Neumomediastino en pacientes con COVID-19 ingresados en UCI: serie de casos y revisión de la literatura / [Pneumomediastinum in patients with COVID-19 admitted to the ICU: case series and review of the literature]

Tras declaración de pandemia en febrero de 2020, se observa un aumento de casos de neumonías bilaterales con insuficiencia respiratoria grave, complicadas a su vez con neumomediastino. Se describe una serie de cuatro pacientes con neumomediastino asociado a distress respiratorio por neumonía por SARS-CoV-2 ingresados en cuidados intensivos del Hospital Universitario Rey Juan Carlos entre diciembre 2020 y enero 2021. En su mayoría son hombres de mediana edad, sin patología pulmonar previa, no fumadores, que han necesitado ventilación mecánica. El diagnóstico de neumomediastino se ha realizado mediante tomografía computarizada y el tratamiento ha sido conservador, con resolución total en todos los casos. Aunque esta complicación es un indicador de destrucción pulmonar y condiciona cambios en el manejo de la ventilación mecánica, no parece estar directamente relacionada con peor pronóstico o aumento de la mortalidad. (AU)

After the declaration of a pandemic in February 2020, an increase in cases of bilateral pneumonia with severe respiratory failure, in turn complicated by pneumomediastinum, has been observed. A series of four patients with pneumomediastinum associated with respiratory distress due to SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia admitted to intensive care at the Rey Juan Carlos University Hospital between December 2020 and January 2021 is described. Most of them are middle-aged men, without previous pulmonary pathology, non- smokers, who have required mechanical ventilation. The diagnosis of pneumomediastinum has been made by computed tomography and the treatment has been conservative, with complete resolution in all cases. Although this complication is an indicator of lung destruction and determines changes in the management of mechanical ventilation, it does not seem to be directly related to a worse prognosis or increased mortality. (AU)

Fragilidad en pacientes mayores de 65 años ingresados en cuidados intensivos (FRAIL-ICU) / Frailty in patients over 65 years of age admitted to Intensive Care Units (FRAIL-ICU)

Objetivo: Estimar la prevalencia de fragilidad en pacientes ingresados en cuidados intensivos (UCI) y su impacto sobre la mortalidad intra UCI, al mes y a los 6 meses. Diseño: Estudio de cohorte prospectiva. Ámbito: UCI polivalentes españolas. Intervención: Ninguna. Pacientes y métodos: Pacientes≥65 años ingresados en UCI>24horas. Se recogieron las variables al ingreso y la situación basal por teléfono al mes y a los 6 meses del alta de UCI. Variables de interés principal: Edad, sexo, fragilidad (escala FRAIL), situación basal (Barthel, Lawton, Clinical Dementia Rating y Nutric Score), días de ventilación mecánica (VM), escalas de gravedad (APACHE II y SOFA), mortalidad UCI, al mes y a los 6 meses del alta. Resultados: Ciento treinta y dos pacientes, 46 frágiles (34,9%). Pacientes frágiles vs. no frágiles: 78,8±7,2 vs. 78,6±6,4 años (p=0,43), varones 43,8% vs. 56,3% (p=0,10), SOFA 4,7±2,9 vs. 4,6±2,9 (p=0,75), VM 33.3% vs. 66,7% (p=0,75), días de VM 5,6±15 vs. 4,3±8,1 (p=0,57), mortalidad UCI 13% versus 6% (p = 0,14), mortalidad al mes 24% versus 8% (p = 0,01), mortalidad 6 meses 32% versus 15% (p = 0,03). La fragilidad se asocia con la mortalidad al mes (OR = 3,5; p <0,05, IC del 95% (1,22-10,03) y a los 6 meses del alta de UCI (OR = 2,62; p <0,05, IC del 95% (1,04-6,56). Conclusiones: La fragilidad está presente en el 35% de los pacientes ingresados en UCI, asociándose a la mortalidad

Objective: To estimate the prevalence of frailty in patients admitted to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) and its impact upon ICU mortality at 1 and 6 months. Design: A prospective observational cohort study was carried out. Setting: Spanish ICU. Intervention: None. Patients and methods: Patients≥65 years of age admitted to the ICU for>24hours. Variables were registered upon admission, and functional status was assessed by telephone calls 1 and 6 months after discharge from the ICU. Main study variables: Age, gender, frailty (FRAIL scale), functional status (Barthel, Lawton, Clinical Dementia Rating and NUTRIC score), days of mechanical ventilation (MV), functional score (APACHE II and SOFA), ICU mortality, and mortality 1 and 6 months after ICU discharge. Results: A total of 132 patients were evaluated, of which 46 were frail (34.9%). Age of the frail versus non-frail patients: 78.8±7.2 and 78.6±6.4 years, respectively (P=.43); male gender: 43.8% versus 56.3% (P=.10); SOFA score: 4.7±2.9 versus 4.6±2.9 (P=.75); MV: 33.3% versus 66.7% (P=.75); days of MV: 5.6±15 versus 4.3±8.1 (P=.57); ICU mortality 13% versus 6% (P = .14), mortality at 1 month 24% versus 8% (P = .01), mortality 6 months 32% versus 15% (P = .03). Frailty is associated with mortality at one month (OR = 3.5, P <.05, 95% CI (1.22-10.03) and at 6 months after discharge from the ICU (OR = 2.62, P <.05, 95% CI (1.04-6.56). Conclusions: Frailty was present in 35% of the patients admitted to the ICU, and was associated with mortality

Frailty in patients over 65 years of age admitted to Intensive Care Units (FRAIL-ICU). / Fragilidad en pacientes mayores de 65 años ingresados en cuidados intensivos (FRAIL-ICU).

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the prevalence of frailty in patients admitted to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) and its impact upon ICU mortality at 1 and 6 months. DESIGN: A prospective observational cohort study was carried out. SETTING: Spanish ICU. INTERVENTION: None. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients≥65 years of age admitted to the ICU for>24hours. Variables were registered upon admission, and functional status was assessed by telephone calls 1 and 6 months after discharge from the ICU. MAIN STUDY VARIABLES: Age, gender, frailty (FRAIL scale), functional status (Barthel, Lawton, Clinical Dementia Rating and NUTRIC score), days of mechanical ventilation (MV), functional score (APACHE II and SOFA), ICU mortality, and mortality 1 and 6 months after ICU discharge. RESULTS: A total of 132 patients were evaluated, of which 46 were frail (34.9%). Age of the frail versus non-frail patients: 78.8±7.2 and 78.6±6.4 years, respectively (P=.43); male gender: 43.8% versus 56.3% (P=.10); SOFA score: 4.7±2.9 versus 4.6±2.9 (P=.75); MV: 33.3% versus 66.7% (P=.75); days of MV: 5.6±15 versus 4.3±8.1 (P=.57); ICU mortality 13% versus 6% (P = .14), mortality at 1 month 24% versus 8% (P = .01), mortality 6 months 32% versus 15% (P = .03). Frailty is associated with mortality at one month (OR = 3.5, P <.05, 95% CI (1.22-10.03) and at 6 months after discharge from the ICU (OR = 2.62, P <.05, 95% CI (1.04-6.56). CONCLUSIONS: Frailty was present in 35% of the patients admitted to the ICU, and was associated with mortality.

Relationship between intra-abdominal hypertension, outcome and the revised Atlanta and determinant-based classifications in acute pancreatitis.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to analyse the relationship between intra-abdominal hypertension (IAH) and severity of acute pancreatitis (AP) measured by the revised Atlanta classification (RAC) and determinant-based classification (DBC). Secondary objectives were to assess IAH as a predictor of morbidity and mortality in the ICU. METHODS: This prospective international observational study included patients admitted to the ICU with AP and at least one organ failure. Information was collected on demographics, severity scores at admission using RAC and DBC, organ failure, mechanical ventilation, continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT), surgery and mortality. Maximum intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) during ICU stay was used for analysis. RESULTS: Some 374 patients were included. The hospital mortality rate was 28·9 per cent. IAP was measured in 301 patients (80·5 per cent), of whom 274 (91·0 per cent) had IAH and 103 (34·2 per cent) acute compartment syndrome. A higher IAH grade was more likely in patients with severe AP (42 per cent for grade I versus 84 per cent for grade IV) and acute critical pancreatitis (9 versus 25 per cent; P = 0·001). Compared with grade I IAH, patients with grade IV had more infected necrosis (16 versus 28 per cent; P = 0·005), need for surgery (27 versus 50 per cent; P = 0·006), mechanical ventilation (53 versus 84 per cent; P = 0·007) and requirement for CRRT (22 versus 66 per cent; P < 0·001). IAH predicted shock (area under receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) 0·79, 95 per cent c.i. 0·73 to 0·84), respiratory failure (AUC 0·82, 0·77 to 0·87), renal failure (AUC 0·93, 0·89 to 0·96) and mortality (AUC 0·89, 0·86 to 0·93). CONCLUSION: IAH was associated with severity of AP classified according to both RAC and DBC systems. IAP grade can predict outcome of AP during ICU stay.

Leptospirosis: diagnóstico diferencial de fiebre en urgencias / Leptospirosis: differential diagnosis of fever in Emergency Departments

No disponible

El infarto renal / Renal infarction

El infarto renal se debe a una oclusión de la arteria renal principal o alguna de sus ramas. Tiene una alta variabilidad clínica, por lo que su frecuencia no se conoce, ya que es generalmente una patología infradiagnosticada. Se debe sospechar en pacientes con dolor lumbar cólico y factores de riesgo para producir un tromboembolismo, principalmente hipertensión arterial (HTA) y fibrilación auricular. Además podemos encontrar leucocitosis, hematuria y aumento de la LDH (hasta 5 veces su valor). Puede existir deterioro de la función renal que suele recuperarse, aunque puede cronificarse o quedar residualmente HTA. En el caso que presentamos, la causa más probable del evento isquémico ha sido la fibrilación auricular. Comenzó como dolor cólico lumbar que se atribuyó a cólico nefrítico, pero ante la falta de mejoría se derivó al paciente a Urgencias, donde se le realizó una tomografía axial computarizada (TAC) con el resultado de infarto esplénico y renal izquierdo. El tratamiento realizado fue anticoagulación y analgesia

Renal infarction is due to an oclussion of principal renal artery or some of its branches. Because of its non-specific clinical presentation it is an illness often missed-diagnosis and its true frequency is unkown. It has been suspected in patients with low-back pain and risk factors of thromboembolism like HBP and atrial fibrillation. Also it could be detected leucocytosis, hematuria and high LDH (five times its normal value). It could be renal failure that could be chronic or appear arterial hypertension permanently. The main cause of this ischemic event has been, in this case, atrial fibrillation. It began as a low- back pain which was diagnosed of renal colic but the pain didn´t disappear so the patient went to hospital where was made a CT scan that was informed as esplenic and left renal infarction. Treatment was anticoagulation and analgesia