Point-of-care ultrasound improves clinical outcomes in patients with acute onset dyspnea: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

The early, appropriate management of acute onset dyspnea is important but often challenging. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of the use of Point-of-Care Ultrasound (PoCUS) versus conventional management on clinical outcomes in patients with acute onset dyspnea. The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE and reference lists were searched to identify eligible trials (inception to October 14, 2021). There were no language restrictions. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and prospective and retrospective cohort studies that compared PoCUS with conventional diagnostic modalities (controls) in patients with acute onset dyspnea were included. Two independent reviewers extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. Disagreements were resolved by consensus. The primary study outcomes were time to diagnosis, time to treatment, and length of stay (LOS). Secondary outcomes included rate of appropriate treatment, 30-day re-admission rate, and mortality. We included eight RCTs and six observational studies with a total of 5393 participants. Heterogeneity across studies was variable (from low to considerable), with overall low or moderate study quality and low or moderate risk of bias (except one article with serious risk of bias). Time to diagnosis (mean difference [MD], - 63 min; 95% CI, - 115 to - 11 min] and time to treatment (MD, - 27 min; 95% CI - 43 to - 11 min) were significantly shorter in the PoCUS group. In-hospital LOS showed no differences between the two groups, but LOS in the Intensive Care Unit (MD, - 1.27 days; - 1.94 to - 0.61 days) was significantly shorter in the PoCUS group. Patients in the PoCUS group showed significantly higher odds of receiving appropriate therapy compared to controls (odds ratio [OR], 2.31; 95% CI, 1.61-3.32), but there was no significant effect on 30-day re-admission rate and in-hospital or 30-day mortality. Our results indicate that PoCUS use contributes to early diagnosis and better outcomes compared to conventional methods in patients admitted with acute onset dyspnea.

Investigating the association between IL-6 antagonist therapy and blood coagulation in critically ill patients with COVID-19: a protocol for a prospective, observational, multicentre study.

INTRODUCTION: Hypercoagulation is one the main features of COVID-19. It is induced by the hyperinflammatory response that shifts the balance of haemostasis towards pro-coagulation. Interleukin-6 (IL-6) antagonist therapy has been recommended in certain subgroups of critically ill patients with COVID-19 to modulate inflammatory response. The interaction between immune response and haemostasis is well recognised. Therefore, our objective is to evaluate whether the modulation of the inflammatory response by IL-6 antagonist inflicts any changes in whole blood coagulation as assessed by viscoelastic methods in critically ill patients with COVID-19. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: In this prospective observational study, we are going to collect data on inflammatory parameters and blood coagulation using the ClotPro® device. The primary outcome is the change of the fibrinolytic system measured by the Lysis Time and Lysis onset time before and after immunomodulation therapy. Data will be collected before the IL-6 antagonist administration at baseline (T0) then after 24, 48 hours, then on day 5 and 7 (T1-4, respectively). Secondary outcomes include changes in other parameters related to inflammation, blood coagulation and biomarkers of endothelial injury. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was given by the Medical Research Council of Hungary (1405-3/2022/EÜG). All participants provided written consent. The results of the study will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05218369; Clinicaltrials.gov.

Goal-Directed Fluid Therapy Enhances Gastrointestinal Recovery after Laparoscopic Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

(1) Background: Whether goal-directed fluid therapy (GDFT) provides any outcome benefit as compared to non-goal-directed fluid therapy (N-GDFT) in elective abdominal laparoscopic surgery has not been determined yet. (2) Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, Web of Science, and Scopus. The main outcomes were length of hospital stay (LOHS), time to first flatus and stool, intraoperative fluid and vasopressor requirements, serum lactate levels, and urinary output. Pooled risks ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for dichotomous outcomes and weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% CI for continuous outcomes. (3) Results: Eleven studies were included in the quantitative, and fifteen in the qualitative synthesis. LOHS (WMD: -1.18 days, 95% CI: -1.84 to -0.53) and time to first stool (WMD: -9.8 h; CI -12.7 to -7.0) were significantly shorter in the GDFT group. GDFT resulted in significantly less intraoperative fluid administration (WMD: -441 mL, 95% CI: -790 to -92) and lower lactate levels at the end of the operation: WMD: -0.25 mmol L-1; 95% CI: -0.36 to -0.14. (4) Conclusions: GDFT resulted in enhanced recovery of the gastrointestinal function and shorter LOHS as compared to N-GDFT.

Frailty and Emergency Surgery: Results of a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Background: Frailty, a "syndrome of loss of reserves," is a decade old concept. Initially it was used mainly in geriatrics but lately its use has been extended into other specialties including surgery. Our main objective was to examine the association between frailty and mortality, between frailty and length of hospital stay (LOS) and frailty and readmission within 30 days in the emergency surgical population. Methods: Studies reporting on frailty in the emergency surgical population were eligible. MEDLINE (via PubMed), EMBASE, Scopus, CENTRAL, and Web of Science were searched with terms related to acute surgery and frail*. We searched for eligible articles without any restrictions on the 2nd of November 2020. Odds ratios (OR) and weighted mean differences (WMD) were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CI), using a random effect model. Risk of bias assessment was performed according to the recommendations of the Cochrane Collaboration. As the finally selected studies were either prospective or retrospective cohorts, the "Quality In Prognosis Studies" (QUIPS) tool was used. Results: At the end of the selection process 21 eligible studies with total 562.070 participants from 8 countries were included in the qualitative and the quantitative synthesis. Patients living with frailty have higher chance of dying within 30 days after an emergency surgical admission (OR: 1.99; CI: 1.76-2.21; p < 0.001). We found a tendency of increased LOS with frailty in acute surgical patients (WMD: 4.75 days; CI: 1.79-7.71; p = 0.002). Patients living with frailty have increased chance of 30-day readmission after discharge (OR: 1.36; CI: 1.06-1.75; p = 0.015). Conclusions: Although there is good evidence that living with frailty increases the chance of unfavorable outcomes, further research needs to be done to assess the benefits and costs of frailty screening for emergency surgical patients. Systematic Review Registration: The review protocol was registered on the PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42021224689).

Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) indicated frailty is associated with increased in-hospital and 30-day mortality in COVID-19 patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The concept of frailty provides an age-independent, easy-to-use tool for risk stratification. We aimed to summarize the evidence on the efficacy of frailty tools in risk assessment in COVID-19 patients. METHODS: The protocol was registered (CRD42021241544). Studies reporting on frailty in COVID-19 patients were eligible. The main outcomes were mortality, length of hospital stay (LOH) and intensive care unit (ICU) admission in frail and non-frail COVID-19 patients. Frailty was also compared in survivors and non-survivors. Five databases were searched up to 24th September 2021. The QUIPS tool was used for the risk of bias assessment. Odds ratios (OR) and weighted mean differences (WMD) were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using a random effect model. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 and χ2 tests. RESULTS: From 3640 records identified, 54 were included in the qualitative and 42 in the quantitative synthesis. Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) was used in 46 studies, the Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) by 4, the Multidimensional Prognostic Index (MPI) by 3 and three studies used other scores. We found that patients with frailty (CFS 4-9 or HFRS ≥ 5) have a higher risk of mortality (CFS: OR: 3.12; CI 2.56-3.81; HFRS OR: 1.98; CI 1.89-2.07). Patients with frailty (CFS 4-9) were less likely to be admitted to ICU (OR 0.28, CI 0.12-0.64). Quantitative synthesis for LOH was not feasible. Most studies carried a high risk of bias. CONCLUSIONS: As determined by CFS, frailty is strongly associated with mortality; hence, frailty-based patient management should be included in international COVID-19 treatment guidelines. Future studies investigating the role of frailty assessment on deciding ICU admission are strongly warranted.

Extracorporeal Cytokine Removal in Critically Ill COVID-19 Patients: A Case Series.

Introduction: Extracorporeal hemoadsorption (HA) is a potential adjunctive therapy in severe cases of COVID-19 associated pneumonia. In this retrospective study we report data from critically ill patients treated with HA during the first and second wave of the pandemic. Patients and Methods: All patients, who received HA therapy with CytoSorb within the first 96 h of intensive care unit (ICU) admission without hospital-acquired bacterial superinfection, were included. Clinical and laboratory data were collected: on admission, before (TB) and after (TA) HA therapy. Results: Out of the 367 COVID-19 cases, 13 patients were treated with CytoSorb, also requiring mechanical ventilation and renal replacement therapy. All patients were alive at the end of HA, but only 3 survived hospital stay. From TB-TA there was a tendency of decreasing norepinephrine requirement: 193.7 [IQR: 34.8-270.4] to 50.2 [6.5-243.5] ug/kg/day and increasing PaO2/FiO2 ratio 127.8 (95% CI: 96.0-159.6) to 155.0 (115.3-194.6) mmHg but they did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.14 and 0.58, respectively). Treatment related adverse events were not reported. Conclusion: The treatment was well-tolerated, and there was a tendency toward an improvement in vasopressor need and oxygenation during the course of HA. These observations render the need for prospective randomized trials.

Individualized Hemodynamic Management in Sepsis.

Hemodynamic optimization remains the cornerstone of resuscitation in the treatment of sepsis and septic shock. Delay or inadequate management will inevitably lead to hypoperfusion, tissue hypoxia or edema, and fluid overload, leading eventually to multiple organ failure, seriously affecting outcomes. According to a large international survey (FENICE study), physicians frequently use inadequate indices to guide fluid management in intensive care units. Goal-directed and "restrictive" infusion strategies have been recommended by guidelines over "liberal" approaches for several years. Unfortunately, these "fixed regimen" treatment protocols neglect the patient's individual needs, and what is shown to be beneficial for a given population may not be so for the individual patient. However, applying multimodal, contextualized, and personalized management could potentially overcome this problem. The aim of this review was to give an insight into the pathophysiological rationale and clinical application of this relatively new approach in the hemodynamic management of septic patients.