Decision-Making on Withholding or Withdrawing Life Support in the ICU: A Worldwide Perspective.

BACKGROUND: Many critically ill patients who die will do so after a decision has been made to withhold/withdraw life-sustaining therapy. The objective of this study was to document the characteristics of ICU patients with a decision to withhold/withdraw life-sustaining treatment, including the types of supportive treatments used, patterns of organ dysfunction, and international differences, including gross national income (GNI). METHODS: In this observational cohort study conducted in 730 ICUs in 84 countries, all adult patients admitted between May 8, 2012, and May 18, 2012 (except admissions for routine postoperative surveillance), were included. RESULTS: The analysis included 9,524 patients, with a hospital mortality of 24%. A decision to withhold/withdraw life-sustaining treatment was reported during the ICU stay in 1,259 patients (13%), including 820 (40%) nonsurvivors and 439 (5%) survivors. Hospital mortality in patients with a decision to withhold/withdraw life-sustaining treatment was 69%. The proportion of deaths in patients with a decision to withhold/withdraw life-sustaining treatment ranged from 10% in South Asia to 67% in Oceania. Decisions to withhold/withdraw life-sustaining treatment were less frequent in low/lower-middle GNI countries than in high GNI countries (6% vs 14%; P < .001). Greater disease severity, presence of ≥ 2 organ failures, severe comorbidities, medical and trauma admissions, and admission from the ED or hospital floor were independent predictors of a decision to withhold/withdraw life-sustaining treatment. CONCLUSIONS: There is considerable worldwide variability in decisions to withhold/withdraw life-sustaining treatments. Interestingly, almost one-third of patients with a decision to withhold/withdraw life-sustaining treatment left the hospital alive.

Arterial blood pressure targets in septic shock: is it time to move to an individualized approach?

Xu and colleagues evaluated the impact of increasing mean arterial blood pressure levels through norepinephrine administration on systemic hemodynamics, tissue perfusion, and sublingual microcirculation of septic shock patients with chronic hypertension. The authors concluded that, although increasing arterial blood pressure improved sublingual microcirculation parameters, no concomitant improvement in systemic tissue perfusion indicators was found. Here, we discuss why resuscitation targets may need to be individualized, taking into account the patient's baseline condition, and present directions for future research in this field.

Angiotensin II in septic shock.

This article is one of ten reviews selected from the Annual Update in Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine 2015 and co-published as a series in Critical Care. Other articles in the series can be found online at http://ccforum.com/series/annualupdate2015. Further information about the Annual Update in Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine is available from http://www.springer.com/series/8901.