Beneficial Effects of Noninvasive Ventilation after Extubation in Obese or Overweight Patients: A Post Hoc Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.

Rationale: Although noninvasive ventilation (NIV) may prevent reintubation in patients at high risk of extubation failure in ICUs, this oxygenation strategy has not been specifically assessed in obese patients. Objectives: We hypothesized that NIV may decrease the risk of reintubation in obese patients compared with high-flow nasal oxygen. Methods:Post hoc analysis of a multicenter randomized controlled trial (not prespecified) comparing NIV alternating with high-flow nasal oxygen versus high-flow nasal oxygen alone after extubation, with the aim of assessing NIV effects according to patient body mass index (BMI). Measurements and Main Results: Among 623 patients at high risk of extubation failure, 206 (33%) were obese (BMI ⩾ 30 kg/m2), 204 (33%) were overweight (25 kg/m2 ⩽ BMI < 30 kg/m2), and 213 (34%) were normal or underweight (BMI < 25 kg/m2). Significant heterogeneity of NIV effects on the rate of reintubation was found according to BMI (Pinteraction = 0.007). Reintubation rates at Day 7 were significantly lower with NIV alternating with high-flow nasal oxygen than with high-flow nasal oxygen alone in obese or overweight patients: 7% (15/204) versus 20% (41/206) (difference, -13% [95% confidence interval, -19 to -6]; P = 0.0002), whereas it did not significantly differ in normal or underweight patients. In-ICU mortality was significantly lower with NIV than with high-flow nasal oxygen alone in obese or overweight patients (2% vs. 9%; difference, -6% [95% confidence interval, -11 to -2]; P = 0.006). Conclusions: Prophylactic NIV alternating with high-flow nasal oxygen immediately after extubation significantly decreased the risk of reintubation and death compared with high-flow nasal oxygen alone in obese or overweight patients at high risk of extubation failure. By contrast, NIV was not effective in normal or underweight patients. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03121482).

Non-invasive ventilation versus high-flow nasal oxygen for postextubation respiratory failure in ICU: a post-hoc analysis of a randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: In intensive care units (ICUs), patients experiencing post-extubation respiratory failure have poor outcomes. The use of noninvasive ventilation (NIV) to treat post-extubation respiratory failure may increase the risk of death. This study aims at comparing mortality between patients treated with NIV alternating with high-flow nasal oxygen or high-flow nasal oxygen alone. METHODS: Post-hoc analysis of a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial focusing on patients who experienced post-extubation respiratory failure within the 7 days following extubation. Patients were classified in the NIV group or the high-flow nasal oxygen group according to oxygenation strategy used after the onset of post-extubation respiratory failure. Patients reintubated within the first hour after extubation and those promptly reintubated without prior treatment were excluded. The primary outcome was mortality at day 28 after the onset of post-extubation respiratory failure. RESULTS: Among 651 extubated patients, 158 (25%) experienced respiratory failure and 146 were included in the analysis. Mortality at day 28 was 18% (15/84) using NIV alternating with high-flow nasal oxygen and 29% (18/62) with high flow nasal oxygen alone (difference, - 11% [95% CI, - 25 to 2]; p = 0.12). Among the 46 patients with hypercapnia at the onset of respiratory failure, mortality at day 28 was 3% (1/33) with NIV and 31% (4/13) with high-flow nasal oxygen alone (difference, - 28% [95% CI, - 54 to - 6]; p = 0.006). The proportion of patients reintubated 48 h after the onset of post-extubation respiratory failure was 44% (37/84) with NIV and 52% (32/62) with high-flow nasal oxygen alone (p = 0.21). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with post-extubation respiratory failure, NIV alternating with high-flow nasal oxygen might not increase the risk of death. Trial registration number The trial was registered at http://www.clinicaltrials.gov with the registration number NCT03121482 the 20th April 2017.

Non-invasive ventilation alternating with high-flow nasal oxygen versus high-flow nasal oxygen alone after extubation in COPD patients: a post hoc analysis of a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Several randomized clinical trials have shown that non-invasive ventilation (NIV) applied immediately after extubation may prevent reintubation in patients at high-risk of extubation failure. However, most of studies included patients with chronic respiratory disorders as well as patients without underlying respiratory disease. To date, no study has shown decreased risk of reintubation with prophylactic NIV after extubation among patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We hypothesized that prophylactic NIV after extubation may decrease the risk of reintubation in COPD patients as compared with high-flow nasal oxygen. We performed a post hoc subgroup analysis of COPD patients included in a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial comparing prophylactic use of NIV alternating with high-flow nasal oxygen versus high-flow nasal oxygen alone immediately after extubation. RESULTS: Among the 651 patients included in the original study, 150 (23%) had underlying COPD including 86 patients treated with NIV alternating with high-flow nasal oxygen and 64 patients treated with high-flow nasal oxygen alone. The reintubation rate was 13% (11 out of 86 patients) with NIV and 27% (17 out of 64 patients) with high-flow nasal oxygen alone [difference, - 14% (95% CI - 27% to - 1%); p = 0.03]. Whereas reintubation rates were significantly lower with NIV than with high-flow nasal oxygen alone at 72 h and until ICU discharge, mortality in ICU did not differ between groups: 6% (5/86) with NIV vs. 9% (6/64) with high-flow nasal oxygen alone [difference - 4% (95% CI - 14% to 5%); p = 0.40]. CONCLUSIONS: In COPD patients, prophylactic NIV alternating with high-flow nasal oxygen significantly decreased the risk of reintubation compared with high-flow nasal oxygen alone. Trial registration The study was registered at http://www.clinicaltrials.gov with the trial registration number NCT03121482 (20 April 2017).

Risk factors and events in the adult intensive care unit associated with pain as self-reported at the end of the intensive care unit stay.

BACKGROUND: The short-term and long-term consequences of the most frequent painful procedures performed in the ICU are unclear. This study aimed to identify the risk factors associated with pain-related discomfort perceived by critically ill patients during the whole ICU stay as self-reported by patients at the end of their ICU stay. METHODS: The study involved 34 ICUs. Adult patients who survived an ICU stay of 3 calendar days or more were eligible for inclusion. Discomforts, including the pain-related discomfort, were assessed using the French 18-item questionnaire on discomfort in ICU patients, the "Inconforts des Patients de REAnimation" (IPREA). Patients scored each item from 0 (minimal discomfort) to 10 (maximal discomfort). Associations between patient characteristics at ICU admission, life support therapies and main potentially painful procedures performed during the ICU stay and pain-related discomfort scores assessed at the end of the ICU stay were analyzed. RESULTS: Patients with complete IPREA questionnaires (n = 2130) were included. The median pain-related discomfort score was 3 (IQR 0-5). From the univariate analysis, pain-related discomfort scores were negatively correlated with age and positively correlated with ICU stay duration; surgical patients reported significant higher pain-related discomfort scores than medical patients; chest drain insertion, chest drain removal, use of bladder catheter, central venous catheter (CVC) insertion, complex dressing change, and intra-hospital transport were associated with pain-related discomfort scores. From the multivariate analyses using generalized estimating equations models, only age, chest drain removal, use of a bladder catheter, CVC insertion, and intra-hospital transport were the main risk factors associated with pain-related discomfort scores. CONCLUSION: Patients who underwent chest drain removal, bladder catheter, CVC insertion, and intra-hospital transport during their ICU stay reported higher pain-related discomfort scores (with respect to the whole ICU stay and assessed at the end of their ICU stay) than patients who did not experience these events. This study may pave the way for further targeted studies aiming at investigating a causal link between these common procedures in the ICU and adult critically ill patients' perceptions of their ICU stay regarding recalled pain. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier NCT02442934, retrospectively registered on May 13, 2015.

T-piece versus pressure-support ventilation for spontaneous breathing trials before extubation in patients at high risk of reintubation: protocol for a multicentre, randomised controlled trial (TIP-EX).

INTRODUCTION: In intensive care unit (ICU), the decision of extubation is a critical time because mortality is particularly high in case of reintubation. To reduce that risk, guidelines recommend to systematically perform a spontaneous breathing trial (SBT) before extubation in order to mimic the postextubation physiological conditions. SBT is usually performed with a T-piece disconnecting the patient from the ventilator or with low levels of pressure-support ventilation (PSV). However, work of breathing is lower during PSV than during T-piece. Consequently, while PSV trial may hasten extubation, it may also increase the risk of reintubation. We hypothesise that, compared with T-piece, SBT performed using PSV may hasten extubation without increasing the risk of reintubation. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study is an investigator-initiated, multicentre randomised controlled trial comparing T-piece vs PSV for SBTs in patients at high risk of reintubation in ICUs. Nine hundred patients will be randomised with a 1:1 ratio in two groups according to the type of SBT. The primary outcome is the number of ventilator-free days at day 28, defined as the number of days alive and without invasive mechanical ventilation between the initial SBT (day 1) and day 28. Secondary outcomes include the number of days between the initial SBT and the first extubation attempt, weaning difficulty, the number of patients extubated after the initial SBT and not reintubated within the following 72 hours, the number of patients extubated within the 7 days following the initial SBT, the number of patients reintubated within the 7 days following extubation, in-ICU length of stay and mortality in ICU, at day 28 and at day 90. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has been approved by the central ethics committee 'Ile de France V' (2019-A02151-56) and patients will be included after informed consent. The results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04227639.

Pressure-Support Ventilation vs T-Piece During Spontaneous Breathing Trials Before Extubation Among Patients at High Risk of Extubation Failure: A Post-Hoc Analysis of a Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Spontaneous breathing trial (SBT) using a T-piece remains the most frequently performed trial before extubation in ICUs. RESEARCH QUESTION: We aimed at determining whether initial SBT using pressure-support ventilation (PSV) could increase successful extubation rates among patients at high risk of extubation failure. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Post hoc analysis of a multicenter trial focusing on reintubation in patients at high-risk of extubation failure. The initial SBT was performed using PSV or T-piece according to the physician/center decision. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients successfully extubated 72 hours after initial SBT, that is, extubated after initial SBT and not reintubated within the following 72 hours. RESULTS: Among the 641 patients included in the original study, initial SBT was performed using PSV (7.0 cm H2O in median without positive end-expiratory pressure) in 243 patients (38%) and using a T-piece in 398 patients (62%). The proportion of patients successfully extubated 72 hours after initial SBT was 67% (162/243) using PSV and 56% (223/398) using T-piece (absolute difference 10.6%; 95% CI, 2.8 to 28.1; P = .0076). The proportion of patients extubated after initial SBT was 77% (186/283) using PSV and 63% (249/398) using T-piece (P = .0002), whereas reintubation rates within the following 72 hours did not significantly differ (13% vs 10%, respectively; P = .4259). Performing an initial SBT using PSV was independently associated with successful extubation (adjusted OR, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.30 to 2.18; P = .0061). INTERPRETATION: In patients at high risk of extubation failure in the ICU, performing an initial SBT using PSV may hasten extubation without an increased risk of reintubation.

Tailored multicomponent program for discomfort reduction in critically ill patients may decrease post-traumatic stress disorder in general ICU survivors at 1 year.

PURPOSE: Reducing discomfort in the intensive care unit (ICU) should have a positive effect on long-term outcomes. This study assessed whether a tailored multicomponent program for discomfort reduction was effective in reducing post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms at 1 year in general ICU survivors. METHODS: This study is a prospective observational comparative effectiveness cohort study involving 30 ICUs. It was an extension of the IPREA3 study, a cluster-randomized controlled trial designed to assess the efficacy of a tailored multicomponent program to reduce discomfort in critically ill patients. The program included assessment of ICU-related self-perceived discomforts, immediate and monthly feedback to the healthcare team, and site-specific tailored interventions. The exposure was the implementation of this program. The eligible patients were exposed versus unexposed general adult ICU survivors. The prevalence of substantial PTSD symptoms at 1 year was assessed based on the Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R). RESULTS: Of the 1537 ICU survivors included in the study, 475 unexposed patients and 344 exposed patients had follow-up data at 1 year: 57 (12.0%) and 21 (6.1%) presented with PTSD at 1 year, respectively (p = 0.004). Considering the clustering and after adjusting for age, gender, McCabe classification, and ICU-related self-perceived overall discomfort score, exposed patients were significantly less likely than unexposed patients to have substantial PTSD symptoms at 1 year (p = 0.015). CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a tailored multicomponent program in the ICU that has proved to be effective for reducing self-perceived discomfort in general adult ICU survivors also reduced the prevalence of substantial PTSD symptoms at 1 year. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02762409.

Assessment of patients' self-perceived intensive care unit discomforts: Validation of the 18-item version of the IPREA.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: We reported the validation of the 18-item version of the 'Inconforts des Patients de REAnimation (IPREA)' questionnaire that includes 2 new items exploring feeling depressed and shortness of breath during an intensive care unit (ICU) stay. METHODS: The validation process was integrated in a multicenter, cluster-randomized, controlled, two-parallel group study built to assess the effectiveness of a tailored multicomponent program for reducing self-perceived discomfort in the ICU. All patients aged 18 years or older who survived an ICU stay of 3 calendar days or more were eligible for inclusion. Data collection included demographics (sex, age), type of admission (medical and surgical), health status scores at admission (Knaus score and McCabe index, Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) II), specific ICU therapeutics such as mechanical ventilation (MV), noninvasive ventilation (NIV), use of vasopressors, or renal replacement therapy (RRT), and ICU stay duration. RESULTS: A total of 994 patients were included. The initial structure of IPREA was confirmed using confirmatory factor analysis showing satisfactory fit (RMSEA at 0.042, CFI at 0.912). No multidimensional structure was identified, allowing the calculation of an overall discomfort score. The three highest discomforts were sleep deprivation, thirst, and perfusion lines and other devices, and the 3 lowest discomforts were limited visiting hours, hunger, and isolation. The overall discomfort score of the 18-item version of IPREA did not differ between men and women. Higher age was significantly correlated with a lower overall discomfort score. While MV was not linked to self-reported discomfort, patients treated by NIV reported higher overall discomfort scores than patients not treated by NIV. CONCLUSION: The 18-item version of IPREA is easy to use and possesses satisfactory psychometric properties. The availability of a reliable and valid French questionnaire asking about patients' self-perceived ICU discomforts enables feedback from the health care team to be incorporated in a continuous quality health care improvement strategy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrial.gov NCT02442934 (registration date: May 18, 2015, retrospectively registered).

A tailored multicomponent program to reduce discomfort in critically ill patients: a cluster-randomized controlled trial.

PURPOSE: Critically ill patients are exposed to stressful conditions and experience several discomforts. The primary objective was to assess whether a tailored multicomponent program is effective for reducing self-perceived discomfort. METHODS: In a cluster-randomized two-arm parallel trial, 34 French adult intensive care units (ICUs) without planned interventions to reduce discomfort were randomized, 17 to the arm including a 6-month period of program implementation followed by a 6-month period without the program (experimental group), and 17 to the arm with an inversed sequence (control group). The tailored multicomponent program consisted of assessment of ICU-related self-perceived discomforts, immediate and monthly feedback to healthcare teams, and site-specific tailored interventions. The primary outcome was the overall discomfort score derived from the 16-item IPREA questionnaire (0, minimal, 100, maximal overall discomfort) and the secondary outcomes were the discomfort scores of each IPREA item. IPREA was administered on the day of ICU discharge with a considered timeframe from the ICU admission until ICU discharge. RESULTS: During a 1-month assessment period, 398 and 360 patients were included in the experimental group and the control group, respectively. The difference (experimental minus control) of the overall discomfort score between groups was - 7.00 (95% CI - 9.89 to - 4.11, p < 0.001). After adjustment (age, gender, ICU duration, mechanical ventilation duration, and type of admission), the program effect was still positive for the overall discomfort score (difference - 6.35, SE 1.23, p < 0.001) and for 12 out of 16 items. CONCLUSIONS: This tailored multicomponent program decreased self-perceived discomfort in adult critically ill patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier NCT02442934.

Fulminant course of unilateral emphysematous pyelonephritis revealing a renal actinomycosis caused by Actinomyces meyeri, an unknown cause of septic shock.

The objective of this case report is to describe the first case of renal actinomycosis caused by Actinomyces meyeri presenting as severe emphysematous pyelonephritis and complicated by septic shock and multi-organ failure. Emphysematous pyelonephritis is a potentially life-threatening infection mostly described in diabetic patients and predominantly caused by uropathogenic bacteria. Actinomycosis is an uncommon chronic infection due to anaerobic gram-positive bacteria that unusually involves the urinary tract. We report the first case of emphysematous pyelonephritis caused by A. meyeri in a 75-year-old non-diabetic woman. The patient presented with an altered status, fever, nausea, and vomiting lasting for 2 days. A computed tomography scan revealed unilateral emphysematous pyelonephritis. She was rapidly admitted to intensive care unit for a septic shock with multiple organ dysfunctions. A conservative management consisting in renal percutaneous drainage, supportive measures, and prolonged adapted antibiotic therapy resulted in complete recovery. This case report illustrates that renal actinomycosis should be considered in case of emphysematous pyelonephritis given the good prognosis of this infection with conservative medical treatment.

Accuracy of a continuous noninvasive hemoglobin monitor in intensive care unit patients.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether noninvasive hemoglobin measurement by Pulse CO-Oximetry could provide clinically acceptable absolute and trend accuracy in critically ill patients, compared to other invasive methods of hemoglobin assessment available at bedside and the gold standard, the laboratory analyzer. DESIGN: Prospective study. SETTING: Surgical intensive care unit of a university teaching hospital. PATIENTS: Sixty-two patients continuously monitored with Pulse CO-Oximetry (Masimo Radical-7). INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: Four hundred seventy-one blood samples were analyzed by a point-of-care device (HemoCue 301), a satellite lab CO-Oximeter (Siemens RapidPoint 405), and a laboratory hematology analyzer (Sysmex XT-2000i), which was considered the reference device. Hemoglobin values reported from the invasive methods were compared to the values reported by the Pulse CO-Oximeter at the time of blood draw. When the case-to-case variation was assessed, the bias and limits of agreement were 0.0±1.0 g/dL for the Pulse CO-Oximeter, 0.3±1.3g/dL for the point-of-care device, and 0.9±0.6 g/dL for the satellite lab CO-Oximeter compared to the reference method. Pulse CO-Oximetry showed similar trend accuracy as satellite lab CO-Oximetry, whereas the point-of-care device did not appear to follow the trend of the laboratory analyzer as well as the other test devices. CONCLUSION: When compared to laboratory reference values, hemoglobin measurement with Pulse CO-Oximetry has absolute accuracy and trending accuracy similar to widely used, invasive methods of hemoglobin measurement at bedside. Hemoglobin measurement with pulse CO-Oximetry has the additional advantages of providing continuous measurements, noninvasively, which may facilitate hemoglobin monitoring in the intensive care unit.