Disseminated intravascular coagulation in an under-recognised zoonotic infection.

A 51 year old man presented with severe sepsis, disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) and multiorgan dysfunction after a 24 hour history of diarrhoea and malaise. Despite fluid resuscitation and receiving a platelet transfusion, freshfrozen plasma and intravenous broad-spectrum antibiotics, he remained anuric with a worsening metabolic acidosis. He was transferred to critical care for organ support including renal replacement therapy. He subsequently developed purpura fulminans. Blood cultures were positive for Captocytophaga carnimorsis, a gram-negative canine zoonosis that is an underdiagnosed cause of severe sepsis, for which DIC at presentation is characteristic. Treatment is with penicillins and fluoroquinolones. Identification of risk factors for unusual organisms and recognition of DIC allowing prompt treatment is critical for the acute physician.

A mannequin study of intubation with the AP advance and GlideScope Ranger videolaryngoscopes and the Macintosh laryngoscope.

BACKGROUND: The AP Advance (APA) is a videolaryngoscope with interchangeable blades: intubators can choose standard Macintosh blades or a difficult-airway blade with increased curvature and a channel to guide the tube to the larynx. The APA may therefore be comparably effective in both normal and difficult airways. We tested the hypotheses that intubation with the APA is no slower than Macintosh laryngoscopy for normal mannequin airways, and that it is no slower than videolaryngoscopy using a GlideScope Ranger in difficult mannequin airways. METHODS: Medical professionals whose roles potentially include tracheal intubation were trained with each device. Participants intubated simulated (Laerdal SimMan) normal and difficult airways with the APA, GlideScope, and a conventional Macintosh blade. Speed of intubation was compared using Cox proportional hazards regression, with a hazard ratio >0.8 considered noninferior. We also compared laryngeal visualization, failures, and participant preferences. RESULTS: Unadjusted intubation times in the normal airway with the APA and Macintosh were virtually identical (median, 22 vs 23 seconds); after adjustment for effects of experience, order, and period, the hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) comparing APA with Macintosh laryngoscopy was 0.87 (0.65, 1.17), which was not significantly more than our predefined noninferiority boundary of 0.8 (P = 0.26). Intubation with the APA was faster than with the GlideScope in difficult airways (hazard ratio = 7.6 [5.0, 11.3], P < 0.001; median, 20 vs 59 seconds). All participants intubated the difficult airway mannequin with the APA, whereas 33% and 37% failed with the GlideScope and Macintosh, respectively. In the difficult airway, 99% of participants achieved a Cormack and Lehane grade I to II view with the APA, versus 85% and 33% with the GlideScope and Macintosh, respectively. When asked to choose 1 device overall, 82% chose the APA. CONCLUSIONS: Intubation times were similar with the APA and Macintosh laryngoscopes in mannequins with normal airways. However, intubation with the APA was significantly faster than with the GlideScope in the difficult mannequin simulation.

Extubation in intensive care units in the UK: an online survey.

AIM: To determine the current practice among critical care nurses in the UK with regard to airway management during cuff deflation and extubation. BACKGROUND: There are a number of techniques used by clinicians to prevent aspiration during cuff deflation and extubation of patients. There are no published clinical studies comparing the different manoeuvres available to clinicians at the time of extubation nor any data to suggest which technique is most commonly used. METHODS: All members of the British Association of Critical Care Nurses with an email address were invited to participate in an online survey. RESULTS: A total of 533 (29%) nurses from 184 (84%) intensive care unit (ICUs) in the UK completed the survey. Just under half of the sample (n = 258, 48.4%) had more than 10 years of critical care experience and the vast majority (n = 427, 80.1%) worked in general ICUs. The majority of respondents (n = 461, 86.5%) suction the trachea during cuff deflation and extubation. A further 304 (57%) respondents ask patients to cough as part of extubation. Respondents increase the positive end expiratory pressure setting on the ventilator infrequently as part of routine procedure for extubation (n = 7, 1.3%). CONCLUSION: The majority of UK critical care nurses either suction the trachea during cuff deflation and extubation of patients and/or simply ask the patient to cough. Further clinical trials are required to identify the most appropriate and safe technique for critically ill patients.

Increasing positive end expiratory pressure at extubation reduces subglottic secretion aspiration in a bench-top model.

AIM: To estimate the ability of simulated tracheal suction, adjusting the positive end expiratory pressure (PEEP) settings on the ventilator or compressing a self-inflating bag to minimize aspiration during cuff deflation and extubation in a bench-top model. BACKGROUND: During intubation, colonized secretions accumulate in the subglottic space above the endotracheal tube (ETT) cuff. Consequently, during cuff deflation and extubation, there is a risk of aspiration of the secretions. This may result in pneumonitis or pneumonia. There are a number of techniques used during cuff deflation and extubation to prevent secretion aspiration. METHOD: A model trachea was intubated and the proximal end of the ETT was attached to a mechanical ventilator. Ten millilitres of water was placed above the inflated cuff and then nine test protocols were implemented in a random order to simulate tracheal suction, adjusting the PEEP settings on the ventilator or compressing a self-inflating bag. The volume of water 'aspirated' by the model was determined by weighing the apparatus pre- and post-extubation. Statistical analysis was performed using regression analysis and heteroscedastic t tests with a Bonferroni correction. RESULTS: The level of PEEP was negatively correlated with the volume of fluid aspirated [co-efficient -0.24 (99% confidence interval -0.31 to -0.17), R(2) = 0.75]. Significantly less fluid was aspirated when a PEEP of 35 cmH(2)O was applied when compared with competing techniques. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that applying PEEP during cuff deflation and extubation is protective against aspiration. We conclude that unless there is a contraindication, the application of PEEP should be considered when extubating patients.