Critical care transfers and COVID-19: Managing capacity challenges through critical care networks.

The intensive care units in North West London are part of one of the oldest critical care networks in the UK, forming a mature and established strategic alliance to share resources, experience and knowledge for the benefit of its patients. North West London saw an early surge in COVID-19 admissions, which urgently threatened the capacity of some of its intensive care units even before the UK government announced lockdown. The pre-existing relationships and culture within the network allowed its members to unite and work rapidly to develop agile and innovative solutions, protecting any individual unit from becoming overwhelmed, and ultimately protecting its patients. Within a short 50-day period 223 patients were transferred within the network to distribute pressures. This unprecedented number of critical care transfers, combined with the creation of extra capacity and new pathways, allowed the region to continue to offer timely and unrationed access to critical care for all patients who would benefit from admission. This extraordinary response is a testament to the power and benefits of a regionally networked approach to critical care, and the lessons learned may benefit other healthcare providers, managers and policy makers, especially in regions currently facing new outbreaks of COVID-19.

Learning from critical care: Improving intra- and inter-hospital transfer processes in enhanced care and the ward.

The Intensive Care Society (ICS) has recently published guidance on the transfer of critically ill adults. Since 2007, the North West London Critical Care Network has documented and audited patient transfers undertaken across 13 hospitals, and trained staff in transferring critically ill or injured patients. In 2015/16 the network introduced intra-hospital transfer documentation and applied the same transfer training and audit methodology for critically ill patients being moved within hospitals. While increasing data capture and with a targeted training strategy adapted from transfer experience, the network has seen a reduction in number and severity of incidents in the region. In contrast to this experience, no formalised processes exists to support the inter-hospital or intra-hospital transfer of patients from enhanced care areas or wards not embedded within critical care. Often very little data is collected from these areas, but we suspect transfer risks are higher in these cases as a consequence of the deficit of structured transfers. In collaboration with members of the critical care network, we have developed a basic training module along with the use of a transfer form which has been well received and had a positive impact in terms of incidents reported.

Opioids and cancer: friend or foe?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Most cancer patients experience pain and many will require opioids. However, the effects of opioids on cancer progression, metastasis, and recurrence is increasingly being questioned. There is evidence that opioids affect immune system function, angiogenesis, apoptosis, and invasion in a potentially deleterious manner. This review will examine the preclinical and clinical evidence. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent clinical data have struggled to find robust evidence that opioids promote cancer progression. Although most study has involved morphine, differential effects of other opioids on immune function and cancer are revealing a more complex picture. SUMMARY: Although there is a biologically plausible story, evidence for the action of opioids on cancer is mixed. Indeed, it may even be that in the chronic setting morphine has a beneficial effect on outcome in certain cancer types. This review critically examines and evaluates the evidence for the action of opioids on the processes involved in cancer progression. In the light of the uncertainty of opioid effect on cancer, any decision making should be tempered by knowing that stress and pain undoubtedly contribute to cancer progression.

Long-term Survival for Patients Undergoing Volatile versus IV Anesthesia for Cancer Surgery: A Retrospective Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Surgical resection remains the best option for long-term survival in many solid tumors. Surgery can, however, lead to tumor cell release into the circulation. Data have suggested differential effects of anesthetic agents on cancer cell growth. This retrospective analysis investigated the association of anesthetic technique with long-term survival in patients presenting for elective surgery in a comprehensive cancer center over 3 yr. METHODS: All patients undergoing elective surgery between June 2010 and May 2013 were included. Patients were grouped according to whether they had received volatile inhalational (INHA) or total IV anesthesia (TIVA). After excluding those who received both forms of anesthesia during the study period, Kaplan-Meier survival curves were constructed from the date of surgery to death. After propensity matching, univariate and multivariable regression models were used to compare hazard ratios for death. RESULTS: A total of 11,395 anesthetics using INHA or TIVA were delivered in the study period. After exclusions, 3,316 patients (796 deaths, 24%) remained in the INHA group and 3,714 (504 deaths, 13.5%) in the TIVA group. After propensity matching, 2,607 patients remained in each group (597 deaths, 22.8%, in INHA group vs. 407, 15.6%, in TIVA group). Volatile inhalational anesthesia was associated with a hazard ratio of 1.59 (1.30 to 1.95) for death on univariate analysis and 1.46 (1.29 to 1.66) after multivariable analysis of known confounders in the matched group. CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective analysis demonstrates an association between type of anesthetic delivered and survival. This analysis alongside biological plausibility should lead to urgent prospective work exploring the effect of anesthetic technique on survival.

Negotiating Transitions: Involvement of Critical Care Outreach Teams in End-of-Life Decision Making.

BACKGROUND: Little research has examined the involvement of critical care outreach teams in end-of-life decision making. OBJECTIVE: To establish how much time critical care outreach teams spend with patients who are subsequently subject to limitation of medical treatment and end-of-life decisions and how much influence the teams have on those decisions. METHODS: A single-center retrospective review, with qualitative analysis, in a large cancer center. Data from all patients referred emergently for critical care outreach from October 2010 to October 2011 who later had limitation of medical treatment or end-of-life care were retrieved. Findings were analyzed by using SPSS 19 and qualitative free-text analysis. RESULTS: Of 890 patients referred for critical care outreach from October 2010 to October 2011, 377 were referred as an emergency; 108 of those had limitation of medical treatment and were included in the review. Thirty-five patients (32.4%) died while hospitalized. As a result of outreach intervention and a decision to limit medical treatment, 56 (51.9%) of the 108 patients received a formal end-of-life care plan (including care pathways, referral to palliative care team, hospice). About a fifth (21.5%) of clinical contact time is being spent on patients who subsequently are subject to limitation of medical treatment. Qualitative document analysis showed 5 emerging themes: difficulty of discussions about not attempting cardiopulmonary resuscitation, complexities in coordinating multiple teams, delays in referral and decision making, decision reversals and opaque decision making, and technical versus ethical imperatives. CONCLUSION: A considerable amount of time is being spent on these emergency referrals, and decisions to limit medical treatment are common. The appropriateness of escalation of levels of care is often not questioned until patients become critically or acutely unwell, and outreach teams subsequently intervene.

Cardiopulmonary exercise testing for predicting postoperative morbidity in patients undergoing hepatic resection surgery.

OBJECTIVES: Cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) may predict which patients are at risk for adverse outcomes after major abdominal surgery. The primary aim of this study was to determine whether CPET variables are predicative of morbidity. METHODS: High-risk patients undergoing elective, one-stage, open hepatic resection were preoperatively assessed using CPET. Morbidity, as defined by the Postoperative Morbidity Survey (POMS), was assessed on postoperative day 3. RESULTS: A total of 104 patients underwent preoperative CPET and were included in the analysis. Of these, 73 patients (70.2%) experienced postoperative morbidity. Oxygen consumption at anaerobic threshold (V˙O2 at AT, ml/kg/min) was the only CPET predictor of postoperative morbidity on multivariable analysis, with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.66 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55-0.76]. In patients requiring a major hepatic resection (three or more segments), a V˙O2 at AT of <10.2 ml/kg/min gave an AUC of 0.79 (95% CI 0.68-0.86) with 83.9% sensitivity and 52.0% specificity, 80.6% positive predictive value and 62.5% negative predictive value. CONCLUSIONS: The application of a cut-off value for V˙O2 at AT of <10.2 ml/kg/min in patients undergoing major hepatic resection may be useful for predicting which patients will experience morbidity.

Intensive care for the cancer patient - unique clinical and ethical challenges and outcome prediction in the critically ill cancer patient.

With the rising number of cancer cases and increasing survival times, cancer patients with critical illness are increasingly presenting to the intensive care unit. This article considers the unique challenges they pose in terms of oncological-specific disease processes and treatment and reviews current trends in outcome prediction. We also consider the ethical standpoints surrounding the treatment of patients for whom there may be no cure and their subsequent transition to palliative care, should it become necessary.