Metformin for sepsis-associated AKI: a protocol for the Randomized Clinical Trial of the Safety and FeasibiLity of Metformin as a Treatment for sepsis-associated AKI (LiMiT AKI).

INTRODUCTION: Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a common complication of sepsis associated with increased risk of death. Preclinical data and observational human studies suggest that activation of AMP-activated protein kinase, an ubiquitous master regulator of energy that can limit mitochondrial injury, with metformin may protect against sepsis-associated AKI (SA-AKI) and mortality. The Randomized Clinical Trial of the Safety and FeasibiLity of Metformin as a Treatment for sepsis-associated AKI (LiMiT AKI) aims to evaluate the safety and feasibility of enteral metformin in patients with sepsis at risk of developing SA-AKI. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Blind, randomised, placebo-controlled clinical trial in a single-centre, quaternary teaching hospital in the USA. We will enrol adult patients (18 years of age or older) within 48 hours of meeting Sepsis-3 criteria, admitted to intensive care unit, with oral or enteral access. Patients will be randomised 1:1:1 to low-dose metformin (500 mg two times per day), high-dose metformin (1000 mg two times per day) or placebo for 5 days. Primary safety outcome will be the proportion of metformin-associated serious adverse events. Feasibility assessment will be based on acceptability by patients and clinicians, and by enrolment rate. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has been approved by the Institutional Review Board. All patients or surrogates will provide written consent prior to enrolment and any study intervention. Metformin is a widely available, inexpensive medication with a long track record for safety, which if effective would be accessible and easy to deploy. We describe the study methods using the Standard Protocol Items for Randomized Trials framework and discuss key design features and methodological decisions. LiMiT AKI will investigate the feasibility and safety of metformin in critically ill patients with sepsis at risk of SA-AKI, in preparation for a future large-scale efficacy study. Main results will be published as soon as available after final analysis. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05900284.

Identification of a hyperinflammatory sepsis phenotype using protein biomarker and clinical data in the ProCESS randomized trial.

Sepsis is a heterogeneous syndrome and phenotypes have been proposed using clinical data. Less is known about the contribution of protein biomarkers to clinical sepsis phenotypes and their importance for treatment effects in randomized trials of resuscitation. The objective is to use both clinical and biomarker data in the Protocol-Based Care for Early Septic Shock (ProCESS) randomized trial to determine sepsis phenotypes and to test for heterogeneity of treatment effect by phenotype comparing usual care to protocolized early, goal-directed therapy(EGDT). In this secondary analysis of a subset of patients with biomarker sampling in the ProCESS trial (n = 543), we identified sepsis phenotypes prior to randomization using latent class analysis of 20 clinical and biomarker variables. Logistic regression was used to test for interaction between phenotype and treatment arm for 60-day inpatient mortality. Among 543 patients with severe sepsis or septic shock in the ProCESS trial, a 2-class model best fit the data (p = 0.01). Phenotype 1 (n = 66, 12%) had increased IL-6, ICAM, and total bilirubin and decreased platelets compared to phenotype 2 (n = 477, 88%, p < 0.01 for all). Phenotype 1 had greater 60-day inpatient mortality compared to Phenotype 2 (41% vs 16%; p < 0.01). Treatment with EGDT was associated with worse 60-day inpatient mortality compared to usual care (58% vs. 23%) in Phenotype 1 only (p-value for interaction = 0.05). The 60-day inpatient mortality was similar comparing EGDT to usual care in Phenotype 2 (16% vs. 17%). We identified 2 sepsis phenotypes using latent class analysis of clinical and protein biomarker data at randomization in the ProCESS trial. Phenotype 1 had increased inflammation, organ dysfunction and worse clinical outcomes compared to phenotype 2. Response to EGDT versus usual care differed by phenotype.

Risk Prediction in Male Adolescents With Congenital Long QT Syndrome: Implications for Sex-Specific Risk Stratification in Potassium Channel-Mediated Long QT Syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Sex-specific risk management may improve outcomes in congenital long QT syndrome (LQTS). We recently developed a prediction score for cardiac events (CEs) and life-threatening events (LTEs) in postadolescent women with LQTS. In the present study, we aimed to develop personalized risk estimates for the burden of CEs and LTEs in male adolescents with potassium channel-mediated LQTS. METHODS AND RESULTS: The prognostic model was derived from the LQTS Registry headquartered in Rochester, NY, comprising 611 LQT1 or LQT2 male adolescents from age 10 through 20 years, using the following variables: genotype/mutation location, QTc-specific thresholds, history of syncope, and ß-blocker therapy. Anderson-Gill modeling was performed for the end point of CE burden (total number of syncope, aborted cardiac arrest, and appropriate defibrillator shocks). The applicability of the CE prediction model was tested for the end point of the first LTE (excluding syncope and adding sudden cardiac death) using Cox modeling. A total of 270 CEs occurred during follow-up. The genotype-phenotype risk prediction model identified low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups, comprising 74%, 14%, and 12% of the study population, respectively. Compared with the low-risk group, high-risk male subjects experienced a pronounced 5.2-fold increased risk of recurrent CEs (P<0.001), whereas intermediate-risk patients had a 2.1-fold (P=0.004) increased risk . At age 20 years, the low-, intermediate-, and high-risk adolescent male patients had on average 0.3, 0.6, and 1.4 CEs per person, respectively. Corresponding 10-year adjusted probabilities for a first LTE were 2%, 6%, and 8%. CONCLUSIONS: Personalized genotype-phenotype risk estimates can be used to guide sex-specific management in male adolescents with potassium channel-mediated LQTS.

The salivary microbiota of patients with acute lower respiratory tract infection-A multicenter cohort study.

The human microbiome contributes to health and disease, but the oral microbiota is understudied relative to the gut microbiota. The salivary microbiota is easily accessible, underexplored, and may provide insight into response to infections. We sought to determine the composition, association with clinical features, and heterogeneity of the salivary microbiota in patients with acute lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI). We conducted a multicenter prospective cohort study of 147 adults with acute LRTI presenting to the emergency department of seven hospitals in three states (Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Ohio) between May 2017 and November 2018. Salivary samples were collected in the emergency department, at days 2-5 if hospitalized, and at day 30, as well as fecal samples if patients were willing. We compared salivary microbiota profiles from patients to those of healthy adult volunteers by sequencing and analyzing bacterial 16-rRNA. Compared to healthy volunteers, the salivary microbiota of patients with LRTI was highly distinct and strongly enriched with intestinal anaerobes such as Bacteroidaceae, Ruminococcaceae, and Lachnospiraceae (e.g., mean 10% relative abundance of Bacteroides vs < 1% in healthy volunteers). Within the LRTI population, COPD exacerbation was associated with altered salivary microbiota composition compared to other LRTI conditions. The largest determinant of microbiota variation within the LRTI population was geography (city in which the hospital was located).

Sedation Research in Critically Ill Pediatric Patients: Proposals for Future Study Design From the Sedation Consortium on Endpoints and Procedures for Treatment, Education, and Research IV Workshop.

OBJECTIVES: Sedation and analgesia for infants and children requiring mechanical ventilation in the PICU is uniquely challenging due to the wide spectrum of ages, developmental stages, and pathophysiological processes encountered. Studies evaluating the safety and efficacy of sedative and analgesic management in pediatric patients have used heterogeneous methodologies. The Sedation Consortium on Endpoints and Procedures for Treatment, Education, and Research (SCEPTER) IV hosted a series of multidisciplinary meetings to establish consensus statements for future clinical study design and implementation as a guide for investigators studying PICU sedation and analgesia. DESIGN: Twenty-five key elements framed as consensus statements were developed in five domains: study design, enrollment, protocol, outcomes and measurement instruments, and future directions. SETTING: A virtual meeting was held on March 2-3, 2022, followed by an in-person meeting in Washington, DC, on June 15-16, 2022. Subsequent iterative online meetings were held to achieve consensus. SUBJECTS: Fifty-one multidisciplinary, international participants from academia, industry, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, and family members of PICU patients attended the virtual and in-person meetings. Participants were invited based on their background and experience. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Common themes throughout the SCEPTER IV consensus statements included using coordinated multidisciplinary and interprofessional teams to ensure culturally appropriate study design and diverse patient enrollment, obtaining input from PICU survivors and their families, engaging community members, and using developmentally appropriate and validated instruments for assessments of sedation, pain, iatrogenic withdrawal, and ICU delirium. CONCLUSIONS: These SCEPTER IV consensus statements are comprehensive and may assist investigators in the design, enrollment, implementation, and dissemination of studies involving sedation and analgesia of PICU patients requiring mechanical ventilation. Implementation may strengthen the rigor and reproducibility of research studies on PICU sedation and analgesia and facilitate the synthesis of evidence across studies to improve the safety and quality of care for PICU patients.

Sex-Related Differences in Ventricular Tachyarrhythmia Events in Patients With Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator and Prior Ventricular Tachyarrhythmias.

BACKGROUND: Data on the risk of ventricular tachycardia (VT), ventricular fibrillation (VF), and death by sex in patients with prior VT/VF are limited. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to assess sex-related differences in implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD)-treated VT/VF events and death in patients implanted for secondary prevention or primary prevention ICD indications who experienced VT/VF before enrollment in the RAID (Ranolazine Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator) trial. METHODS: Sex-related differences in the first and recurrent VT/VF requiring antitachycardia pacing or ICD shock and death were evaluated in 714 patients. RESULTS: There were 124 women (17%) and 590 men observed during a mean follow-up of 26.81 ± 14.52 months. Compared to men, women were at a significantly lower risk of VT/VF/death (HR: 0.67; P = 0.029), VT/VF (HR: 0.68; P = 0.049), VT/VF treated with antitachycardia pacing (HR: 0.59; P = 0.019), and VT/VF treated with ICD shock (HR: 0.54; P = 0.035). The risk of recurrent VT/VF was also significantly lower in women (HR: 0.35; P < 0.001). HR for death was similar to the other endpoints (HR: 0.61; P = 0.162). In comparison to men, women presented with faster VT rates (196 ± 32 beats/min vs 177 ± 30 beats/min, respectively; P = 0.002), and faster shock-requiring VT/VF rates (258 ± 56 beats/min vs 227 ± 57 beats/min, respectively; P = 0.30). There was a significant interaction for the risk of VT/VF by race (P = 0.013) with White women having significantly lower risk than White men (HR: 0.36; P < 0.001), whereas Black women had a similar risk to Black men (HR: 1.06; P = 0.851). CONCLUSIONS: Women with a history of prior VT/VF experienced a lower risk recurrent VT/VF requiring ICD therapy when compared to men. Black Women had a risk similar to men, whereas the lower risk for VT/VF in women was observed primarily in White women. (Ranolazine Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Trial; NCT01215253).

Symptoms and Impaired Quality of Life After COVID-19 Hospitalization: Effect of Therapeutic Heparin in Non-ICU Patients in the Accelerating COVID-19 Therapeutic Interventions and Vaccines 4 Acute Trial: Effect on 3-Month Symptoms and Quality of Life.

BACKGROUND: Therapeutic-dose heparin decreased days requiring organ support in noncritically ill patients hospitalized for COVID-19, but its impact on persistent symptoms or quality of life (QOL) is unclear. RESEARCH QUESTION: In the Accelerating COVID-19 Therapeutic Interventions and Vaccines 4 ACUTE (ACTIV-4a) trial, was randomization of patients hospitalized for COVID-19 illness to therapeutic-dose vs prophylactic heparin associated with fewer symptoms and better QOL at 90 days? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: This was an open-label randomized controlled trial at 34 hospitals in the United States and Spain. A total of 727 noncritically ill patients hospitalized for COVID-19 from September 2020 to June 2021 were randomized to therapeutic-dose vs prophylactic heparin. Only patients with 90-day data on symptoms and QOL were analyzed. We ascertained symptoms and QOL by the EQ-5D-5L at 90-day follow-up in a preplanned analysis for the ACTIV-4a trial. Individual domains assessed by the EQ-5D-5L included mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed. RESULTS: Among 571 patients, 288 (50.4%) reported at least one symptom. Among 410 patients, 148 (36.1%) reported moderate to severe impairment in one or more domains of the EQ-5D-5L. The presence of 90-day symptoms was associated with moderate-severe impairment in the EQ-5D-5L domains of mobility (adjusted OR [aOR], 2.37; 95% CI, 1.22-4.59), usual activities (aOR, 3.66; 95% CI, 1.75-7.65), pain (aOR, 2.43; 95% CI, 1.43-4.12), and anxiety (aOR, 4.32; 95% CI, 2.06-9.02), compared with patients reporting no symptoms There were no differences in symptoms or in the overall EQ-5D-5L index score between treatment groups. Therapeutic-dose heparin was associated with less moderate-severe impairment in all physical functioning domains (mobility, self-care, usual activities) but was independently significant only in the self-care domain (aOR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.11-0.96). INTERPRETATION: In a randomized controlled trial of hospitalized noncritically ill patients with COVID-19, therapeutic-dose heparin was associated with less severe impairment in the self-care domain of EQ-5D-5L. However, this type of impairment was uncommon, affecting 23 individuals. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT04505774; URL: www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov.

Clinical Management of Brugada Syndrome: Commentary From the Experts.

Although there is consensus on the management of patients with Brugada Syndrome with high risk for sudden cardiac arrest, asymptomatic or intermediate-risk patients present clinical management challenges. This document explores the management opinions of experts throughout the world for patients with Brugada Syndrome who do not fit guideline recommendations. Four real-world clinical scenarios were presented with commentary from small expert groups for each case. All authors voted on case-specific questions to evaluate the level of consensus among the entire group in nuanced diagnostic and management decisions relevant to each case. Points of agreement, points of controversy, and gaps in knowledge are highlighted.

Simvastatin in Critically Ill Patients with Covid-19.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of simvastatin in critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) is unclear. METHODS: In an ongoing international, multifactorial, adaptive platform, randomized, controlled trial, we evaluated simvastatin (80 mg daily) as compared with no statin (control) in critically ill patients with Covid-19 who were not receiving statins at baseline. The primary outcome was respiratory and cardiovascular organ support-free days, assessed on an ordinal scale combining in-hospital death (assigned a value of -1) and days free of organ support through day 21 in survivors; the analyis used a Bayesian hierarchical ordinal model. The adaptive design included prespecified statistical stopping criteria for superiority (>99% posterior probability that the odds ratio was >1) and futility (>95% posterior probability that the odds ratio was <1.2). RESULTS: Enrollment began on October 28, 2020. On January 8, 2023, enrollment was closed on the basis of a low anticipated likelihood that prespecified stopping criteria would be met as Covid-19 cases decreased. The final analysis included 2684 critically ill patients. The median number of organ support-free days was 11 (interquartile range, -1 to 17) in the simvastatin group and 7 (interquartile range, -1 to 16) in the control group; the posterior median adjusted odds ratio was 1.15 (95% credible interval, 0.98 to 1.34) for simvastatin as compared with control, yielding a 95.9% posterior probability of superiority. At 90 days, the hazard ratio for survival was 1.12 (95% credible interval, 0.95 to 1.32), yielding a 91.9% posterior probability of superiority of simvastatin. The results of secondary analyses were consistent with those of the primary analysis. Serious adverse events, such as elevated levels of liver enzymes and creatine kinase, were reported more frequently with simvastatin than with control. CONCLUSIONS: Although recruitment was stopped because cases had decreased, among critically ill patients with Covid-19, simvastatin did not meet the prespecified criteria for superiority to control. (REMAP-CAP ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02735707.).

Intravenous Vitamin C for Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19: Two Harmonized Randomized Clinical Trials.

Importance: The efficacy of vitamin C for hospitalized patients with COVID-19 is uncertain. Objective: To determine whether vitamin C improves outcomes for patients with COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: Two prospectively harmonized randomized clinical trials enrolled critically ill patients receiving organ support in intensive care units (90 sites) and patients who were not critically ill (40 sites) between July 23, 2020, and July 15, 2022, on 4 continents. Interventions: Patients were randomized to receive vitamin C administered intravenously or control (placebo or no vitamin C) every 6 hours for 96 hours (maximum of 16 doses). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was a composite of organ support-free days defined as days alive and free of respiratory and cardiovascular organ support in the intensive care unit up to day 21 and survival to hospital discharge. Values ranged from -1 organ support-free days for patients experiencing in-hospital death to 22 organ support-free days for those who survived without needing organ support. The primary analysis used a bayesian cumulative logistic model. An odds ratio (OR) greater than 1 represented efficacy (improved survival, more organ support-free days, or both), an OR less than 1 represented harm, and an OR less than 1.2 represented futility. Results: Enrollment was terminated after statistical triggers for harm and futility were met. The trials had primary outcome data for 1568 critically ill patients (1037 in the vitamin C group and 531 in the control group; median age, 60 years [IQR, 50-70 years]; 35.9% were female) and 1022 patients who were not critically ill (456 in the vitamin C group and 566 in the control group; median age, 62 years [IQR, 51-72 years]; 39.6% were female). Among critically ill patients, the median number of organ support-free days was 7 (IQR, -1 to 17 days) for the vitamin C group vs 10 (IQR, -1 to 17 days) for the control group (adjusted proportional OR, 0.88 [95% credible interval {CrI}, 0.73 to 1.06]) and the posterior probabilities were 8.6% (efficacy), 91.4% (harm), and 99.9% (futility). Among patients who were not critically ill, the median number of organ support-free days was 22 (IQR, 18 to 22 days) for the vitamin C group vs 22 (IQR, 21 to 22 days) for the control group (adjusted proportional OR, 0.80 [95% CrI, 0.60 to 1.01]) and the posterior probabilities were 2.9% (efficacy), 97.1% (harm), and greater than 99.9% (futility). Among critically ill patients, survival to hospital discharge was 61.9% (642/1037) for the vitamin C group vs 64.6% (343/531) for the control group (adjusted OR, 0.92 [95% CrI, 0.73 to 1.17]) and the posterior probability was 24.0% for efficacy. Among patients who were not critically ill, survival to hospital discharge was 85.1% (388/456) for the vitamin C group vs 86.6% (490/566) for the control group (adjusted OR, 0.86 [95% CrI, 0.61 to 1.17]) and the posterior probability was 17.8% for efficacy. Conclusions and Relevance: In hospitalized patients with COVID-19, vitamin C had low probability of improving the primary composite outcome of organ support-free days and hospital survival. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT04401150 (LOVIT-COVID) and NCT02735707 (REMAP-CAP).

Designing and Implementing "Living and Breathing" Clinical Trials: An Overview and Lessons Learned from the COVID-19 Pandemic.

The practice of medicine is characterized by uncertainty, and the findings of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are meant to help curb that uncertainty. Traditional RCTs, however, have many limitations. To overcome some of these limitations, new trial paradigms rooted in the origins of evidence-based medicine are beginning to disrupt the traditional mold. These new designs recognize uncertainty permeates medical decision making and aim to capitalize on modern health system infrastructure to integrate investigation as a component of care delivery. This article provides an overview of "living, breathing" trials, including current state, anticipated developments, and areas of controversy.

Design and characteristics of the prophylactic intra-operative ventricular arrhythmia ablation in high-risk LVAD candidates (PIVATAL) trial.

BACKGROUND: The use of a Left Ventricular Assist Device (LVAD) in patients with advanced heart failure refractory to optimal medical management has progressed steadily over the past two decades. Data have demonstrated reduced LVAD efficacy, worse clinical outcome, and higher mortality for patients who experience significant ventricular tachyarrhythmia (VTA). We hypothesize that a novel prophylactic intra-operative VTA ablation protocol at the time of LVAD implantation may reduce the recurrent VTA and adverse events postimplant. METHODS: We designed a prospective, multicenter, open-label, randomized-controlled clinical trial enrolling 100 patients who are LVAD candidates with a history of VTA in the previous 5 years. Enrolled patients will be randomized in a 1:1 fashion to intra-operative VTA ablation (n = 50) versus conventional medical management (n = 50) with LVAD implant. Arrhythmia outcomes data will be captured by an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) to monitor VTA events, with a uniform ICD programming protocol. Patients will be followed prospectively over a mean of 18 months (with a minimum of 9 months) after LVAD implantation to evaluate recurrent VTA, adverse events, and procedural outcomes. Secondary endpoints include right heart function/hemodynamics, healthcare utilization, and quality of life. CONCLUSION: The primary aim of this first-ever randomized trial is to assess the efficacy of intra-operative ablation during LVAD surgery in reducing VTA recurrence and improving clinical outcomes for patients with a history of VTA.

Restrictive versus Liberal Rate of Extracorporeal Volume Removal Evaluation in Acute Kidney Injury (RELIEVE-AKI): a pilot clinical trial protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Observational studies have linked slower and faster net ultrafiltration (UFNET) rates during kidney replacement therapy (KRT) with mortality in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury (AKI) and fluid overload. To inform the design of a larger randomised trial of patient-centered outcomes, we conduct a feasibility study to examine restrictive and liberal approaches to UFNET during continuous KRT (CKRT). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study is an investigator-initiated, unblinded, 2-arm, comparative-effectiveness, stepped-wedged, cluster randomised trial among 112 critically ill patients with AKI treated with CKRT in 10 intensive care units (ICUs) across 2 hospital systems. In the first 6 months, all ICUs started with a liberal UFNET rate strategy. Thereafter, one ICU is randomised to the restrictive UFNET rate strategy every 2 months. In the liberal group, the UFNET rate is maintained between 2.0 and 5.0 mL/kg/hour; in the restrictive group, the UFNET rate is maintained between 0.5 and 1.5 mL/kg/hour. The three coprimary feasibility outcomes are (1) between-group separation in mean delivered UFNET rates; (2) protocol adherence; and (3) patient recruitment rate. Secondary outcomes include daily and cumulative fluid balance, KRT and mechanical ventilation duration, organ failure-free days, ICU and hospital length of stay, hospital mortality and KRT dependence at hospital discharge. Safety endpoints include haemodynamics, electrolyte imbalance, CKRT circuit issues, organ dysfunction related to fluid overload, secondary infections and thrombotic and haematological complications. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The University of Pittsburgh Human Research Protection Office approved the study, and an independent Data and Safety Monitoring Board monitors the study. A grant from the United States National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases sponsors the study. The trial results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals and presented at scientific conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: This trial has been prospectively registered with clinicaltrials.gov (NCT05306964). Protocol version identifier and date: 1.5; 13 June 2023.

Guidelines for the Management of Adult Acute and Acute-on-Chronic Liver Failure in the ICU: Neurology, Peri-Transplant Medicine, Infectious Disease, and Gastroenterology Considerations

To develop evidence-based recommendations for clinicians caring for adults with acute liver failure (ALF) or acute on chronic liver failure (ACLF) in the ICU. The guideline panel comprised 27 members with expertise in aspects of care of the critically ill patient with liver failure or methodology. We adhered to the Society of Critical Care Medicine standard operating procedures manual and conflict-of-interest policy. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among the panel, as well as within subgroups, served as an integral part of the guideline development. In part 2 of this guideline, the panel was divided into four subgroups: neurology, peri-transplant, infectious diseases, and gastrointestinal groups. We developed and selected Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcomes (PICO) questions according to importance to patients and practicing clinicians. For each PICO question, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis where applicable. The quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. We used the evidence to decision framework to facilitate recommendations formulation as strong or conditional. We followed strict criteria to formulate best practice statements. We report 28 recommendations (from 31 PICO questions) on the management ALF and ACLF in the ICU. Overall, five were strong recommendations, 21 were conditional recommendations, two were best-practice statements, and we were unable to issue a recommendation for five questions due to insufficient evidence. Multidisciplinary, international experts formulated evidence-based recommendations for the management ALF and ACLF patients in the ICU, acknowledging that most recommendations were based on low quality and indirect evidence.

Effect of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor and Angiotensin Receptor Blocker Initiation on Organ Support-Free Days in Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective: To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non-critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was organ support-free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS: On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support-free days among critically ill patients was 10 (-1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (-1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support-free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02735707.

Evolving Real-World Effectiveness of Monoclonal Antibodies for Treatment of COVID-19 : A Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Treatment guidelines and U.S. Food and Drug Administration emergency use authorizations (EUAs) of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) for treatment of high-risk outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19 changed frequently as different SARS-CoV-2 variants emerged. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether early outpatient treatment with mAbs, overall and by mAb product, presumed SARS-CoV-2 variant, and immunocompromised status, is associated with reduced risk for hospitalization or death at 28 days. DESIGN: Hypothetical pragmatic randomized trial from observational data comparing mAb-treated patients with a propensity score-matched, nontreated control group. SETTING: Large U.S. health care system. PARTICIPANTS: High-risk outpatients eligible for mAb treatment under any EUA with a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result from 8 December 2020 to 31 August 2022. INTERVENTION: Single-dose intravenous mAb treatment with bamlanivimab, bamlanivimab-etesevimab, sotrovimab, bebtelovimab, or intravenous or subcutaneous casirivimab-imdevimab administered within 2 days of a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was hospitalization or death at 28 days among treated patients versus a nontreated control group (no treatment or treatment ≥3 days after SARS-CoV-2 test date). RESULTS: The risk for hospitalization or death at 28 days was 4.6% in 2571 treated patients and 7.6% in 5135 nontreated control patients (risk ratio [RR], 0.61 [95% CI, 0.50 to 0.74]). In sensitivity analyses, the corresponding RRs for 1- and 3-day treatment grace periods were 0.59 and 0.49, respectively. In subgroup analyses, those receiving mAbs when the Alpha and Delta variants were presumed to be predominant had estimated RRs of 0.55 and 0.53, respectively, compared with 0.71 for the Omicron variant period. Relative risk estimates for individual mAb products all suggested lower risk for hospitalization or death. Among immunocompromised patients, the RR was 0.45 (CI, 0.28 to 0.71). LIMITATIONS: Observational study design, SARS-CoV-2 variant presumed by date rather than genotyping, no data on symptom severity, and partial data on vaccination status. CONCLUSION: Early mAb treatment among outpatients with COVID-19 is associated with lower risk for hospitalization or death for various mAb products and SARS-CoV-2 variants. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: None.

Guidelines for the Management of Adult Acute and Acute-on-Chronic Liver Failure in the ICU: Neurology, Peri-Transplant Medicine, Infectious Disease, and Gastroenterology Considerations.

OBJECTIVES: To develop evidence-based recommendations for clinicians caring for adults with acute liver failure (ALF) or acute on chronic liver failure (ACLF) in the ICU. DESIGN: The guideline panel comprised 27 members with expertise in aspects of care of the critically ill patient with liver failure or methodology. We adhered to the Society of Critical Care Medicine standard operating procedures manual and conflict-of-interest policy. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among the panel, as well as within subgroups, served as an integral part of the guideline development. INTERVENTIONS: In part 2 of this guideline, the panel was divided into four subgroups: neurology, peri-transplant, infectious diseases, and gastrointestinal groups. We developed and selected Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcomes (PICO) questions according to importance to patients and practicing clinicians. For each PICO question, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis where applicable. The quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. We used the evidence to decision framework to facilitate recommendations formulation as strong or conditional. We followed strict criteria to formulate best practice statements. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We report 28 recommendations (from 31 PICO questions) on the management ALF and ACLF in the ICU. Overall, five were strong recommendations, 21 were conditional recommendations, two were best-practice statements, and we were unable to issue a recommendation for five questions due to insufficient evidence. CONCLUSIONS: Multidisciplinary, international experts formulated evidence-based recommendations for the management ALF and ACLF patients in the ICU, acknowledging that most recommendations were based on low quality and indirect evidence.

Recurrent ventricular tachycardia in a patient with COVID-19 vaccine-associated myocarditis: a case report.

Background: The development of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine-associated myocarditis has been reported. Most of the reported cases are mild, with quick clinical recovery and excellent short-term outcomes. Cases of COVID-19 vaccine-associated myocarditis presenting with sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT) are rare. Case Description: A 46-year-old male patient with no prior cardiac history presented following two episodes of syncope. Two days earlier, he had received his second dose of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine (Pfizer)-first dose was administered three weeks earlier. He had an episode of VT while in the emergency room. His cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings were consistent with myocarditis. He was eventually diagnosed with COVID-19 vaccine-associated myocarditis after all other work up were unremarkable [echocardiogram, coronary angiogram, diagnostic electrophysiology study and later 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) metabolism cardiac sarcoid positron emission tomography (PET) study]. An implantable cardiac monitor was implanted to monitor for recurrence of VT. Seven months after initial presentation, he had recurrent VT and he underwent implantation of an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD). He has received appropriate ICD therapies on account of recurrent VT and he is currently maintained on an antiarrhythmic medication. Conclusions: Excellent short-term outcomes have been reported in patients with COVID-19 vaccine associated myocarditis. Our case shows that long-term outcomes may not be benign in everyone, particularly in those who develop myocardial scar.