Developing Guidance for Donor Intervention Randomized Controlled Trials: Initial Discussions From the Canada-United Kingdom 2022 Workshop.

BACKGROUND: Donor interventions, including medications, protocols, and medical devices administered to donors, can enhance transplantable organ quality and quantity and maximize transplantation success. However, there is paucity of high-quality evidence about their effectiveness, in part because of ethical, practical, and regulatory challenges, and lack of guidance about conduct of donor intervention randomized controlled trials (RCTs). METHODS: With the vision to develop authoritative guidance for conduct of donor intervention RCTs, we convened a workshop of Canadian-United Kingdom experts in organ donation and transplantation ethics, research, and policy to identify stakeholders, explore unique challenges, and develop research agenda to inform future work in this promising field. RESULTS: Donor intervention trials should consider perspectives of broad group of stakeholders including donors, transplant recipients, and their families; researchers in donation and transplantation; research ethics boards; and healthcare providers and administrators involved in donation and transplantation. Unique challenges include (1) research ethics (living versus deceased status of the donor at the time of intervention, intervention versus outcomes assessment in different individuals, harm-benefit analysis in donors versus recipients, consent, and impact on research bystanders); (2) outcome data standardization and linkage; and (3) regulatory and governance considerations. CONCLUSIONS: Donor intervention RCTs hold potential to benefit organ transplantation outcomes but face unique research ethics, outcome data, and regulatory challenges. By developing research agenda to address these challenges, our workshop was an important first step toward developing Canada-United Kingdom guidance for donor intervention RCTs that are poised to improve the quality and availability of transplantable organs.

A Canadian survey of perceptions and practices related to ordering of blood tests in the intensive care unit.

PURPOSE: The ordering of routine blood test panels in advance is common in intensive care units (ICUs), with limited consideration of the pretest probability of finding abnormalities. This practice contributes to anemia, false positive results, and health care costs. We sought to understand practices and attitudes of Canadian adult intensivists regarding ordering of blood tests in critically ill patients. METHODS: We conducted a nationwide Canadian cross-sectional survey consisting of 15 questions assessing three domains (global perceptions, test ordering, daily practice), plus 11 demographic questions. The target sample was one intensivist per adult ICU in Canada. We summarized responses using descriptive statistics and present data as mean with standard deviation (SD) or count with percentage as appropriate. RESULTS: Over seven months, 80/131 (61%) physicians responded from 77 ICUs, 50% of which were from Ontario. Respondents had a mean (SD) clinical experience of 12 (9) years, and 61% worked in academic centres. When asked about their perceptions of how frequently unnecessary blood tests are ordered, 61% responded "sometimes" and 23% responded "almost always." Fifty-seven percent favoured ordering complete blood counts one day in advance. Only 24% of respondents believed that advanced blood test ordering frequently led to changes in management. The most common factors perceived to influence blood test ordering in the ICU were physician preferences, institutional patterns, and order sets. CONCLUSION: Most respondents to this survey perceived that unnecessary blood testing occurs in the ICU. The survey identified possible strategies to decrease the number of blood tests.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: La prescription à l'avance de tests sanguins de routine est courante dans les unités de soins intensifs (USI), avec une prise en compte limitée de la probabilité de découverte d'anomalies avant le test. Cette pratique contribue à l'anémie, aux résultats faussement positifs et aux coûts des soins de santé. Nous avons cherché à comprendre les pratiques et les attitudes des intensivistes pour adultes au Canada en ce qui concerne la prescription d'analyses sanguines chez la patientèle gravement malade. MéTHODE: Nous avons mené un sondage transversal à l'échelle nationale au Canada en posant 15 questions évaluant trois domaines (perceptions globales, commande de tests, pratique quotidienne), ainsi que 11 questions démographiques. L'échantillon cible était composé d'un·e intensiviste par unité de soins intensifs pour adultes au Canada. Nous avons résumé les réponses à l'aide de statistiques descriptives et présenté les données sous forme de moyennes avec écarts type (ET) ou de dénombrements avec pourcentages, selon le cas. RéSULTATS: Sur une période de sept mois, 80 médecins sur 131 (61%) ont répondu dans 77 unités de soins intensifs, dont 50% en Ontario. Les répondant·es avaient une expérience clinique moyenne (ET) de 12 (9) ans, et 61% travaillaient dans des centres universitaires. Lorsqu'on leur a demandé ce qu'ils ou elles pensaient de la fréquence à laquelle des tests sanguins inutiles étaient prescrits, 61% ont répondu « parfois ¼ et 23% ont répondu « presque toujours ¼. Cinquante-sept pour cent étaient en faveur de la réalisation d'une formule sanguine complète un jour à l'avance. Seulement 24% des personnes interrogées estimaient que la prescription de tests sanguins à l'avance entraînait fréquemment des changements dans la prise en charge. Les facteurs les plus souvent perçus comme influençant la prescription d'analyses sanguines à l'unité de soins intensifs étaient les préférences des médecins, les habitudes institutionnelles et les ensembles d'ordonnances. CONCLUSION: La plupart des répondant·es à ce sondage ont l'impression que des tests sanguins inutiles sont prescrits aux soins intensifs. L'enquête a permis d'identifier des stratégies possibles pour réduire le nombre de tests sanguins.

Evidence-Based Checklist to Delay Cardiac Arrest in Brain-Dead Potential Organ Donors: The DONORS Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The effectiveness of goal-directed care to reduce loss of brain-dead potential donors to cardiac arrest is unclear. Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of an evidence-based, goal-directed checklist in the clinical management of brain-dead potential donors in the intensive care unit (ICU). Design, Setting, and Participants: The Donation Network to Optimize Organ Recovery Study (DONORS) was an open-label, parallel-group cluster randomized clinical trial in Brazil. Enrollment and follow-up were conducted from June 20, 2017, to November 30, 2019. Hospital ICUs that reported 10 or more brain deaths in the previous 2 years were included. Consecutive brain-dead potential donors in the ICU aged 14 to 90 years with a condition consistent with brain death after the first clinical examination were enrolled. Participants were randomized to either the intervention group or the control group. The intention-to-treat data analysis was conducted from June 15 to August 30, 2020. Interventions: Hospital staff in the intervention group were instructed to administer to brain-dead potential donors in the intervention group an evidence-based checklist with 13 clinical goals and 14 corresponding actions to guide care, every 6 hours, from study enrollment to organ retrieval. The control group provided or received usual care. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was loss of brain-dead potential donors to cardiac arrest at the individual level. A prespecified sensitivity analysis assessed the effect of adherence to the checklist in the intervention group. Results: Among the 1771 brain-dead potential donors screened in 63 hospitals, 1535 were included. These patients included 673 males (59.2%) and had a median (IQR) age of 51 (36.3-62.0) years. The main cause of brain injury was stroke (877 [57.1%]), followed by trauma (485 [31.6%]). Of the 63 hospitals, 31 (49.2%) were assigned to the intervention group (743 [48.4%] brain-dead potential donors) and 32 (50.8%) to the control group (792 [51.6%] brain-dead potential donors). Seventy potential donors (9.4%) at intervention hospitals and 117 (14.8%) at control hospitals met the primary outcome (risk ratio [RR], 0.70; 95% CI, 0.46-1.08; P = .11). The primary outcome rate was lower in those with adherence higher than 79.0% than in the control group (5.3% vs 14.8%; RR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.22-0.78; P = .006). Conclusions and Relevance: This cluster randomized clinical trial was inconclusive in determining whether the overall use of an evidence-based, goal-directed checklist reduced brain-dead potential donor loss to cardiac arrest. The findings suggest that use of such a checklist has limited effectiveness without adherence to the actions recommended in this checklist. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03179020.

Frequency of screening and SBT Technique Trial-North American Weaning Collaboration (FAST-NAWC): an update to the protocol and statistical analysis plan.

BACKGROUND: This update summarizes key changes made to the protocol for the Frequency of Screening and Spontaneous Breathing Trial (SBT) Technique Trial-North American Weaning Collaborative (FAST-NAWC) trial since the publication of the original protocol. This multicenter, factorial design randomized controlled trial with concealed allocation, will compare the effect of both screening frequency (once vs. at least twice daily) to identify candidates to undergo a SBT and SBT technique [pressure support + positive end-expiratory pressure vs. T-piece] on the time to successful extubation (primary outcome) in 760 critically ill adults who are invasively ventilated for at least 24 h in 20 North American intensive care units. METHODS/DESIGN: Protocols for the pilot, factorial design trial and the full trial were previously published in J Clin Trials ( https://doi.org/10.4172/2167-0870.1000284 ) and Trials (https://doi: 10.1186/s13063-019-3641-8). As planned, participants enrolled in the FAST pilot trial will be included in the report of the full FAST-NAWC trial. In response to the onset of the coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic when approximately two thirds of enrollment was complete, we revised the protocol and consent form to include critically ill invasively ventilated patients with COVID-19. We also refined the statistical analysis plan (SAP) to reflect inclusion and reporting of participants with and without COVID-19. This update summarizes the changes made and their rationale and provides a refined SAP for the FAST-NAWC trial. These changes have been finalized before completion of trial follow-up and the commencement of data analysis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials.gov NCT02399267.

Differences in directives to limit treatment and discontinue mechanical ventilation between elderly and very elderly patients: a substudy of a multinational observational study.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to characterize differences in directives to limit treatments and discontinue invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) in elderly (65-80 years) and very elderly (> 80 years) intensive care unit (ICU) patients. METHODS: We prospectively described new written orders to limit treatments, IMV discontinuation strategies [direct extubation, direct tracheostomy, spontaneous breathing trial (SBT), noninvasive ventilation (NIV) use], and associations between initial failed SBT and outcomes in 142 ICUs from 6 regions (Canada, India, United Kingdom, Europe, Australia/New Zealand, United States). RESULTS: We evaluated 788 (586 elderly; 202 very elderly) patients. Very elderly (vs. elderly) patients had similar withdrawal orders but significantly more withholding orders, especially cardiopulmonary resuscitation and dialysis, after ICU admission [67 (33.2%) vs. 128 (21.9%); p = 0.002]. Orders to withhold reintubation were written sooner in very elderly (vs. elderly) patients [4 (2-8) vs. 7 (4-13) days, p = 0.02]. Very elderly and elderly patients had similar rates of direct extubation [39 (19.3%) vs. 113 (19.3%)], direct tracheostomy [10 (5%) vs. 40 (6.8%)], initial SBT [105 (52%) vs. 302 (51.5%)] and initial successful SBT [84 (80%) vs. 245 (81.1%)]. Very elderly patients experienced similar ICU outcomes (mortality, length of stay, duration of ventilation) but higher hospital mortality [26 (12.9%) vs. 38 (6.5%)]. Direct tracheostomy and initial failed SBT were associated with worse outcomes. Regional differences existed in withholding orders at ICU admission and in withholding and withdrawal orders after ICU admission. CONCLUSIONS: Very elderly (vs. elderly) patients had more orders to withhold treatments after ICU admission and higher hospital mortality, but similar ICU outcomes and IMV discontinuation. Significant regional differences existed in withholding and withdrawal practices.

Calcineurin Inhibition in Deceased Organ Donors: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Preclinical Studies.

Background: Preconditioning deceased organ donors with calcineurin inhibitors (CNIs) may reduce ischemia-reperfusion injury to improve transplant outcomes. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and conference proceedings for animal models of organ donation and transplantation, comparing donor treatment with CNIs with either placebo or no intervention, and evaluating outcomes for organ transplantation. Reviewers independently screened and selected studies, abstracted data, and assessed the risk of bias and clinical relevance of included studies. Where possible, we pooled results using meta-analysis; otherwise, we summarized findings descriptively. Results: Eighteen studies used various animals and a range of CNI agents and doses and evaluated their effects on a variety of transplant outcomes. The risk of bias and clinical applicability were poorly reported. Pooled analyses suggested benefit of CNI treatment on early graft function in renal transplants (3 studies; serum creatinine: ratio of means [RoM] 0.54; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.34-0.86) but not for liver transplants (2 studies; serum alanine transaminase: RoM 0.61; 95% CI, 0.30-1.26; and serum aspartate aminotransferase: RoM 0.58; 95% CI, 0.26-1.31). We found no reduction in graft loss at 7 d (2 studies; risk ratio 0.54; 95% CI, 0.08-3.42). CNI treatment was associated with reduced transplant recipient levels of interleukin-6 (4 studies; RoM 0.36; 95% CI, 0.19-0.70), tumor necrosis factor-alpha (5 studies; RoM 0.36; 95% CI, 0.12-1.03), and cellular apoptosis (4 studies; RoM 0.30; 95% CI, 0.19-0.47). Conclusions: Although this compendium of animal experiments suggests that donor preconditioning with CNIs may improve early kidney graft function, the limited ability to reproduce a true clinical environment in animal experiments and to assess for risk of bias in these experiments is a serious weakness that precludes current clinical application.

Transplant Recipient Preferences Regarding Organ Donor Research: Their Role in Consent and use of Their Data.

Research on deceased organ donors has been hindered by concerns related to seeking research consent from transplant recipients. We undertook this qualitative study to elucidate solid organ transplant recipients views on organ donor research, their role in the consent for such research, and their preferences related to providing their data. We conducted interviews with 18 participants and three themes emerged from the data. The first centered around participant research literacy. The second described practical preferences of participating in research, and the third related to the connection between donor and recipient. We concluded that previously held views about the requirement for transplant recipients to have a consenting role in donor research is not always suitable.

Death determination by neurologic criteria-what do families understand?

PURPOSE: Currently, there is little empirical data on family understanding about brain death and death determination. The purpose of this study was to describe family members' (FMs') understanding of brain death and the process of determining death in the context of organ donation in Canadian intensive care units (ICUs). METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study using semistructured, in-depth interviews with FMs who were asked to make an organ donation decision on behalf of adult or pediatric patients with death determination by neurologic criteria (DNC) in Canadian ICUs. RESULTS: From interviews with 179 FMs, six main themes emerged: 1) state of mind, 2) communication, 3) DNC may be counterintuitive, 4) preparation for the DNC clinical assessment, 5) DNC clinical assessment, and 6) time of death. Recommendations on how clinicians can help FMs to understand and accept DNC through communication at key moments were described including preparing FMs for death determination, allowing FMs to be present, and explaining the legal time of death, combined with multimodal strategies. For many FMs, understanding of DNC unfolded over time, facilitated with repeated encounters and explanation, rather than during a single meeting. CONCLUSION: Family members' understanding of brain death and death determination represented a journey that they reported in sequential meeting with health care providers, most notably physicians. Modifiable factors to improve communication and bereavement outcomes during DNC include attention to the state of mind of the family, pacing and repeating discussions according to families' expressed understanding, and preparing and inviting families to be present for the clinical determination including apnea testing. We have provided family-generated recommendations that are pragmatic and can be easily implemented.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: À l'heure actuelle, il y a peu de données empiriques sur la compréhension des familles de la mort cérébrale et de la détermination du décès. Le but de cette étude était de décrire la compréhension des membres de la famille de la mort cérébrale et du processus de détermination du décès dans le contexte du don d'organes dans les unités de soins intensifs (USI) canadiennes. MéTHODE: Nous avons mené une étude qualitative à l'aide d'entrevues semi-structurées et approfondies avec des membres de la famille à qui on a demandé de prendre une décision de don d'organes au nom de patients adultes ou pédiatriques dont le décès avait été déterminé selon des critères neurologiques (DCN) dans les unités de soins intensifs canadiennes. RéSULTATS: Sur la base d'entrevues avec 179 membres de la famille, six thèmes principaux ont émergé : 1) l'état d'esprit, 2) la communication, 3) le DCN peut être contre-intuitif, 4) la préparation à l'évaluation clinique pour un DCN, 5) l'évaluation clinique pour un DCN et 6) le moment du décès. Des recommandations sur la façon dont les cliniciens peuvent aider les membres de la famille à comprendre et à accepter un DCN par la communication à des moments clés ont été décrites, y compris la préparation des membres de la famille à la détermination du décès, l'autorisation de la présence des membres de la famille et l'explication de l'heure légale du décès, combinées à des stratégies multimodales. Pour de nombreux membres de la famille, la compréhension du DCN s'est développée au fil du temps et a été facilitée par des rencontres et des explications répétées plutôt qu'au cours d'une seule rencontre. CONCLUSION: La compréhension qu'ont les membres de la famille de la mort cérébrale et de la détermination du décès représente un parcours qu'ils ont décrit lors de rencontres successives avec des acteurs de soins de santé, et particulièrement avec des médecins. Les facteurs modifiables pour améliorer la communication et les issues du deuil pendant un DCN comprennent l'attention portée à l'état d'esprit de la famille, le rythme et la répétition des discussions en fonction de la compréhension exprimée par les familles, ainsi que la préparation et l'invitation des familles à être présentes pour la détermination clinique, y compris pendant le test d'apnée. Nous avons fourni des recommandations familiales qui sont pragmatiques et peuvent être facilement mises en œuvre.

Neurologic Physiology after Removal of Therapy (NeuPaRT) study: study protocol of a multicentre, prospective, observational, pilot feasibility study of neurophysiology after withdrawal of life-sustaining measures.

INTRODUCTION: In donation after circulatory determination of death, death is declared 5 min after circulatory arrest. This practice assumes, but does not explicitly confirm, permanent loss of brain activity. While this assumption is rooted a strong physiological rationale, paucity of direct human data regarding temporal relationship between cessation of brain activity and circulatory arrest during the dying process threatens public and healthcare provider trust in deceased organ donation. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: In this cohort study, we will prospectively record cerebral and brainstem electrical activity, cerebral blood flow velocity and arterial blood pressure using electroencephalography (EEG), brainstem evoked potentials, transcranial doppler and bedside haemodynamic monitors in adult patients undergoing planned withdrawal of life sustaining measures in the intensive care units at five hospital sites for 18 months. We will use MATLAB to synchronise waveform data and compute the time of cessation of each signal relative to circulatory arrest. Our primary outcome is the feasibility of patient accrual, while secondary outcomes are (a) proportion of patients with complete waveform recordings and data transfer to coordinating site and (b) time difference between cessation of neurophysiological signals and circulatory arrest. We expect to accrue 1 patient/site/month for a total of 90 patients. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: We have ethics approval from Clinical Trials Ontario (protocol #3862, version 1.0, date 19 January 2022.) and the relevant Research Ethics Board for each site. We will obtain written informed consent from legal substitute decision makers. We will present study results at research conferences including donor family partner forum and in peer-reviewed publications. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05306327.

The experiences of family members of deceased organ donors and suggestions to improve the donation process: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Decisions about organ donation are stressful for family members of potential organ donors. We sought to comprehensively explore the donation process from interviews conducted with family members of patients admitted to pediatric and adult intensive care units in Canada. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study using semistructured, in-depth interviews with 271 family members asked to make an organ donation decision. We recruited participants from all provinces with an organ donation organization (n = 10), and analyzed themes using a modified grounded theory approach. On the basis of these interviews, suggestions were made by researchers and family members on how to improve the process of organ donation. RESULTS: We identified 3 main themes and 9 subthemes. Families need more comprehensive support around the time of donation, including having access to someone with shared experiences, support during specific moments as needed and better support during critical transitions (e.g., when the donor body goes to the operating room). The theme of better connection to recipient(s) included receiving information about the donation surgery (e.g., which organs were recovered), establishing connection with recipients (e.g., via social networks or letters) and planned encounters. Support after donation, such as updates on organ transplantation, early mental health checks and continued connection to donor organizations, could be improved. We derived 20 suggestions for improving the organ donation process, derived from interviews with family members of pediatric and adult organ donors. INTERPRETATION: We found gaps in family support during end-of-life and donation care. Feelings of abandonment, lack of support and poor-to-little follow-up provide the empirical findings needed for hospitals and organ donor organizations to provide better support to donor families.

The Intersection of Death Investigation and Organ Donation Systems: A Scoping Review.

Introduction: Death investigators (DIs) such as coroners, medical examiners, and forensic pathologists play important and evolving roles in deceased organ donation. DIs communicate with organ donation organizations (ODOs) to gather case-specific information and release or restrict organs depending on the medicolegal requirements. This scoping review aims to identify the breadth of roles and decision-making processes that may facilitate or hinder deceased donation in DI cases. Methods: This study was conducted using a scoping literature review and subsequent thematic analysis. Results: Thirty-one eligible papers described 8 common themes with region-specific nuances. These include: 1) shared (ODO and DI) protocols for early communication around each case; 2) shared standards and education for death investigation practices related to organ donation; 3) DI support staff or teams to facilitate organ donation; 4) DI authority to order additional testing and imaging before organ recovery; 5) donation-specific legislation to enhance DI and/or ODO operations; 6) legally trained DI authority to veto medical decisions to proceed with organ donation; 7) DI attendance at organ recovery; and 8) surgeons recording specific DI evidence during organ recovery. Conclusion: These findings have cultural and resource-allocation implications and expose gaps in the international literature describing practices at the intersection of deceased organ donation and death investigation. A better understanding of the rationale and execution of various systems for DI and ODO cooperation may serve to advance both organ donation and death investigation.

Economic Evaluation of Cost and Time Required for a Platform Trial vs Conventional Trials.

Importance: Platform trial design allows the introduction of new interventions after the trial is initiated and offers efficiencies to clinical research. However, limited guidance exists on the economic resources required to establish and maintain platform trials. Objective: To compare cost (US dollars) and time requirements of conducting a platform trial vs a series of conventional (nonplatform) trials using a real-life example. Design, Setting, and Participants: For this economic evaluation, an online survey was administered to a group of international experts (146 participants) with publication records of platform trials to elicit their opinions on cost and time to set up and conduct platform, multigroup, and 2-group trials. Using the reported entry dates of 10 interventions into Systemic Therapy in Advancing Metastatic Prostate Cancer: Evaluation of Drug Efficacy, the longest ongoing platform trial, 3 scenarios were designed involving a single platform trial (scenario 1), 1 multigroup followed by 5 2-group trials (scenario 2), and a series of 10 2-group trials (scenario 3). All scenarios started with 5 interventions, then 5 more interventions were either added to the platform or evaluated independently. Simulations with the survey results as inputs were used to compare the platform vs conventional trial designs. Data were analyzed from July to September 2021. Exposure: Platform trial design. Main Outcomes and Measures: Total trial setup and conduct cost and cumulative duration. Results: Although setup time and cost requirements of a single trial were highest for the platform trial, cumulative requirements of setting up a series of multiple trials in scenarios 2 and 3 were larger. Compared with the platform trial, there was a median (IQR) increase of 216.7% (202.2%-242.5%) in cumulative setup costs for scenario 2 and 391.1% (365.3%-437.9%) for scenario 3. In terms of total cost, there was a median (IQR) increase of 17.4% (12.1%-22.5%) for scenario 2 and 57.5% (43.1%-69.9%) for scenario 3. There was a median (IQR) increase in cumulative trial duration of 171.1% (158.3%-184.3%) for scenario 2 and 311.9% (282.0%-349.1%) for scenario 3. Cost and time reductions in the platform trial were observed in both the initial and subsequently evaluated interventions. Conclusions and Relevance: Although setting up platform trials can take longer and be costly, the findings of this study suggest that having a single infrastructure can improve efficiencies with respect to costs and efforts.

Intravenous Vitamin C in Adults with Sepsis in the Intensive Care Unit.

BACKGROUND: Studies that have evaluated the use of intravenous vitamin C in adults with sepsis who were receiving vasopressor therapy in the intensive care unit (ICU) have shown mixed results with respect to the risk of death and organ dysfunction. METHODS: In this randomized, placebo-controlled trial, we assigned adults who had been in the ICU for no longer than 24 hours, who had proven or suspected infection as the main diagnosis, and who were receiving a vasopressor to receive an infusion of either vitamin C (at a dose of 50 mg per kilogram of body weight) or matched placebo administered every 6 hours for up to 96 hours. The primary outcome was a composite of death or persistent organ dysfunction (defined by the use of vasopressors, invasive mechanical ventilation, or new renal-replacement therapy) on day 28. RESULTS: A total of 872 patients underwent randomization (435 to the vitamin C group and 437 to the control group). The primary outcome occurred in 191 of 429 patients (44.5%) in the vitamin C group and in 167 of 434 patients (38.5%) in the control group (risk ratio, 1.21; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04 to 1.40; P = 0.01). At 28 days, death had occurred in 152 of 429 patients (35.4%) in the vitamin C group and in 137 of 434 patients (31.6%) in the placebo group (risk ratio, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.98 to 1.40) and persistent organ dysfunction in 39 of 429 patients (9.1%) and 30 of 434 patients (6.9%), respectively (risk ratio, 1.30; 95% CI, 0.83 to 2.05). Findings were similar in the two groups regarding organ-dysfunction scores, biomarkers, 6-month survival, health-related quality of life, stage 3 acute kidney injury, and hypoglycemic episodes. In the vitamin C group, one patient had a severe hypoglycemic episode and another had a serious anaphylaxis event. CONCLUSIONS: In adults with sepsis receiving vasopressor therapy in the ICU, those who received intravenous vitamin C had a higher risk of death or persistent organ dysfunction at 28 days than those who received placebo. (Funded by the Lotte and John Hecht Memorial Foundation; LOVIT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03680274.).

Effect of Awake Prone Positioning on Endotracheal Intubation in Patients With COVID-19 and Acute Respiratory Failure: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The efficacy and safety of prone positioning is unclear in nonintubated patients with acute hypoxemia and COVID-19. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and adverse events of prone positioning in nonintubated adult patients with acute hypoxemia and COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: Pragmatic, unblinded randomized clinical trial conducted at 21 hospitals in Canada, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and the US. Eligible adult patients with COVID-19 were not intubated and required oxygen (≥40%) or noninvasive ventilation. A total of 400 patients were enrolled between May 19, 2020, and May 18, 2021, and final follow-up was completed in July 2021. Intervention: Patients were randomized to awake prone positioning (n = 205) or usual care without prone positioning (control; n = 195). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was endotracheal intubation within 30 days of randomization. The secondary outcomes included mortality at 60 days, days free from invasive mechanical ventilation or noninvasive ventilation at 30 days, days free from the intensive care unit or hospital at 60 days, adverse events, and serious adverse events. Results: Among the 400 patients who were randomized (mean age, 57.6 years [SD, 12.83 years]; 117 [29.3%] were women), all (100%) completed the trial. In the first 4 days after randomization, the median duration of prone positioning was 4.8 h/d (IQR, 1.8 to 8.0 h/d) in the awake prone positioning group vs 0 h/d (IQR, 0 to 0 h/d) in the control group. By day 30, 70 of 205 patients (34.1%) in the prone positioning group were intubated vs 79 of 195 patients (40.5%) in the control group (hazard ratio, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.59 to 1.12], P = .20; absolute difference, -6.37% [95% CI, -15.83% to 3.10%]). Prone positioning did not significantly reduce mortality at 60 days (hazard ratio, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.62 to 1.40], P = .54; absolute difference, -1.15% [95% CI, -9.40% to 7.10%]) and had no significant effect on days free from invasive mechanical ventilation or noninvasive ventilation at 30 days or on days free from the intensive care unit or hospital at 60 days. There were no serious adverse events in either group. In the awake prone positioning group, 21 patients (10%) experienced adverse events and the most frequently reported were musculoskeletal pain or discomfort from prone positioning (13 of 205 patients [6.34%]) and desaturation (2 of 205 patients [0.98%]). There were no reported adverse events in the control group. Conclusions and Relevance: In patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure from COVID-19, prone positioning, compared with usual care without prone positioning, did not significantly reduce endotracheal intubation at 30 days. However, the effect size for the primary study outcome was imprecise and does not exclude a clinically important benefit. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04350723.

Predictors of 1-year mortality after adult lung transplantation: Systematic review and meta-analyses.

BACKGROUND: Prognostic factors in lung transplantation are those variables that are associated with transplant outcomes. Knowledge of donor and recipient prognostic variables can aid in the optimal allocation of donor lungs to transplant recipients and can also inform post-operative discussions with patients about prognosis. Current research findings related to prognostic factors in lung transplantation are inconsistent and the relative importance of various factors is unclear. This review aims to provide the best possible estimates of the association between putative prognostic variables and 1-year all-cause mortality in adult lung transplant recipients. METHODS: We searched 5 bibliographic databases for studies assessing the associations between putative predictors (related to lung donors, recipients, or the transplant procedure) and 1-year recipient mortality. We pooled data across studies when justified and utilized GRADE methodology to assess the certainty in the evidence. RESULTS: From 72 eligible studies (2002-2020), there were 34 recipient variables, 4 donor variables, 10 procedural variables, and 7 post-transplant complication variables that were amenable to a meta-analysis. With a high degree of certainty in the evidence only post-transplant need for extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) (HR 1.91, 95% CI 1.79-2.04) predicted 1-year mortality. No donor variables appeared to predict transplant outcome with high or even moderate certainty. CONCLUSION: Across the range of contemporary donors and recipients that clinicians accept for lung transplantation, this review, with high certainty, found 1 prognostic factor that predicted 1-year mortality, and 37 additional factors with a moderate degree of certainty. The lack of prognostic significance for some widely accepted factors (e.g., donor smoking, age) likely relates to existing limits in the range of these variables at the time of donor and recipient selection.

Association of Positive End-Expiratory Pressure and Lung Recruitment Selection Strategies with Mortality in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.

Rationale: The most beneficial positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) selection strategy in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is unknown, and current practice is variable. Objectives: To compare the relative effects of different PEEP selection strategies on mortality in adults with moderate to severe ARDS. Methods: We conducted a network meta-analysis using a Bayesian framework. Certainty of evidence was evaluated using grading of recommendations assessment, development and evaluation methodology. Measurements and Main Results: We included 18 randomized trials (4,646 participants). Compared with a lower PEEP strategy, the posterior probability of mortality benefit from a higher PEEP without lung recruitment maneuver (LRM) strategy was 99% (risk ratio [RR], 0.77; 95% credible interval [CrI], 0.60-0.96, high certainty), the posterior probability of benefit of the esophageal pressure-guided strategy was 87% (RR, 0.77; 95% CrI, 0.48-1.22, moderate certainty), the posterior probability of benefit of a higher PEEP with brief LRM strategy was 96% (RR, 0.83; 95% CrI, 0.67-1.02, moderate certainty), and the posterior probability of increased mortality from a higher PEEP with prolonged LRM strategy was 77% (RR, 1.06; 95% CrI, 0.89-1.22, low certainty). Compared with a higher PEEP without LRM strategy, the posterior probability of increased mortality from a higher PEEP with prolonged LRM strategy was 99% (RR, 1.37; 95% CrI, 1.04-1.81, moderate certainty). Conclusions: In patients with moderate to severe ARDS, higher PEEP without LRM is associated with a lower risk of death than lower PEEP. A higher PEEP with prolonged LRM strategy is associated with increased risk of death when compared with higher PEEP without LRM.