Peripheral Administration of Norepinephrine: A Prospective Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Historically, norepinephrine has been administered through a central venous catheter (CVC) because of concerns about the risk of ischemic tissue injury if extravasation from a peripheral IV catheter (PIVC) occurs. Recently, several reports have suggested that peripheral administration of norepinephrine may be safe. RESEARCH QUESTION: Can a protocol for peripheral norepinephrine administration safely reduce the number of days a CVC is in use and frequency of CVC placement? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a prospective observational cohort study conducted in the medical ICU at a quaternary care academic medical center. A protocol for peripheral norepinephrine administration was developed and implemented in the medical ICU at the study site. The protocol was recommended for use in patients who met prespecified criteria, but was used at the treating clinician's discretion. All adult patients admitted to the medical ICU receiving norepinephrine through a PIVC from February 2019 through June 2021 were included. RESULTS: The primary outcome was the number of days of CVC use that were avoided per patient, and the secondary safety outcomes included the incidence of extravasation events. Six hundred thirty-five patients received peripherally administered norepinephrine. The median number of CVC days avoided per patient was 1 (interquartile range, 0-2 days per patient). Of the 603 patients who received norepinephrine peripherally as the first norepinephrine exposure, 311 patients (51.6%) never required CVC insertion. Extravasation of norepinephrine occurred in 35 patients (75.8 events/1,000 d of PIVC infusion [95% CI, 52.8-105.4 events/1,000 d of PIVC infusion]). Most extravasations caused no or minimal tissue injury. No patient required surgical intervention. INTERPRETATION: This study suggests that implementing a protocol for peripheral administration of norepinephrine safely can avoid 1 CVC day in the average patient, with 51.6% of patients not requiring CVC insertion. No patient experienced significant ischemic tissue injury with the protocol used. These data support performance of a randomized, prospective, multicenter study to characterize the net benefits of peripheral norepinephrine administration compared with norepinephrine administration through a CVC.

Association of Arterial pH With Hemodynamic Response to Vasopressin in Patients With Septic Shock: An Observational Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVES: Vasopressin is reported to retain vasoconstrictive activity in the setting of acidemia, but preclinical models are inconsistent and studies have not evaluated the clinical effectiveness of vasopressin based on arterial pH. This study sought to determine the association between arterial pH and blood pressure after vasopressin initiation in septic shock. DESIGN: This retrospective, multicenter, observational cohort study evaluated the association of arterial pH at the time of vasopressin initiation with hemodynamic response to vasopressin and change in catecholamine dose after vasopressin initiation. Hemodynamic response was defined as a catecholamine dose decrease with mean arterial pressure greater than or equal to 65 mm Hg at 6 hours after vasopressin initiation. SETTING: Patients from eight hospitals in a health system were evaluated. PATIENTS: Patients with septic shock initiated on vasopressin as a catecholamine adjunct between January 2012 and November 2017 were screened for inclusion. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 1,350 patients were included. At the time of vasopressin initiation patients were severely ill with arterial pH 7.28 ± 0.13, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment 14.1 ± 3.5, lactate 5.6 ± 4.6 mmol/L, and norepinephrine-equivalent catecholamine dose 32.3 ± 25.4 µg/min. After adjusting for lactate and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment with multivariable logistic regression, lower arterial pH was independently associated with lower odds of hemodynamic response to vasopressin (for each 0.1 unit arterial pH was below 7.40, response odds ratio 0.79; 95% CI, 0.72-0.87). For each 0.1 unit the pH was below 7.40 at vasopressin initiation, the norepinephrine-equivalent catecholamine dose increased by 1.5 µg/min (95% CI, 0.5-2.5 µg/min) at 1 hour, and increased by 2.5 µg/min (95% CI, 1.4-3.5 µg/min) at 6 hours after vasopressin initiation. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with higher arterial pH, patients with septic shock and low arterial pH had lower odds of vasopressin response and higher catecholamine doses after vasopressin initiation. Similar to other vasopressors, the clinical effectiveness of vasopressin appears to be impaired in the setting of acidemia.

Retrospective evaluation of a delirium order set utilizing nonpharmacologic and pharmacologic interventions for the treatment of delirium in medical intensive care unit patients.

PURPOSE: To describe the use of a medical intensive care unit (MICU) delirium order set pilot and its associated impact on utilization of nonpharmacologic and pharmacologic interventions, pharmacologic continuation at transitions of care, and resolution of ICU delirium. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort analysis of MICU patients who received delirium management using an order set pilot compared to standard care. Patients 18 years of age or older admitted to the MICU between May 2019 and January 2020 who received an antipsychotic or valproic acid for the treatment of delirium were included. RESULTS: Pharmacologic treatment continuation past ICU discharge occurred in 30% of patients in the pilot cohort (n = 50) compared to 54% of patients receiving standard care (n = 50; P = 0.027). On treatment days 1 through 7, utilization of deliriogenic medications was significantly lower in the pilot cohort (78% vs 96%, P = 0.007). No differences were observed between the groups in delirium resolution, delirium recurrence, hospital and ICU length of stay, or mortality. CONCLUSION: A MICU order set prioritizing nonpharmacologic management and limiting the duration of pharmacologic agents for delirium may aid providers in the management of ICU delirium and reduce exposure to pharmacologic interventions.

Effectiveness and Safety of Twice Daily Versus Thrice Daily Subcutaneous Unfractionated Heparin for Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis at a Tertiary Medical Center.

BACKGROUND: The direct comparison of twice daily (BID) and thrice daily (TID) dosing of subcutaneous low dose unfractionated heparin (LDUH) for venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis in a mixed inpatient population is not well-studied. OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the effectiveness and safety of BID compared to TID dosing of LDUH for prevention of VTE. METHODS: Retrospective, single-center analysis of patients who received LDUH for VTE prophylaxis between July and September 2015. Outcomes were identified by ICD-9 codes. A matched cohort was created using propensity scores and multivariate analysis was conducted to identify independent risk factors for VTE. The primary outcome was incidence of symptomatic VTE. RESULTS: In the full cohort, VTE occurred in 0.71% of patients who received LDUH BID compared to 0.77% of patients who received LDUH TID (p = 0.85). There was no difference in major (p = 0.85) and minor (p = 0.52) bleeding between the BID and TID groups. For the matched cohort, VTE occurred in 1.4% of BID patients and 2.1% of TID patients (p = 0.32). Major bleed occurred in 0.36% of BID patients and 0.52% of TID patients (p = 0.7), while a minor bleed was seen in 3.4% of BID patients and 2.1% of TID patients (p = 0.13). Personal history of VTE (p = 0.002) and weight (p = 0.035) were independently associated with increased risk of VTE. CONCLUSION: This study did not demonstrate a difference in effectiveness or safety between BID and TID dosing of LDUH for VTE prevention.

Hemodynamic Response to Vasopressin Dosage of 0.03 Units/Min vs. 0.04 Units/Min in Patients With Septic Shock.

BACKGROUND: Arginine vasopressin (AVP) is suggested as an adjunct to norepinephrine in patients with septic shock. Guidelines recommend an AVP dosage up to 0.03 units/min, but 0.04 units/min is commonly used in practice based on initial studies. This study was designed to compare the incidence of hemodynamic response between initial fixed-dosage AVP 0.03 units/min and AVP 0.04 units/min. METHODS: This retrospective, multi-hospital health system, cohort study included adult patients with septic shock receiving AVP as an adjunct to catecholamine vasopressors. Patients were excluded if they received an initial dosage other than 0.03 units/min or 0.04 units/min, or AVP was titrated within the first 6 hours of therapy. The primary outcome was hemodynamic response, defined as a mean arterial pressure ≥65 mm Hg and a decrease in catecholamine dosage at 6 hours after AVP initiation. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) based on the propensity score for initial AVP dosage receipt was utilized to estimate adjusted exposure effects. RESULTS: Of the 1536 patients included in the observed data, there was a nearly even split between initial AVP dosage of 0.03 units/min (n = 842 [54.8%]) and 0.04 units/min (n = 694 [45.2%]). Observed patients receiving AVP 0.03 units/min were more frequently treated at the main campus academic medical center (96.3% vs. 52.2%, p < 0.01) and in a medical intensive care unit (87.4% vs. 39.8%, p < 0.01). The IPTW analysis included 1379 patients with achievement of baseline covariate balance. There was no evidence for a difference between groups in the incidence of hemodynamic response (0.03 units/min 50.0% vs. 0.04 units/min 53.1%, adjusted relative risk 1.06 [95% CI 0.94, 1.20]). CONCLUSIONS: Initial AVP dosing varied by hospital and unit type. Although commonly used, an initial AVP dosage of 0.04 units/min was not associated with a higher incidence of early hemodynamic response to AVP in patients with septic shock.

Safety of bedside placement of tunneled dialysis catheter in COVID-19 patients.

COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU have high incidence of AKI requiring prolonged renal replacement therapy and often necessitate the placement of a tunneled dialysis catheter (TDC). We describe our experience with two cases of COVID-19 patients who underwent successful bedside placement of TDC under ultrasound guidance using anatomical landmarks without fluoroscopy guidance. Tunneled dialysis catheter placement under direct fluoroscopy remains the standard of care; but in well selected patients, placement of tunneled dialysis catheter at the bedside using anatomic landmarks without fluoroscopy can be safely and successfully performed without compromising the quality of care and avoid transfer of COVID-19 infected patients outside the ICU.

Association of Catecholamine Dose, Lactate, and Shock Duration at Vasopressin Initiation With Mortality in Patients With Septic Shock.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the association of catecholamine dose, lactate concentration, and timing from shock onset at vasopressin initiation with in-hospital mortality. DESIGN: Retrospective, observational study using segmented and multivariable logistic regression to evaluate the associations of catecholamine dose, lactate concentration, and timing from shock onset at vasopressin initiation with in-hospital mortality. SETTING: Multiple hospitals within the Cleveland Clinic Health System. PATIENTS: Adult patients who met criteria for septic shock based on the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Adult Sepsis Event definition. INTERVENTIONS: All patients received continuous infusion vasopressin as an adjunct to catecholamine vasopressors. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: In total, 1,610 patients were included with a mean Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation III 109.0 ± 35.1 and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment 14.0 ± 3.5; 41% of patients survived the hospital admission. At the time of vasopressin initiation, patients had median (interquartile range) lactate concentration 3.9 mmol/L (2.3-7.2 mmol/L), norepinephrine-equivalent dose 25 µg/min (18-40 µg/min), and 5.3 hours (2.1-12.2 hr) elapsed since shock onset. The odds of in-hospital mortality increased 20.7% for every 10 µg/min increase in norepinephrine-equivalent dose up to 60 µg/min at the time of vasopressin initiation (adjusted odds ratio, 1.21 [95% CI, 1.09-1.34]), but no association was detected when the norepinephrine-equivalent dose exceeded 60 µg/min (adjusted odds ratio, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.84-1.10]). There was a significant interaction between timing of vasopressin initiation and lactate concentration (p = 0.02) for the association with in-hospital mortality. A linear association between increasing in-hospital mortality was detected for increasing lactate concentration at the time of vasopressin initiation, but no association was detected for time elapsed from shock onset. CONCLUSIONS: Higher norepinephrine-equivalent dose at vasopressin initiation and higher lactate concentration at vasopressin initiation were each associated higher in-hospital mortality in patients with septic shock who received vasopressin.

Reinfection Rates Among Patients Who Previously Tested Positive for Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Protection afforded from prior disease among patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection is unknown. If infection provides substantial long-lasting immunity, it may be appropriate to reconsider vaccination distribution. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study of 1 health system included 150 325 patients tested for COVID-19 infection via polymerase chain reaction from 12 March 2020 to 30 August 2020. Testing performed up to 24 February 2021 in these patients was included. The main outcome was reinfection, defined as infection ≥90 days after initial testing. Secondary outcomes were symptomatic infection and protection of prior infection against reinfection. RESULTS: Of 150 325 patients, 8845 (5.9%) tested positive and 141 480 (94.1%) tested negative before 30 August. A total of 1278 (14.4%) positive patients were retested after 90 days, and 62 had possible reinfection. Of those, 31 (50%) were symptomatic. Of those with initial negative testing, 5449 (3.9%) were subsequently positive and 3191 of those (58.5%) were symptomatic. Protection offered from prior infection was 81.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 76.6-85.8) and against symptomatic infection was 84.5% (95% CI, 77.9-89.1). This protection increased over time. CONCLUSIONS: Prior infection in patients with COVID-19 was highly protective against reinfection and symptomatic disease. This protection increased over time, suggesting that viral shedding or ongoing immune response may persist beyond 90 days and may not represent true reinfection. As vaccine supply is limited, patients with known history of COVID-19 could delay early vaccination to allow for the most vulnerable to access the vaccine and slow transmission.

Choosing Wisely For Critical Care: The Next Five.

OBJECTIVES: To formulate new "Choosing Wisely" for Critical Care recommendations that identify best practices to avoid waste and promote value while providing critical care. DATA SOURCES: Semistructured narrative literature review and quantitative survey assessments. STUDY SELECTION: English language publications that examined critical care practices in relation to reducing cost or waste. DATA EXTRACTION: Practices assessed to add no value to critical care were grouped by category. Taskforce assessment, modified Delphi consensus building, and quantitative survey analysis identified eight novel recommendations to avoid wasteful critical care practices. These were submitted to the Society of Critical Care Medicine membership for evaluation and ranking. DATA SYNTHESIS: Results from the quantitative Society of Critical Care Medicine membership survey identified the top scoring five of eight recommendations. These five highest ranked recommendations established Society of Critical Care Medicine's Next Five "Choosing" Wisely for Critical Care practices. CONCLUSIONS: Five new recommendations to reduce waste and enhance value in the practice of critical care address invasive devices, proactive liberation from mechanical ventilation, antibiotic stewardship, early mobilization, and providing goal-concordant care. These recommendations supplement the initial critical care recommendations from the "Choosing Wisely" campaign.

Home testing for COVID-19: Benefits and limitations.

The home test kits for detecting SARS-CoV-2 infection with Food and Drug Administration emergency use authorization primarily use either isothermal nucleic acid amplification or antigen detection, and each test has advantages and limitations in terms of sensitivity and specificity, cost, results reporting, and results turnaround time. In clinical studies, these tests provide accurate positive results in symptomatic individuals, although negative results are less accurate. There are also accuracy concerns for positive results in asymptomatic individuals. These factors have implications for their clinical interpretation and use.

Abrupt Discontinuation Versus Down-Titration of Vasopressin in Patients Recovering from Septic Shock.

PURPOSE: To compare patient outcomes based on management of arginine vasopressin (AVP) during the recovery phase of septic shock (abrupt vs. tapering discontinuation). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Multicenter, retrospective cohort study of patients receiving AVP with concomitant norepinephrine for septic shock. Primary outcome measure was time to intensive care unit (ICU) discharge (from decision to titrate or stop AVP). Secondary outcomes included ICU and hospital mortality, and incidence of hypotension. RESULTS: A total of 958 (73%) abrupt discontinuation and 360 (27%) down-titration patients were included. Patient characteristics and septic shock treatment courses were similar between groups. Median time to ICU discharge was similar between abrupt discontinuation (7.9 days, 95% CI 7.2-8.7 days) and tapered patients (7.3 days, 95% CI 6.3-9.3 days, P = 0.60). After controlling for baseline discrepancies, down-titration was not an independent predictor of time to ICU discharge (HR = 0.99, 95% CI: 0.85-1.15, P = 0.91). There was no difference in ICU mortality (21.8% vs. 18.0%, P = 0.13) or hospital mortality (28.9% vs. 31.1%, P = 0.44). Although incidence of hypotension was similar (39.7% vs. 41.7%, P = 0.53), patients in the down-titration group more frequently required an escalation of AVP dose (5.7% vs. 11.1%, P < 0.001). Median AVP duration was shorter in the abrupt discontinuation group (1.4 days [IQR: 0.6-2.6 days] vs. 1.8 days [IQR: 1.1-3.2 days], P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: A difference in time to ICU discharge was not detected between abrupt AVP discontinuation and down-titration in patients recovering from septic shock. In patients recovering from septic shock, abrupt discontinuation of AVP appears to be safe and may lead to shortened AVP duration.

Operationalizing COVID-19 testing: Who, what, when, where, why, and how.

The authors review the rationale behind and approaches to testing for COVID-19, the quality of currently available tests, the role of data analytics in strategizing testing, and using the electronic medical record and other programs designed to steward COVID-19 testing and follow-up of patients.

Effect of Phenylephrine Push Before Continuous Infusion Norepinephrine in Patients With Septic Shock.

BACKGROUND: IV pushes of phenylephrine may be used for patients with septic shock with the intent of rapidly achieving mean arterial pressure (MAP) goals. However, the clinical effectiveness and safety of this approach are unclear. RESEARCH QUESTION: In patients with septic shock, is administration of a phenylephrine push before norepinephrine initiation associated with a higher incidence of hemodynamic stability? METHODS: This retrospective, multicenter cohort study included adult patients with septic shock initiated on norepinephrine. Propensity scores for initial phenylephrine push receipt were generated, and patients receiving an initial phenylephrine push were propensity score-matched 1:2 to those not receiving an initial phenylephrine push. The primary outcome was achievement of hemodynamic stability (defined as maintaining MAP of ≥ 65 mm Hg for at least 6 h without an increase in continuous infusion vasoactive agent dosage) within 3 and 12 h of norepinephrine initiation. RESULTS: Of 1,317 included patients, 181 received an initial phenylephrine push; 141 phenylephrine push patients were matched to 282 patients not receiving a phenylephrine push. More patients who received a phenylephrine push achieved hemodynamic stability at hour 3 than those who did not receive a phenylephrine push (28.4% vs 18.8%; risk difference, 10%; 95% CI, 0.9%-18%). Phenylephrine push receipt was associated independently with hemodynamic stability within 3 h (adjusted OR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.09-2.97), but not at 12 h (adjusted OR, 1.42; 95% CI, 0.93-2.16). Phenylephrine push receipt was associated independently with higher ICU mortality (adjusted OR, 1.88; 95% CI, 1.1-3.21). INTERPRETATION: Phenylephrine pushes were associated with a higher incidence of early, but not sustained, hemodynamic stability and were associated independently with higher ICU mortality. Caution is warranted when clinicians are considering the use of phenylephrine pushes in patients with septic shock.

Interhospital transport of patients with COVID-19: Cleveland Clinic approach.

Hospital-to-hospital transportation of patients in the COVID-19 era presents unique challenges to ensuring the safety of both patients and health care providers. Crucial factors to address include having adequate supplies of protective equipment and ensuring their appropriate use, defining patient care procedures during transport, and decontamination post-transport. Transport vehicles need to have adequate physical space, an isolated driver compartment, NS HEPA filtration of air. Having a standardized intake process can help identify patients who would benefit from transport to another facility.

Mortality, Morbidity, and Costs After Implementation of a Vasopressin Guideline in Medical Intensive Care Patients With Septic Shock: An Interrupted Time Series Analysis.

Background: Vasopressin decreases vasopressor requirements in patients with septic shock. However, the optimal norepinephrine dose for initiation or cessation of vasopressin is unclear. Objective: Analyze monthly intensive care unit (ICU) mortality rates 1 year preimplementation and postimplementation of a guideline suggesting a norepinephrine dose of 50 µg/min or more for initiation of vasopressin and early cessation of vasopressin. Methods: This retrospective quasi-experimental study included adult patients with septic shock admitted to the medical ICU of a tertiary care medical center over 2 years. Time periods were evaluated with interrupted time series analysis. Results: A total of 1148 patients were included: 573 patients preguideline and 575 patients postguideline. Group characteristics were well balanced at baseline, except patients postguideline had higher sequential organ failure assessment scores. Postguideline, fewer patients were initiated on vasopressin (305 [53.2%] vs 217 [37.7%], absolute difference -15.5% [95% CI -21.2% to -9.8%]), and the norepinephrine dose at vasopressin initiation was higher (median 25 [interquartile range 18, 40] µg/min vs 40 [22, 52] µg/min; median difference 15 [95% CI 11 to 19] µg/min; P < 0.01). After guideline implementation, there was no evidence for a difference in ICU mortality rate slope (slope change 0.07% [95% CI -0.8% to 1.0%] per month; P 0.87), but the vasoactive cost level decreased by US$183 (95% CI -US$327 to -US$39) per patient immediately after implementation. Conclusion and Relevance: Implementation of a guideline suggesting a high norepinephrine dose threshold for vasopressin initiation and early vasopressin cessation in patients with septic shock appears to be safe and may decrease vasoactive costs.

Association Between Volume of Fluid Resuscitation and Intubation in High-Risk Patients With Sepsis, Heart Failure, End-Stage Renal Disease, and Cirrhosis.

BACKGROUND: Initial fluid resuscitation volume for sepsis is controversial, particularly in patients at high baseline risk for complications. This study was designed to assess the association between 30 mL/kg crystalloids and intubation in patients with sepsis or septic shock and heart failure, end-stage renal disease, or cirrhosis. METHODS: This propensity score-matched retrospective cohort study included patients with sepsis or septic shock admitted to a large medical ICU. Primary exposure was IV fluid volume in the first 6 h following sepsis diagnosis, divided into two cohorts: ≥ 30 mL/kg (standard group) and < 30 mL/kg (restricted group). The primary outcome was need for mechanical ventilation within 72 h following initiation of fluid resuscitation. Secondary outcomes were length of stay, ventilator days, and time to intubation. RESULTS: A total of 208 patients were included, with 104 (50%) in the restricted group (< 30 mL/kg) and 104 in the standard group (≥ 30 mL/kg). No difference in intubation incidence was detected between the two groups, with 36 patients (35%) in the restricted group and 33 (32%) in the standard group (adjusted OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.41-1.36; P = .34) intubated. There was no difference between standard and restricted groups in alive ICU-free days (17 ± 11 days vs 17 ± 10 days; P = .64), duration of mechanical ventilation (10 ± 12 days vs 11 ± 16 days; P = .96), or hours to intubation (16 ± 19 h vs 14 ± 15; P = .55). CONCLUSIONS: No differences were detected in the incidence of intubation in patients with sepsis and cirrhosis, end-stage renal disease, or heart failure who received guideline-recommended fluid resuscitation with 30 mL/kg compared with patients initially resuscitated with a lower fluid volume.

Effect of Detailed Titration Instructions on Time to Hemodynamic Stability in ICU Patients Requiring Norepinephrine.

BACKGROUND: This study was conducted to assess the effect of titration instructions on patients receiving norepinephrine. METHODS: In a single-center, retrospective cohort of patients who received at least 24 hours of norepinephrine as their first vasopressor (n = 1,303), patients were classified by whether they received norepinephrine before (n = 616) or after (n = 687) titration instructions were added. RESULTS: Patients in the two groups had significant differences at baseline. On univariate analysis, time to hemodynamic stability was significantly longer in the post group (32 minutes [interquartile range (IQR): 12-65] vs. 10 minutes [IQR: 0-26]; p < 0.01). On multivariate analysis, addition of titration instructions was associated with an increase of 24 minutes in time to hemodynamic stability after accounting for differences in baseline systolic blood pressure, fluid boluses before norepinephrine, baseline arrhythmia, and number of other vasopressors or titratable infusions (p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: In this evaluation, time to hemodynamic stability was significantly longer after addition of norepinephrine titration instructions even when accounting for differences in baseline characteristics.