Effect of nutritional supplementation on bone mineral density in children with sickle cell disease: protocol for an open-label, randomised controlled clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: Children with sickle cell disease show a significant decrease in bone mineral density, an increase in resting energy expenditure of more than 15%, a decrease in fat and lean mass as well as a significant increase in protein turnover, particularly in bone tissue. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of an increase in food intake on bone mineral density and the clinical and biological complications of paediatric sickle cell disease. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The study is designed as an open-label randomised controlled clinical trial conducted in the Paediatrics Unit of the Orléans University Hospital Centre. Participants aged 3-16 years will be randomly divided into two groups: the intervention group will receive oral nutritional supplements (pharmacological nutritional hypercaloric products) while the control group will receive age-appropriate and gender-appropriate nutritional intake during 12 months. Total body less head bone mineral density will be measured at the beginning and the end of the trial. A rigorous nutritional follow-up by weekly 24 hours recall dietary assessment and planned contacts every 6 weeks will be carried out throughout the study. A school absenteeism questionnaire, intended to reflect the patient's school productivity, will be completed by participants and parents every 3 months. Blood samples of each patient of both groups will be stocked at the beginning and at the end of the trial, for future biological trial. Clinical and biological complications will be regularly monitored. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The protocol has been approved by the French ethics committee (Comité de Protection des Personnes Sud-Ouest et Outre-Mer 2, Toulouse; approval no: 2-20-092 id9534). Children and their parents will give informed consent to participate in the study before taking part. Results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals or international academic conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04754711.

Hydrocortisone plus fludrocortisone for community acquired pneumonia-related septic shock: a subgroup analysis of the APROCCHSS phase 3 randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Glucocorticoids probably improve outcomes in patients hospitalised for community acquired pneumonia (CAP). In this a priori planned exploratory subgroup analysis of the phase 3 randomised controlled Activated Protein C and Corticosteroids for Human Septic Shock (APROCCHSS) trial, we aimed to investigate responses to hydrocortisone plus fludrocortisone between CAP and non-CAP related septic shock. METHODS: APROCCHSS was a randomised controlled trial that investigated the effects of hydrocortisone plus fludrocortisone, drotrecogin-alfa (activated), or both on mortality in septic shock in a two-by-two factorial design; after drotrecogin-alfa was withdrawn on October 2011, from the market, the trial continued on two parallel groups. It was conducted in 34 centres in France. In this subgroup study, patients with CAP were a preselected subgroup for an exploratory secondary analysis of the APROCCHSS trial of hydrocortisone plus fludrocortisone in septic shock. Adults with septic shock were randomised 1:1 to receive, in a double-blind manner, a 7-day treatment with daily administration of intravenous hydrocortisone 50 mg bolus every 6h and a tablet of 50 µg of fludrocortisone via the nasogastric tube, or their placebos. The primary outcome was 90-day all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality at intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital discharge, 28-day and 180-day mortality, the number of days alive and free of vasopressors, mechanical ventilation, or organ failure, and ICU and hospital free-days to 90-days. Analysis was done in the intention-to-treat population. The trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00625209). FINDINGS: Of 1241 patients included in the APROCCHSS trial, CAP could not be ruled in or out in 31 patients, 562 had a diagnosis of CAP (279 in the placebo group and 283 in the corticosteroid group), and 648 patients did not have CAP (329 in the placebo group and 319 in the corticosteroid group). In patients with CAP, there were 109 (39%) deaths of 283 patients at day 90 with hydrocortisone plus fludrocortisone and 143 (51%) of 279 patients receiving placebo (odds ratio [OR] 0·60, 95% CI 0·43-0·83). In patients without CAP, there were 148 (46%) deaths of 319 patients at day 90 in the hydrocortisone and fludrocortisone group and 157 (48%) of 329 patients in the placebo group (OR 0·95, 95% CI 0·70-1·29). There was significant heterogeneity in corticosteroid effects on 90-day mortality across subgroups with CAP and without CAP (p=0·046 for both multiplicative and additive interaction tests; moderate credibility). Of 1241 patients included in the APROCCHSS trial, 648 (52%) had ARDS (328 in the placebo group and 320 in the corticosteroid group). There were 155 (48%) deaths of 320 patients at day 90 in the corticosteroid group and 186 (57%) of 328 patients in the placebo group. The OR for death at day 90 was 0·72 (95% CI 0·53-0·98) in patients with ARDS and 0·85 (0·61-1·20) in patients without ARDS (p=0·45 for multiplicative interaction and p=0·42 for additive interaction). The OR for observing at least one serious adverse event (corticosteroid group vs placebo) within 180 days post randomisation was 0·64 (95% CI 0·46-0·89) in the CAP subgroup and 1·02 (0·75-1·39) in the non-CAP subgroup (p=0·044 for multiplicative interaction and p=0·042 for additive interaction). INTERPRETATION: In a pre-specified subgroup analysis of the APROCCHSS trial of patients with CAP and septic shock, hydrocortisone plus fludrocortisone reduced mortality as compared with placebo. Although a large proportion of patients with CAP also met criteria for ARDS, the subgroup analysis was underpowered to fully discriminate between ARDS and CAP modifying effects on mortality reduction with corticosteroids. There was no evidence of a significant treatment effect of corticosteroids in the non-CAP subgroup. FUNDING: Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique of the French Ministry of Health, by Programme d'Investissements d'Avenir, France 2030, and IAHU-ANR-0004.

Risk factors for poor performance in finger cuff non-invasive monitoring of arterial pressure: A prospective multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Compared to the invasive technique, non-invasive monitoring of arterial pressure favors easier and faster implementation while potentially sacrificing some reliability. This may be particularly true for the Clearsight™ system (Edwards Lifesciences), which enables continuous monitoring. We evaluated the risk factors for its poor performance. METHODS: Patients with an arterial catheter and stable mean arterial pressure (MAP) over a 5-min period were included. Six pairs of invasive and Clearsight measurements of MAP were collected and the bias between the two techniques was calculated. Poor performance of the Clearsight™ system was defined as either a failure to measure and display MAP or displaying an erroneous MAP (individual bias > 5 mmHg). Fingertip perfusion was assessed using the plethysmographic perfusion index (PI) and the capillary refill time (CRT). RESULTS: Among 152 ICU patients (MAP of 81 ± 14 mmHg, norepinephrine in 78 [51%]), 78 (51%) experienced a poor performance of the Clearsight™ system: failure to display MAP in 19 (13%) patients, and erroneous value displayed in 59 (44%). In multivariate analysis, PI ≤ 0.85% (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 2.94 [95% confidence interval (95%CI):1.34;6.45]), CRT > 4 s (aOR = 5.28 [95%CI 1.39;20.05]), and the presence of hand edema (aOR = 2.06 [95%CI 1.01;4.21]) were associated with a higher likelihood of poor performance. Cardiac arrhythmia (aOR = 1.39 [95%CI 0.64;3.02]) and other tested variables were not associated with poor performance. CONCLUSIONS: Half of the included patients exhibited poor Clearsight™ system performance. Our results caution against using finger cuff arterial pressure monitoring in patients with low PI (≤0.85%), protracted CRT (>4 s), or hand edema. REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04269382, Dr. G. Muller, February 13, 2020. https://classic. CLINICALTRIALS: gov/ct2/show/NCT04269382.

Hypothermia vs Normothermia in Patients With Cardiac Arrest and Nonshockable Rhythm: A Meta-Analysis.

Importance: International guidelines recommend body temperature control below 37.8 °C in unconscious patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA); however, a target temperature of 33 °C might lead to better outcomes when the initial rhythm is nonshockable. Objective: To assess whether hypothermia at 33 °C increases survival and improves function when compared with controlled normothermia in unconscious adults resuscitated from OHCA with initial nonshockable rhythm. Data Sources: Individual patient data meta-analysis of 2 multicenter, randomized clinical trials (Targeted Normothermia after Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest [TTM2; NCT02908308] and HYPERION [NCT01994772]) with blinded outcome assessors. Unconscious patients with OHCA and an initial nonshockable rhythm were eligible for the final analysis. Study Selection: The study cohorts had similar inclusion and exclusion criteria. Patients were randomized to hypothermia (target temperature 33 °C) or normothermia (target temperature 36.5 to 37.7 °C), according to different study protocols, for at least 24 hours. Additional analyses of mortality and unfavorable functional outcome were performed according to age, sex, initial rhythm, presence or absence of shock on admission, time to return of spontaneous circulation, lactate levels on admission, and the cardiac arrest hospital prognosis score. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Only patients who experienced OHCA and had a nonshockable rhythm with all causes of cardiac arrest were included. Variables from the 2 studies were available from the original data sets and pooled into a unique database and analyzed. Clinical outcomes were harmonized into a single file, which was checked for accuracy of numbers, distributions, and categories. The last day of follow-up from arrest was recorded for each patient. Adjustment for primary outcome and functional outcome was performed using age, gender, time to return of spontaneous circulation, and bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was mortality at 3 months; secondary outcomes included unfavorable functional outcome at 3 to 6 months, defined as a Cerebral Performance Category score of 3 to 5. Results: A total of 912 patients were included, 490 from the TTM2 trial and 422 from the HYPERION trial. Of those, 442 had been assigned to hypothermia (48.4%; mean age, 65.5 years; 287 males [64.9%]) and 470 to normothermia (51.6%; mean age, 65.6 years; 327 males [69.6%]); 571 patients had a first monitored rhythm of asystole (62.6%) and 503 a presumed noncardiac cause of arrest (55.2%). At 3 months, 354 of 442 patients in the hypothermia group (80.1%) and 386 of 470 patients in the normothermia group (82.1%) had died (relative risk [RR] with hypothermia, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.89-1.20; P = .63). On the last day of follow-up, 386 of 429 in the hypothermia group (90.0%) and 413 of 463 in the normothermia group (89.2%) had an unfavorable functional outcome (RR with hypothermia, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.87-1.15; P = .97). The association of hypothermia with death and functional outcome was consistent across the prespecified subgroups. Conclusions and Relevance: In this individual patient data meta-analysis, including unconscious survivors from OHCA with an initial nonshockable rhythm, hypothermia at 33 °C did not significantly improve survival or functional outcome.

Clinical spectrum and prognostic impact of cancer in critically ill patients with HIV: a multicentre cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Both AIDS-defining and non-AIDS-defining cancers (ADC/NADC) predispose people living with HIV (PLHIV) to critical illnesses. The objective of this multicentre study was to investigate the prognostic impact of ADC and NADC in PLHIV admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). METHODS: All PLHIV admitted over the 2015-2020 period in 12 university-affiliated ICUs in France were included in the study cohort. The effect of ADC and NADC on in-hospital mortality (primary study endpoint) was measured through logistic regression with augmented backward elimination of potential independent variables. The association between ADC/NADC and treatment limitation decision (TLD) during the ICU stay (secondary study endpoint) was analysed. One-year mortality in patients discharged alive from the index hospital admission (exploratory study endpoint) was compared between those with ADC, NADC or no cancer. RESULTS: Amongst the 939 included PLHIV (median age, 52 [43-59] years; combination antiretroviral therapy, 74.4%), 97 (10.3%) and 106 (11.3%) presented with an active NADC (mostly lung and intestinal neoplasms) and an active ADC (predominantly AIDS-defining non-Hodgkin lymphoma), respectively. Inaugural admissions were common. Bacterial sepsis and non-infectious neoplasm-related complications accounted for most of admissions in these subgroups. Hospital mortality was 12.4% in patients without cancer, 30.2% in ADC patients and 45.4% in NADC patients (P < 0.0001). NADC (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 7.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.07-12.05) and ADC (aOR, 3.11; 95% CI 1.76-5.51) were independently associated with in-hospital death after adjustment on severity and frailty markers. The prevalence of TLD was 8.0% in patients without cancer, 17.9% in ADC patients and 33.0% in NADC patients (P < 0.0001)-organ failures and non-neoplastic comorbidities were less often considered in patients with cancer. One-year mortality in survivors of the index hospital admission was 7.8% in patients without cancer, 17.0% in ADC patients and 33.3% in NADC patients (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: NADC and ADC are equally prevalent, stand as a leading argument for TLD, and strongly predict in-hospital death in the current population of PLHIV requiring ICU admission.

Insulin therapy and blood glucose management in critically ill patients: a 1-day cross-sectional observational study in 69 French intensive care units.

BACKGROUND: Hyperglycaemia is common in critically ill patients, but blood glucose and insulin management may differ widely among intensive care units (ICUs). We aimed to describe insulin use practices and the resulting glycaemic control in French ICUs. We conducted a multicentre 1-day observational study on November 23, 2021, in 69 French ICUs. Adult patients hospitalized for an acute organ failure, severe infection or post-operative care were included. Data were recorded from midnight to 11:59 p.m. the day of the study by 4-h periods. RESULTS: Two ICUs declared to have no insulin protocol. There was a wide disparity in blood glucose targets between ICUs with 35 different target ranges recorded. In 893 included patients we collected 4823 blood glucose values whose distribution varied significantly across ICUs (P < 0.0001). We observed 1135 hyperglycaemias (> 1.8 g/L) in 402 (45.0%) patients, 35 hypoglycaemias (≤ 0.7 g/L) in 26 (2.9%) patients, and one instance of severe hypoglycaemia (≤ 0.4 g/L). Four hundred eight (45.7%) patients received either IV insulin (255 [62.5%]), subcutaneous (SC) insulin (126 [30.9%]), or both (27 [6.6%]). Among patients under protocolized intravenous (IV) insulin, 767/1681 (45.6%) of glycaemias were above the target range. Among patients receiving insulin, short- and long-acting SC insulin use were associated with higher counts of hyperglycaemias as assessed by multivariable negative binomial regression adjusted for the propensity to receive SC insulin: incidence rate ratio of 3.45 (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.97-4.00) (P < 0.0001) and 3.58 (95% CI 2.84-4.52) (P < 0.0001), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Practices regarding blood glucose management varied widely among French ICUs. Administration of short or long-acting SC insulin was not unusual and associated with more frequent hyperglycaemia. The protocolized insulin algorithms used failed to prevent hyperglycaemic events.

Prone position versus usual care in hypoxemic COVID-19 patients in medical wards: a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Benefit of early awake prone positioning for COVID-19 patients hospitalised in medical wards and who need oxygen therapy remains to be demonstrated. The question was considered at the time of COVID-19 pandemic to avoid overloading the intensive care units. We aimed to determine whether prone position plus usual care could reduce the rate of non-invasive ventilation (NIV) or intubation or death as compared to usual care alone. METHODS: In this multicentre randomised clinical trial, 268 patients were randomly assigned to awake prone position plus usual care (N = 135) or usual care alone (N = 132). The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who underwent NIV or intubation or died within 28 days. Main secondary outcomes included the rates of NIV, of intubation or death, within 28 days. RESULTS: Median time spent each day in the prone position within 72 h of randomisation was 90 min (IQR 30-133). The proportion of NIV or intubation or death within 28 days was 14.1% (19/135) in the prone position group and 12.9% (17/132) in the usual care group [odds ratio adjusted for stratification (aOR) 0.43; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.14-1.35]. The probability of intubation, or intubation or death (secondary outcomes) was lower in the prone position group than in the usual care group (aOR 0.11; 95% CI 0.01-0.89 and aOR 0.09; 95% CI 0.01-0.76, respectively) in the whole study population and in the prespecified subgroup of patients with SpO2 ≥ 95% on inclusion (aOR 0.11; 95% CI 0.01-0.90, and aOR 0.09; 95% CI 0.03-0.27, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Awake prone position plus usual care in COVID-19 patients in medical wards did not decrease the composite outcome of need for NIV or intubation or death. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04363463 . Registered 27 April 2020.

Noninvasive Monitoring of Arterial Pressure: Finger or Lower Leg As Alternatives to the Upper Arm: A Prospective Study in Three ICUs.

OBJECTIVES: When the upper arm is inaccessible for measurements of arterial pressure (AP), the best alternative site is unknown. We performed a between-site comparison of the agreement between invasive and noninvasive readings of AP taken at the lower leg, the finger, and the upper arm. The risk associated with measurement errors and the trending ability were also assessed. DESIGN: Prospective observational study. SETTING: Three ICUs. PATIENTS: Patients having an arterial catheter and an arm circumference less than 42 cm. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Three triplicates of AP measurements were collected via an arterial catheter (reference AP), a finger cuff system (ClearSight; Edward Lifesciences, Irvine, CA), and an oscillometric cuff (at the lower leg then the upper arm). Trending ability was assessed through an additional set of measurements after a cardiovascular intervention. The default bed backrest angle was respected. Failure to measure and display AP occurred in 19 patients (13%) at the finger, never at other sites. In 130 patients analyzed, the agreement between noninvasive and invasive readings was worse at the lower leg than that observed at the upper arm or the finger (for mean AP, bias ± sd of 6.0 ± 15.8 vs 3.6 ± 7.1 and 0.1 ± 7.4 mm Hg, respectively; p < 0.05), yielding a higher frequency of error-associated clinical risk (no risk for 64% vs 84% and 86% of measurements, respectively, p < 0.0001). According to the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 81060-2:2018 standard, mean AP measurements were reliable at the upper arm and the finger, not the lower leg. In 33 patients reassessed after a cardiovascular intervention, both the concordance rate for change in mean AP and the ability to detect a therapy-induced significant change were good and similar at the three sites. CONCLUSIONS: As compared with lower leg measurements of AP, finger measurements were, when possible, a preferable alternative to upper arm ones.

The accuracy of intensive care nurses' interpretation of chest radiographs to recognise misplacement of endotracheal and nasogastric tubes after a single training session and comparison with residents' interpretation.

BACKGROUND: Misplacements of endotracheal and nasogastric tubes are frequent encounters in critically ill patients. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to assess the effectiveness of a single standardised training session on the ability of intensive care registered nurses (RNs) to recognise the misplacement of endotracheal and nasogastric tubes on bedside chest radiographs of patients in intensive care units (ICUs). METHODS: In eight French ICUs, RNs received a 110-min standardised teaching on the position of endotracheal and nasogastric tubes on chest radiographs. Their knowledge was evaluated within the subsequent weeks. For 20 chest radiographs, each with an endotracheal and nasogastric tube, RNs had to indicate whether each tube was in the proper or incorrect position. Training success was defined as >90% for the lower bound of the 95% confidence interval (95% CI) of the mean correct response rate (CRR). Residents of the participating ICUs underwent the same evaluation (without prior specific training). RESULTS: In total, 181 RNs were trained and evaluated and 110 residents were evaluated. The global mean CRR for RNs was 84.6% (95% CI: 83.3-85.9), significantly higher than for residents (81.4% [95% CI: 79.7-83.2]) (P < 0.0001). The mean CRR for RNs and residents was 95.9% (93.9-98.0) and 97.0% (94.7-99.3) for misplaced nasogastric tubes (P = 0.54), 86.8% (85.2-88.5) and 82.6% (79.4-85.7) (P = 0.07) for nasogastric tubes in the correct position, 86.6% (83.8-89.3) and 62.7% (57.9-67.5) for misplaced endotracheal tubes (P < 0.0001), and 79.1% (76.6-81.6) and 84.7% (82.1-87.2) for endotracheal tubes in the correct position (P = 0.01), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The ability of trained RNs to detect tube misplacement did not reach the predetermined arbitrary level, indicating training success. Their mean CRR was higher than that for residents and was considered satisfactory for detecting misplaced nasogastric tubes. This finding is encouraging but insufficient to ensure patient safety. Transferring responsibility for reading radiographs to detect the misplacement of endotracheal tubes to intensive care RNs will need a more advanced or more in-depth teaching method.

Cough Peak Flow Assessment Without Disconnection From the ICU Ventilator in Mechanically Ventilated Patients.

BACKGROUND: Because ICU ventilators incorporate flow velocity measurement, cough peak expiratory flow (CPF) can be assessed without disconnecting the patient from the ICU ventilator. Our goal was to estimate the correlation between CPF obtained with the built-in ventilator flow meter (ventilator CPF) and CPF obtained with an electronic portable handheld peak flow meter connected to the endotracheal tube. METHODS: Cooperative mechanically ventilated patients who entered the weaning process and who were ventilated with pressure support < 15 cm H2O and PEEP < 9 cm H2O were eligible for the study. Their CPF measurements obtained on the extubation day were kept for analysis. RESULTS: We analyzed CPF obtained in 61 subjects. The mean ± SD value of ventilator CPF and peak flow meter CPF were 72.6 ± 27.5 L/min and 31.1 ± 13.4 L/min. The Pearson correlation coefficient was 0.63 (95% CI 0.45-0.76), P < .001. The ventilator CPF had an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.84 (95% CI 0.75-0.93) to predict a peak flow meter CPF < 35 L/min. Neither ventilator CPF nor peak flow meter CPF differed significantly between subjects who were or were not re-intubated within 72 h (n = 5) and failed to predict re-intubation at 72 h (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.64 [95% CI 0.46-0.82] and 0.47 [95% CI 0.22-0.74]). CONCLUSIONS: CPF measurements using a built-in ventilator flow meter were feasible in routine practice with cooperative ICU subjects who were intubated and correlated with CPF assessed by an electronic portable peak flow meter.

Manually Controlled, Continuous Infusion of Phenylephrine or Norepinephrine for Maintenance of Blood Pressure and Cardiac Output During Spinal Anesthesia for Cesarean Delivery: A Double-Blinded Randomized Study.

BACKGROUND: To counteract the vasoplegia induced by spinal anesthesia (SA) and maintain blood pressure (BP) during cesarean delivery, phenylephrine is currently recommended, but norepinephrine might offer superior preservation of cardiac output. We aimed to compare the hemodynamic effects of phenylephrine and norepinephrine administered by manually adjusted continuous infusion during elective cesarean delivery. METHODS: In this pragmatic, parallel-group, double-blind randomized controlled trial, 124 parturients scheduled for elective cesarean delivery under SA in a tertiary maternity in France, between February 2019 and December 2020, were randomized to receive norepinephrine at a starting rate of 0.05 µg·kg -1 ·min -1 (n = 62) or phenylephrine at a starting rate of 0.5 µg·kg -1 ·min -1 (n = 62). In both groups, the vasopressor infusion rate was then manually adjusted to maintain maternal systolic BP above 90% of the baseline value. The primary outcome, the change in cardiac index (CI) measured by thoracic bioreactance from SA to umbilical cord clamping, was analyzed through repeated measures analysis of variance and post hoc t tests. Secondary outcomes included maternal BP and neonatal outcomes. RESULTS: In the norepinephrine group, cardiac index was maintained between 90% and 100% of baseline from SA to umbilical cord clamping, whereas it was maintained at significantly lower values (81%-88%) in the phenylephrine group ( P = .001). The percentage of elapsed time with a mean maternal BP <65 mm Hg and with systolic BP <80% of the baseline value was higher in the phenylephrine group: 2.9% (7.3) vs 0.5% (1.8) (absolute risk difference [ARD], -2.4%; 95% confidence interval, -4.4 to -0.5; P = .012) and 8.5% (16.6) vs 2.3% (5.2) (ARD, -6.2%; 95% confidence interval, -10.6 to -1.8; P = .006). Excluding parturients with gestational diabetes, severe neonatal hypoglycemia was more common in the phenylephrine group at 19.6% (9/46) vs 4.1% (2/49) ( P = .02). The other neonatal outcomes did not differ significantly between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: When administered by manually adjusted infusion during SA for cesarean delivery, norepinephrine was associated with a higher CI; both infusions were effective for maintaining BP.

Relying on pulse oximetry to avoid hypoxaemia and hyperoxia: A multicentre prospective cohort study in patients with circulatory failure.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to assess the predictive performance of pulse oximetry (SpO2) to rule out hypoxaemia and hyperoxia in critically ill patients. METHODS: SpO2, arterial oxygenation (SaO2), and arterial partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2) were prospectively and simultaneously measured every 6 h during the first 24 h of intensive care unit admission in a multicentre cohort of critically ill patients suffering acute circulatory failure. Likelihood ratios associated with different cutoff values of SpO2 to rule out hypoxaemia (SaO2 < 90% or PaO2 < 60 mmHg) or hyperoxia (SaO2 > 95% or PaO2 > 100 mmHg) and post-test probabilities were calculated. Mean bias between SpO2 and SaO2 and agreement interval were calculated. Area under the receiver operating characteristics associated with SpO2 to predict different threshold values of SaO2 and PaO2 were calculated. RESULTS: Five hundred seventy-one patients (mean [standard deviation] Simplified Acute Physiology Score II: 58.7 [20.1]; mechanically ventilated 75.6%) with 2643 available SaO2 and PaO2 samples and corresponding 2643 SpO2 values were analysed. Mean bias between SpO2 and SaO2 was 1.1%, and its agreement interval ranged from -8.2 to +11.1%. SpO2 cutoff values of 88%, 90%, and 92% left the possibility that 8%-13% of patients had hypoxaemia. SpO2 < 95% left the possibility that 31% of patients had hyperoxia. All calculated areas under the receiver operating characteristics showed a lower limit of their 95% confidence interval below 0.85 CONCLUSION: In this cohort of patients with circulatory failure, SpO2 had poor discriminative ability to rule out hypoxaemia and hyperoxia. Overconfidence upon SpO2 monitoring may be dangerous.

Empirical Antibiotic Therapy for Gram-Negative Bacilli Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia: Observational Study and Pharmacodynamic Assessment.

Background: Strong evidence suggests a correlation between pharmacodynamics (PD) index and antibiotic efficacy while dose adjustment should be considered in critically ill patients due to modified pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters and/or higher minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs). This study aimed to assess pharmacodynamic (PD) target attainment considering both antibiotics serum concentrations and measured MICs in these patients. Method: A multicentric prospective open-label trial conducted in 11 French ICUs involved patients with Gram-negative bacilli (GNB) ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) confirmed by quantitative cultures. Results: We included 117 patients. Causative GNBs were P. aeruginosa (40%), Enterobacter spp. (23%), E. coli (20%), and Klebsiella spp. (16%). Hence, 117 (100%) patients received ß-lactams, 65 (58%) aminoglycosides, and two (1.5%) fluoroquinolones. For ß-lactams, 83% of the patients achieved a Cmin/MIC > 1 and 70% had a Cmin/MIC > 4. In the case of high creatinine clearance (CrCL > 100 mL/min/1.73 m2), 70.4% of the patients achieved a Cmin/MIC ratio > 1 versus 91% otherwise (p = 0.041), and 52% achieved a Cmin/MIC ratio > 4 versus 81% (p = 0.018). For aminoglycosides, 94% of the patients had a Cmax/MIC ratio > 8. Neither ß-lactams nor aminoglycosides PK/PD parameters were associated clinical outcomes, but our data suggest a correlation between ß-lactams Cmin/MIC and microbiological success. Conclusion: In our ICU patients treated for GNB VAP, using recommended antibiotic dosage led in most cases to PK/PD targets attainment for aminoglycosides and ß-lactams. High creatinine clearance should encourage clinicians to focus on PK/PD issues.

Outcomes of mild-to-moderate postresuscitation shock after non-shockable cardiac arrest and association with temperature management: a post hoc analysis of HYPERION trial data.

BACKGROUND: Outcomes of postresuscitation shock after cardiac arrest can be affected by targeted temperature management (TTM). A post hoc analysis of the "TTM1 trial" suggested higher mortality with hypothermia at 33 °C. We performed a post hoc analysis of HYPERION trial data to assess potential associations linking postresuscitation shock after non-shockable cardiac arrest to hypothermia at 33 °C on favourable functional outcome. METHODS: We divided the patients into groups with vs. without postresuscitation (defined as the need for vasoactive drugs) shock then assessed the proportion of patients with a favourable functional outcome (day-90 Cerebral Performance Category [CPC] 1 or 2) after hypothermia (33 °C) vs. controlled normothermia (37 °C) in each group. Patients with norepinephrine or epinephrine > 1 µg/kg/min were not included. RESULTS: Of the 581 patients included in 25 ICUs in France and who did not withdraw consent, 339 had a postresuscitation shock and 242 did not. In the postresuscitation-shock group, 159 received hypothermia, including 14 with a day-90 CPC of 1-2, and 180 normothermia, including 10 with a day-90 CPC of 1-2 (8.81% vs. 5.56%, respectively; P = 0.24). After adjustment, the proportion of patients with CPC 1-2 also did not differ significantly between the hypothermia and normothermia groups (adjusted hazards ratio, 1.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.72-5.50; P = 0.18). Day-90 mortality was comparable in these two groups (83% vs. 86%, respectively; P = 0.43). CONCLUSIONS: After non-shockable cardiac arrest, mild-to-moderate postresuscitation shock at intensive-care-unit admission did not seem associated with day-90 functional outcome or survival. Therapeutic hypothermia at 33 °C was not associated with worse outcomes compared to controlled normothermia in patients with postresuscitation shock. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01994772.

Does awake prone positioning prevent the use of mechanical respiratory support or death in COVID-19 patients on standard oxygen therapy hospitalised in general wards? A multicentre randomised controlled trial: the PROVID-19 protocol.

INTRODUCTION: COVID-19 is responsible of severe hypoxaemia and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Prone positioning improves oxygenation and survival in sedated mechanically patients with ARDS not related to COVID-19. Awake prone positioning is a simple and safe technique which improves oxygenation in non-intubated COVID-19 patients. We hypothesised that early prone positioning in COVID-19 patients breathing spontaneously in medical wards could decrease the rates of intubation or need for noninvasive ventilation or death. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: PROVID-19 is an investigator-initiated, prospective, multicentre randomised, controlled, superiority trial comparing awake prone positioning to standard of care in hypoxaemic COVID-19 patients in 20 medical wards in France and Monaco. Patients are randomised to receive either awake prone position plus usual care or usual care alone with stratification on centres, body mass index and severity of hypoxaemia.The study objective is to compare the rate of treatment failure defined as a composite endpoint comprising the need for non-invasive ventilation (at two pressure levels) or for intubation or death, between the intervention group (awake prone position plus usual care) and the usual care (usual care alone) group at 28 days. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The protocol and amendments have been approved by the ethics committees (Comité de protection des personnes Ouest VI, France, no 1279 HPS2 and Comité Consultatif d'Ethique en matière de Recherche Biomédicale, Monaco, no 2020.8894 AP/jv), and patients are included after written informed consent. The results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04363463.

Performance of the Cepheid Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus/S. aureus Skin and Soft Tissue Infection PCR Assay on Respiratory Samples from Mechanically Ventilated Patients for S. aureus Screening during the Phase 2 Double-Blind SAATELLITE Study.

We investigated the performance of the Xpert methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA)/S. aureus skin and soft tissue (SSTI) quantitative PCR (qPCR) assay in SAATELLITE, a multicenter, double-blind, phase 2 study of suvratoxumab, a monoclonal antibody (MAb) targeting S. aureus alpha-toxin, for reducing the incidence of S. aureus pneumonia. The assay was used to detect methicillin-susceptible S. aureus (MSSA) and MRSA in lower respiratory tract (LRT) samples from mechanically ventilated patients. LRT culture results were compared with S. aureus protein A (spa) gene cycle threshold (CT) values. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) and Youden index were used to determine the CT cutoff for best separation of culture-S. aureus-negative and S. aureus-positive patients. Of 720 screened subjects, 299 (41.5%) were S. aureus positive by qPCR, of whom 209 had culture data: 162 (77.5%) were S. aureus positive and 47 (22.5%) were S. aureus negative. Culture results were negatively affected by antibiotic use and cross-laboratory variability. An inverse linear correlation was observed between CT values and quantitative S. aureus culture results. A spa CT value of 29 (≈2 × 103 CFU/mL) served as the best cutoff for separation between culture-negative and culture-positive samples. The associated area under the ROC curve was 83.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 78 to 90%). Suvratoxumab provided greater reduction in S. aureus pneumonia or death than placebo in subjects with low S. aureus load (CT ≥ 29; relative risk reduction [RRR], 50.0%; 90% CI, 2.7 to 74.4%) versus the total study population (RRR, 25.2%; 90% CI, -4.3 to 46.4%). The qPCR assay was easy to perform, sensitive, and standardized and provided better sensitivity than conventional culture for S. aureus detection. Quantitative PCR CT output correlated with suvratoxumab efficacy in reducing S. aureus pneumonia incidence or death in S. aureus-colonized, mechanically ventilated patients.

Sensitivity and specificity of heat and moisture exchange filters sampling for SARS-CoV-2 detection in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients.

We assessed the sensitivity and specificity of SARS-CoV-2 detection by polymerase chain reaction in heat and moisture exchange filters (HMEF) in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients. We showed that testing HMEF might obviate the need for a tracheal sample to affirm that a patient is not ready to end isolation.

Impact of targeted hypothermia in expanded-criteria organ donors on recipient kidney-graft function: study protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial (HYPOREME).

INTRODUCTION: Expanded-criteria donors (ECDs) are used to reduce the shortage of kidneys for transplantation. However, kidneys from ECDs are associated with an increased risk of delayed graft function (DGF), a risk factor for allograft loss and mortality. HYPOREME will be a multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT) comparing targeted hypothermia to normothermia in ECDs, in a country where the use of machine perfusion for organ storage is the standard of care. We hypothesise that hypothermia will decrease the incidence of DGF. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: HYPOREME is a multicentre RCT comparing the effect on kidney function in recipients of targeted hypothermia (34°C-35°C) and normothermia (36.5°C-37.5°C) in the ECDs. The temperature intervention starts from randomisation and is maintained until aortic clamping in the operating room. We aim to enrol 289 ECDs in order to analyse the kidney function of 516 recipients in the 53 participating centres. The primary outcome is the occurrence of DGF in kidney recipients, defined as a requirement for renal replacement therapy within 7 days after transplantation (not counting a single session for hyperkalemia during the first 24 hours). Secondary outcomes include the proportion of patients with individual organs transplanted in each group; the number of organs transplanted from each ECD and the vital status and kidney function of the recipients 7 days, 28 days, 3 months and 1 year after transplantation. An interim analysis is planned after the enrolment of 258 kidney recipients. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The trial was approved by the ethics committee of the French Intensive Care Society (CE-SRLF-16-07) on 26 April 2016 and by the competent French authorities on 20 April 2016 (Comité de Protection des Personnes-TOURS-Région Centre-Ouest 1, registration #2016-S3). Findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented during national and international scientific meetings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03098706.