Adductor Canal Block versus Femoral Nerve Block in Total Knee Arthroplasty: Network Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: The quality of postoperative analgesia in total knee arthroplasty is crucial for patient recovery, rehabilitation and hospital stay duration. In line with the above, а single-shot adductor canal block has been considered as surpassing method over continuous femoral nerve block. However, continuous adductor canal block and single-shot femoral nerve block 'kept overboard' the discussion. This study aims to compare the effectiveness of various types of adductor and femoral nerve blocks on clinically relevant outcomes in patients following total knee arthroplasty. METHODS: A systematic review and network meta-analysis were conducted following 'PRISMA-NMA' and Cochrane Handbook guidelines. Eligibility criteria included randomized trials and, where these were lacking for a comparison, non-randomized studies involving adults undergoing primary total knee arthroplasty, comparing single-shot adductor canal block, continuous adductor canal block, single-shot femoral nerve block, and continuous femoral nerve block. RESULTS: A total of 36 studies involving 3308 patients were included. Single-shot adductor canal block showed higher pain scores and opioid consumption but better functional recovery at 24-h compared to continuous femoral nerve block. However, this trend vanishes by the 48-h assessment post-surgery. Continuous adductor canal block had higher opioid consumption but better functional recovery and shorter hospital stay compared to continuous femoral nerve block. Single-shot adductor canal block showed higher pain scores but comparable opioid consumption and functional recovery to continuous adductor canal block. DISCUSSION: The shift from continuous femoral nerve block to single-shot adductor canal block as the preferred method for pain relief after total knee arthroplasty may be premature. While the latter improves mobility, it falls short in pain control and doesn't shorten hospital stays. Continuous adductor canal block shows promise but is currently underappreciated, and single-shot femoral nerve block is often overshadowed by other techniques in regional anesthesia. Further high-quality, multicenter randomized controlled trials are needed to validate these findings.

Continuous vs Intermittent Meropenem Administration in Critically Ill Patients With Sepsis: The MERCY Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Meropenem is a widely prescribed ß-lactam antibiotic. Meropenem exhibits maximum pharmacodynamic efficacy when given by continuous infusion to deliver constant drug levels above the minimal inhibitory concentration. Compared with intermittent administration, continuous administration of meropenem may improve clinical outcomes. Objective: To determine whether continuous administration of meropenem reduces a composite of mortality and emergence of pandrug-resistant or extensively drug-resistant bacteria compared with intermittent administration in critically ill patients with sepsis. Design, Setting, and Participants: A double-blind, randomized clinical trial enrolling critically ill patients with sepsis or septic shock who had been prescribed meropenem by their treating clinicians at 31 intensive care units of 26 hospitals in 4 countries (Croatia, Italy, Kazakhstan, and Russia). Patients were enrolled between June 5, 2018, and August 9, 2022, and the final 90-day follow-up was completed in November 2022. Interventions: Patients were randomized to receive an equal dose of the antibiotic meropenem by either continuous administration (n = 303) or intermittent administration (n = 304). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality and emergence of pandrug-resistant or extensively drug-resistant bacteria at day 28. There were 4 secondary outcomes, including days alive and free from antibiotics at day 28, days alive and free from the intensive care unit at day 28, and all-cause mortality at day 90. Seizures, allergic reactions, and mortality were recorded as adverse events. Results: All 607 patients (mean age, 64 [SD, 15] years; 203 were women [33%]) were included in the measurement of the 28-day primary outcome and completed the 90-day mortality follow-up. The majority (369 patients, 61%) had septic shock. The median time from hospital admission to randomization was 9 days (IQR, 3-17 days) and the median duration of meropenem therapy was 11 days (IQR, 6-17 days). Only 1 crossover event was recorded. The primary outcome occurred in 142 patients (47%) in the continuous administration group and in 149 patients (49%) in the intermittent administration group (relative risk, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.81-1.13], P = .60). Of the 4 secondary outcomes, none was statistically significant. No adverse events of seizures or allergic reactions related to the study drug were reported. At 90 days, mortality was 42% both in the continuous administration group (127 of 303 patients) and in the intermittent administration group (127 of 304 patients). Conclusions and Relevance: In critically ill patients with sepsis, compared with intermittent administration, the continuous administration of meropenem did not improve the composite outcome of mortality and emergence of pandrug-resistant or extensively drug-resistant bacteria at day 28. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03452839.

Effects of early postoperative neurocognitive disorders on clinically relevant outcomes: a meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Early postoperative neurocognitive disorders (ePND), include both emergence delirium, which is defined as very early onset postoperative delirium, and emergence agitation, defined as motor arousal. Although research on anesthesia emergence is limited, ePND are likely associated with unfavorable outcomes. This meta-analysis assessed the effect of ePND on clinically relevant outcomes. METHODS: A systematic search of studies published between 2002 and 2022 on MEDLINE, PubMed, Google Scholar, and the Cochrane Library was performed. Studies that included adults with emergence agitation and/or delirium and reported at least one of the following outcomes: mortality, postoperative delirium, length of post-anesthesia care unit stay, or length of hospital stay were included. The internal validity, risk of bias, and certainty of the evidence were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 16,028 patients from 21 prospective observational studies and one case-control retrospective study were included in this meta-analysis. The occurrence rate of ePND was 13% (data excluding the case-control study). The mortality rate was 2.4% in patients with ePND vs. 1.2% in the normal emergence group (risk ratio [RR]: 2.6, P = 0.01, very low quality of evidence). Postoperative delirium occurred in 29% of patients with ePND and 4.5% of patients with normal emergence (RR: 9.5, P < 0.001, I2 = 93%). Patients with ePND had a prolonged length of post-anesthesia care unit stay (P = 0.004) and length of hospital stay (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis suggests that ePND are associated with twice the risk of mortality and a 9-fold increased risk of postoperative delirium.

Hypotension-Avoidance Versus Hypertension-Avoidance Strategies in Noncardiac Surgery : An International Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Among patients having noncardiac surgery, perioperative hemodynamic abnormalities are associated with vascular complications. Uncertainty remains about what intraoperative blood pressure to target and how to manage long-term antihypertensive medications perioperatively. OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of a hypotension-avoidance and a hypertension-avoidance strategy on major vascular complications after noncardiac surgery. DESIGN: Partial factorial randomized trial of 2 perioperative blood pressure management strategies (reported here) and tranexamic acid versus placebo. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03505723). SETTING: 110 hospitals in 22 countries. PATIENTS: 7490 patients having noncardiac surgery who were at risk for vascular complications and were receiving 1 or more long-term antihypertensive medications. INTERVENTION: In the hypotension-avoidance strategy group, the intraoperative mean arterial pressure target was 80 mm Hg or greater; before and for 2 days after surgery, renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors were withheld and the other long-term antihypertensive medications were administered only for systolic blood pressures 130 mm Hg or greater, following an algorithm. In the hypertension-avoidance strategy group, the intraoperative mean arterial pressure target was 60 mm Hg or greater; all antihypertensive medications were continued before and after surgery. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was a composite of vascular death and nonfatal myocardial injury after noncardiac surgery, stroke, and cardiac arrest at 30 days. Outcome adjudicators were masked to treatment assignment. RESULTS: The primary outcome occurred in 520 of 3742 patients (13.9%) in the hypotension-avoidance group and in 524 of 3748 patients (14.0%) in the hypertension-avoidance group (hazard ratio, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.88 to 1.12]; P = 0.92). Results were consistent for patients who used 1 or more than 1 antihypertensive medication in the long term. LIMITATION: Adherence to the assigned strategies was suboptimal; however, results were consistent across different adherence levels. CONCLUSION: In patients having noncardiac surgery, our hypotension-avoidance and hypertension-avoidance strategies resulted in a similar incidence of major vascular complications. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Canadian Institutes of Health Research, National Health and Medical Research Council (Australia), and Research Grant Council of Hong Kong.

Tranexamic Acid in Patients Undergoing Noncardiac Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Perioperative bleeding is common in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery. Tranexamic acid is an antifibrinolytic drug that may safely decrease such bleeding. METHODS: We conducted a trial involving patients undergoing noncardiac surgery. Patients were randomly assigned to receive tranexamic acid (1-g intravenous bolus) or placebo at the start and end of surgery (reported here) and, with the use of a partial factorial design, a hypotension-avoidance or hypertension-avoidance strategy (not reported here). The primary efficacy outcome was life-threatening bleeding, major bleeding, or bleeding into a critical organ (composite bleeding outcome) at 30 days. The primary safety outcome was myocardial injury after noncardiac surgery, nonhemorrhagic stroke, peripheral arterial thrombosis, or symptomatic proximal venous thromboembolism (composite cardiovascular outcome) at 30 days. To establish the noninferiority of tranexamic acid to placebo for the composite cardiovascular outcome, the upper boundary of the one-sided 97.5% confidence interval for the hazard ratio had to be below 1.125, and the one-sided P value had to be less than 0.025. RESULTS: A total of 9535 patients underwent randomization. A composite bleeding outcome event occurred in 433 of 4757 patients (9.1%) in the tranexamic acid group and in 561 of 4778 patients (11.7%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.67 to 0.87; absolute difference, -2.6 percentage points; 95% CI, -3.8 to -1.4; two-sided P<0.001 for superiority). A composite cardiovascular outcome event occurred in 649 of 4581 patients (14.2%) in the tranexamic acid group and in 639 of 4601 patients (13.9%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.92 to 1.14; upper boundary of the one-sided 97.5% CI, 1.14; absolute difference, 0.3 percentage points; 95% CI, -1.1 to 1.7; one-sided P = 0.04 for noninferiority). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients undergoing noncardiac surgery, the incidence of the composite bleeding outcome was significantly lower with tranexamic acid than with placebo. Although the between-group difference in the composite cardiovascular outcome was small, the noninferiority of tranexamic acid was not established. (Funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and others; POISE-3 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03505723.).

Effect of Volatile Anesthetics on Myocardial Infarction After Coronary Artery Surgery: A Post Hoc Analysis of a Randomized Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of volatile anesthetics on the rates of postoperative myocardial infarction (MI) and cardiac death after coronary artery bypass graft (CABG). DESIGN: A post hoc analysis of a randomized trial. SETTING: Cardiac surgical operating rooms. PARTICIPANTS: Patients undergoing elective, isolated CABG. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized to receive a volatile anesthetic (desflurane, isoflurane, or sevoflurane) or total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA). The primary outcome was hemodynamically relevant MI (MI requiring high-dose inotropic support or prolonged intensive care unit stay) occurring within 48 hours from surgery. The secondary outcome was 1-year death due to cardiac causes. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 5,400 patients were enrolled between April 2014 and September 2017 (2,709 patients randomized to the volatile anesthetics group and 2,691 to TIVA). The mean age was 62 ± 8.4 years, and the median baseline ejection fraction was 57% (50-67), without differences between the 2 groups. Patients in the volatile group had a lower incidence of MI with hemodynamic complications both in the per-protocol (14 of 2,530 [0.6%] v 27 of 2,501 [1.1%] in the TIVA group; p = 0.038) and as-treated analyses (16 of 2,708 [0.6%] v 29 of 2,617 [1.1%] in the TIVA group; p = 0.039), but not in the intention-to-treat analysis (17 of 2,663 [0.6%] v 28 of 2,667 [1.0%] in the TIVA group; p = 0.10). Overall, deaths due to cardiac causes were lower in the volatile group (23 of 2,685 [0.9%] v 40 of 2,668 [1.5%] than in the TIVA group; p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: An anesthetic regimen, including volatile agents, may be associated with a lower rate of postoperative MI with hemodynamic complication in patients undergoing CABG. Furthermore, it may reduce long-term cardiac mortality.

Rationale and design of the PeriOperative ISchemic Evaluation-3 (POISE-3): a randomized controlled trial evaluating tranexamic acid and a strategy to minimize hypotension in noncardiac surgery.

BACKGROUND: For patients undergoing noncardiac surgery, bleeding and hypotension are frequent and associated with increased mortality and cardiovascular complications. Tranexamic acid (TXA) is an antifibrinolytic agent with the potential to reduce surgical bleeding; however, there is uncertainty about its efficacy and safety in noncardiac surgery. Although usual perioperative care is commonly consistent with a hypertension-avoidance strategy (i.e., most patients continue their antihypertensive medications throughout the perioperative period and intraoperative mean arterial pressures of 60 mmHg are commonly accepted), a hypotension-avoidance strategy may improve perioperative outcomes. METHODS: The PeriOperative Ischemic Evaluation (POISE)-3 Trial is a large international randomized controlled trial designed to determine if TXA is superior to placebo for the composite outcome of life-threatening, major, and critical organ bleeding, and non-inferior to placebo for the occurrence of major arterial and venous thrombotic events, at 30 days after randomization. Using a partial factorial design, POISE-3 will additionally determine the effect of a hypotension-avoidance strategy versus a hypertension-avoidance strategy on the risk of major cardiovascular events, at 30 days after randomization. The target sample size is 10,000 participants. Patients ≥45 years of age undergoing noncardiac surgery, with or at risk of cardiovascular and bleeding complications, are randomized to receive a TXA 1 g intravenous bolus or matching placebo at the start and at the end of surgery. Patients, health care providers, data collectors, outcome adjudicators, and investigators are blinded to the treatment allocation. Patients on ≥ 1 chronic antihypertensive medication are also randomized to either of the two blood pressure management strategies, which differ in the management of patient antihypertensive medications on the morning of surgery and on the first 2 days after surgery, and in the target mean arterial pressure during surgery. Outcome adjudicators are blinded to the blood pressure treatment allocation. Patients are followed up at 30 days and 1 year after randomization. DISCUSSION: Bleeding and hypotension in noncardiac surgery are common and have a substantial impact on patient prognosis. The POISE-3 trial will evaluate two interventions to determine their impact on bleeding, cardiovascular complications, and mortality. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03505723. Registered on 23 April 2018.

Effect of a Perioperative Hypotension-Avoidance Strategy Versus a Hypertension-Avoidance Strategy on the Risk of Acute Kidney Injury: A Clinical Research Protocol for a Substudy of the POISE-3 Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Most patients who take antihypertensive medications continue taking them on the morning of surgery and during the perioperative period. However, growing evidence suggests this practice may contribute to perioperative hypotension and a higher risk of complications. This protocol describes an acute kidney injury substudy of the Perioperative Ischemic Evaluation-3 (POISE-3) trial, which is testing the effect of a perioperative hypotension-avoidance strategy versus a hypertension-avoidance strategy in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery. OBJECTIVE: To conduct a substudy of POISE-3 to determine whether a perioperative hypotension-avoidance strategy reduces the risk of acute kidney injury compared with a hypertension-avoidance strategy. DESIGN: Randomized clinical trial with 1:1 randomization to the intervention (a perioperative hypotension-avoidance strategy) or control (a hypertension-avoidance strategy). INTERVENTION: If the presurgery systolic blood pressure (SBP) is <130 mmHg, all antihypertensive medications are withheld on the morning of surgery. If the SBP is ≥130 mmHg, some medications (but not angiotensin receptor blockers [ACEIs], angiotensin receptor blockers [ARBs], or renin inhibitors) may be continued in a stepwise manner. During surgery, the patients' mean arterial pressure (MAP) is maintained at ≥80 mmHg. During the first 48 hours after surgery, some antihypertensive medications (but not ACEIs, ARBs, or renin inhibitors) may be restarted in a stepwise manner if the SBP is ≥130 mmHg. CONTROL: Patients receive their usual antihypertensive medications before and after surgery. The patients' MAP is maintained at ≥60 mmHg from anesthetic induction until the end of surgery. SETTING: Recruitment from 108 centers in 22 countries from 2018 to 2021. PATIENTS: Patients (~6800) aged ≥45 years having noncardiac surgery who have or are at risk of atherosclerotic disease and who routinely take antihypertensive medications. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome of the substudy is postoperative acute kidney injury, defined as an increase in serum creatinine concentration of either ≥26.5 µmol/L (≥0.3 mg/dL) within 48 hours of randomization or ≥50% within 7 days of randomization. METHODS: The primary analysis (intention-to-treat) will examine the relative risk and 95% confidence interval of acute kidney injury in the intervention versus control group. We will repeat the primary analysis using alternative definitions of acute kidney injury and examine effect modification by preexisting chronic kidney disease, defined as a prerandomization estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min/1.73 m2. RESULTS: Substudy results will be analyzed in 2022. LIMITATIONS: It is not possible to mask patients or providers to the intervention; however, objective measures will be used to assess acute kidney injury. CONCLUSIONS: This substudy will provide generalizable estimates of the effect of a perioperative hypotension-avoidance strategy on the risk of acute kidney injury.

CONTEXTE: La plupart des patients qui prennent des médicaments antihypertenseurs continuent de les prendre le matin d'une intervention chirurgicale et pendant la période périopératoire. De plus en plus de preuves suggèrent que cette pratique pourrait entraîner l'hypotension périopératoire et augmenter le risque de complications. Ce protocole décrit une sous-étude sur l'insuffisance rénale aiguë (IRA) découlant de l'essai Perioperative Ischemic Evaluation-3 (POISE-3). Cet essai teste l'effet d'une stratégie d'évitement de l'hypotension périopératoire par rapport à une stratégie d'évitement de l'hypertension chez des patients qui subissent une chirurgie non cardiaque. OBJECTIFS: Cette sous-étude de l'essai POISE-3 vise à déterminer si une stratégie d'évitement de l'hypotension périopératoire réduit le risque d'IRA comparativement à la stratégie d'évitement de l'hypertension. TYPE D'ÉTUDE: Essai clinique randomisé à répartition 1:1 au groupe intervention (stratégie d'évitement de l'hypotension périopératoire) ou au groupe témoin (stratégie d'évitement de l'hypertension). GROUPE INTERVENTION: Si la pression artérielle systolique (PAS) avant l'opération est <130 mmHg, tous les médicaments antihypertenseurs sont suspendus le matin de la chirurgie. Si la PAS est ≥130 mmHg, certains médicaments (excluant les inhibiteurs de l'enzyme de conversion de l'angiotensine [IECA], les antagonistes du récepteur de l'angiotensine [ARA] ou les inhibiteurs de la rénine) peuvent être poursuivis de façon graduelle. Pendant la chirurgie, la pression artérielle moyenne (PAM) du patient est maintenue à ≥80 mmHg. Dans les 48 heures suivant l'intervention chirurgicale, certains médicaments antihypertenseurs (excluant les IECA, les ARA ou les inhibiteurs de la rénine) peuvent être réintroduits par étapes si la PAS est ≥130 mmHg. GROUPE TÉMOIN: Les patients reçoivent leurs médicaments antihypertenseurs habituels avant et après la chirurgie. La PAM du patient est maintenue à ≥60 mmHg de l'induction de l'anesthésie à la fin de l'intervention chirurgicale. CADRE: Recrutement à partir de 108 centres dans 22 pays entre 2018 à 2021. SUJETS: Des patients (~6 800) âgés de 45 ans et plus atteints d'athérosclérose, ou présentant un risque de l'être, devant subir une chirurgie non cardiaque et prenant des médicaments antihypertenseurs sur une base régulière. MESURES: Le principal critère d'évaluation de cette sous-étude est une IRA postopératoire définie par une hausse d'au moins 26,5 µmol/L (≥0,3 mg/dL) de la créatinine sérique dans les 48 heures suivant la randomisation ou d'au moins 50 % dans les 7 jours suivant la randomisation. MÉTHODOLOGIE: L'analyse primaire (par intention de traiter) examinera le risque relatif d'une IRA et l'intervalle de confiance à 95 % dans le groupe intervention par rapport au groupe témoin. Nous répéterons l'analyse primaire en utilisant d'autres définitions de l'IRA et nous examinerons la modification de l'effet en présence d'une insuffisance rénale préexistante (définie par un DFGe prérandomisation <60 ml/min/1,73 m2). RÉSULTATS: Les résultats de cette sous-étude seront analysés en 2022. LIMITES: Il n'est pas possible de procéder à l'insu des patients ou des prestataires de soins pour cette intervention; des mesures objectives seront toutefois utilisées pour évaluer l'IRA. CONCLUSION: Cette sous-étude fournira des estimations généralisables de l'effet d'une stratégie visant à éviter l'hypotension périopératoire sur le risque d'insuffisance rénale aiguë.

Effect of volatile anesthetics on myocardial infarction after coronary artery surgery: a post hoc analysis of a randomized trial

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of volatile anesthetics on the rates of postoperative myocardial infarction (MI) and cardiac death after coronary artery bypass graft (CABG). DESIGN: A post hoc analysis of a randomized trial. SETTING: Cardiac surgical operating rooms. PARTICIPANTS: Patients undergoing elective, isolated CABG. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized to receive a volatile anesthetic (desflurane, isoflurane, or sevoflurane) or total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA). The primary outcome was hemodynamically relevant MI (MI requiring high-dose inotropic support or prolonged intensive care unit stay) occurring within 48 hours from surgery. The secondary outcome was 1-year death due to cardiac causes. Measurements and main Results: A total of 5,400 patients were enrolled between April 2014 and September 2017 (2,709 patients randomized to the volatile anesthetics group and 2,691 to TIVA). The mean age was 62 ± 8.4 years, and the median baseline ejection fraction was 57% (50-67), without differences between the 2 groups. Patients in the volatile group had a lower incidence of MI with hemodynamic complications both in the per-protocol (14 of 2,530 [0.6%] v 27 of 2,501 [1.1%] in the TIVA group; p = 0.038) and as-treated analyses (16 of 2,708 [0.6%] v 29 of 2,617 [1.1%] in the TIVA group; p = 0.039), but not in the intention-to-treat analysis (17 of 2,663 [0.6%] v 28 of 2,667 [1.0%] in the TIVA group; p = 0.10). Overall, deaths due to cardiac causes were lower in the volatile group (23 of 2,685 [0.9%] v 40 of 2,668 [1.5%] than in the TIVA group; p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: An anesthetic regimen, including volatile agents, may be associated with a lower rate of postoperative MI with hemodynamic complication in patients undergoing CABG. Furthermore, it may reduce long-term cardiac mortality.

Perioperative Noninvasive Ventilation After Adult or Pediatric Surgery: A Comprehensive Review.

Postoperative pulmonary complications and acute respiratory failure are among the leading causes of adverse postoperative outcomes. Noninvasive ventilation may safely and effectively prevent acute respiratory failure in high-risk patients after cardiothoracic surgery and after abdominal surgery. Moreover, noninvasive ventilation can be used to treat postoperative hypoxemia, particularly after abdominal surgery. Noninvasive ventilation also can be helpful to prevent or manage intraoperative acute respiratory failure during non-general anesthesia, primarily in patients with poor respiratory function. Finally, noninvasive ventilation is superior to standard preoxygenation in delaying desaturation during intubation in morbidly obese and in critically ill hypoxemic patients. The few available studies in children suggest that noninvasive ventilation could be safe and valuable in treating hypoxemic or hypercapnic acute respiratory failure after cardiac surgery; on the other hand, it could be dangerous after tracheoesophageal correction.

Six-Month Quality of Life in COVID-19 Intensive Care Unit Survivors.

OBJECTIVES: Because there is increasing evidence of serious deterioration in long-term quality of life (QoL) in coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) intensive care unit (ICU) survivors, the authors identified predictors of poor quality of life in these patients. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Research hospital repurposed into a COVID-19 center. PARTICIPANTS: Consecutive patients admitted in COVID-19 ICUs between March and June 2020. INTERVENTIONS: An SF-36 questionnaire, which included physical and mental items, was used six months after patient's discharge. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 403 patients were managed in the ICU, with a hospital mortality of 181 of 403 (44.9%), and 16 (4.0%) patients died within six months. Among the 125 questionnaire responders, only 32.0% and 52% had a normal quality of life in terms of the physical and mental component of health. Multivariate analysis identified low-molecular-weight heparin treatment in the ICU as the only modifiable factor associated with an increase in physical component of QoL odds ratio (OR) 3.341 (95% confidence interval 1.298-8.599), p = 0.012, and age ≥52 years OR 0.223 and female sex OR 0.321 were significantly associated with a decrease in the physical component. Medical history of cerebrovascular insufficiency was significantly associated with a decrease in mental component of QoL OR 0.125, and the only factor associated with an increase in the mental health component was body mass index ≥27.6 kg/m2 OR 7.466. CONCLUSIONS: In COVID-19 ICU survivors the authors identified treatment with low- molecular-weight heparin as a predictor of improved physical component of QoL at 6 months.

Efficacy and safety of IL-6 inhibitors in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of multicentre, randomized trials.

PURPOSE: COVID-19 is characterized by dysregulated immune response, respiratory failure and a relevant mortality rate among hospitalized patients. Interleukin-6 (IL-6) is involved in COVID-19-associated cytokine storm, and several trials investigated whether its inhibition could improve patients' outcome. We performed a meta-analysis of randomized trials (RCT) to test this hypothesis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two independent investigators searched PubMed, Scopus, ClnicalTrials.gov and medRxiv up to September 1st, 2021. Inclusion criteria were: administration of tocilizumab or sarilumab; COVID-19 adult patients with pneumonia; and being a RCT. Primary outcome was mortality at the longest follow-up. Secondary outcomes included intubation rate and incidence of adverse events. Two independent investigators extracted data from eligible trials. RESULTS: Of the 763 studies assessed, 15 RCTs were included (9,320 patients), all were multicentre, and the majority open-label vs standard treatment. IL-6 inhibitors were associated with reduced all-cause mortality at the longest follow-up (1315/5,380 [24.4%] in the IL-6 inhibitors group versus 1080/3,814 [28.3%] in the control group, RR = 0.90; 95% CI 0.84 to 0.96; p for effect = 0.003, I2 = 0%, with 13 studies included), with reduction in 28/30-day mortality and intubation rates, and with no increase in adverse events and secondary infections. CONCLUSION: IL-6 inhibitors reduced longest follow-up mortality and intubation in COVID-19 patients. Findings need to be confirmed in high-quality RCTs.

Continuous infusion versus intermittent administration of meropenem in critically ill patients (MERCY): A multicenter randomized double-blind trial. Rationale and design.

OBJECTIVE: Meropenem is a ß-lactam, carbapenem antibacterial agent with antimicrobial activity against gram-negative, gram-positive and anaerobic micro-organisms and is important in the empirical treatment of serious infections in Intensive Care Unit (ICU) patients. Multi-drug resistant gram-negative organisms, coupled with scarcity of new antibiotic classes, forced healthcare community to optimize the therapeutic potential of available antibiotics. Our aim is to investigate the effect of continuous infusion of meropenem against bolus administration, as indicated by a composite outcome of reducing death and emergence of extensive or pan drug-resistant pathogens in a population of ICU patients. DESIGN: Double blind, double dummy, multicenter randomized controlled trial (1:1 allocation ratio). SETTING: Tertiary and University hospitals. INTERVENTIONS: 600 ICU patients with sepsis or septic shock, needing by clinical judgment antibiotic therapy with meropenem, will be randomized to receive a continuous infusion of meropenem 3 g/24 h or an equal dose divided into three daily boluses (i.e. 1g q8h). MEASUREMENTS: The primary endpoint will be a composite outcome of reducing death and emergence of extensive or pan drug-resistant pathogens. Secondary endpoints will be death from any cause at day 90, antibiotic-free days at day 28, ICU-free days at day 28, cumulative SOFA-free (Sequential Organ Failure Assessment) score from randomization to day 28 and the two, separate, components of the primary endpoint. We expect a primary outcome reduction from 52 to 40% in the continuous infusion group. CONCLUSIONS: The trial will provide evidence for choosing intermittent or continuous infusion of meropenem for critically ill patients with multi-drug resistant gram-negative infections.

Anakinra for patients with COVID-19: a meta-analysis of non-randomized cohort studies.

INTRODUCTION: Severe COVID-19 cases have a detrimental hyper-inflammatory host response and different cytokine-blocking biologic agents were explored to improve outcomes. Anakinra blocks the activity of both IL-1α and IL­1ß and is approved for different autoinflammatory disorders, but it is used off-label for conditions characterized by an excess of cytokine production. Several studies on anakinra in COVID-19 patients reported positive effects. We performed a meta-analysis of all published evidence on the use of anakinra in COVID19 to investigate its effect on survival and need for mechanical ventilation. METHODS: We searched for any study performed on adult patients with acute hypoxemic failure related to 2019-nCoV infection, receiving anakinra versus any comparator. Primary endpoint was mortality at the longest available follow-up. Adverse effects, need for mechanical ventilation and discharge at home with no limitations were also analysed. RESULTS: Four observational studies involving 184 patients were included. Overall mortality of patients treated with anakinra was significantly lower than mortality in the control group (95% CI 0.14-0.48, p<0.0001). Moreover, patients treated with anakinra had a significantly lower risk of need for mechanical ventilation than controls (95% CI 0.250.74, p=0.002). No difference in adverse events and discharge at home with no limitations was observed. The Trial Sequential Analysis z-cumulative line reached the monitoring boundary for benefit and the required sample size. CONCLUSIONS: Administration of anakinra in COVID-19 patients was safe and might be associated with reductions in both mortality and need for mechanical ventilation. Randomized clinical trials are warranted to confirm these findings.

Procedural sedation and analgesia for percutaneous high-tech cardiac procedures.

The interest in percutaneous high-tech cardiac procedures has increased in recent years together with its safety and efficacy. In fragile patients, procedural sedation and analgesia are used to perform most of the procedures. General anesthesia remains the technique of choice during the team learning curve and might be required in selected patients or in emergent situations. Despite the high costs of percutaneous high-tech cardiac procedures, the decrease in length of hospital stays, rate of intensive care admission and complications, balance the increase in devices costs. In fragile patients who undergo percutaneous high tech cardiac procedures, the primary role of the anesthesiologist is to prevent the need for postprocedural intensive care unit and complications rate. Starting from the experience of a large university third level hospital we identified the eight most commonly performed contemporary percutaneous high tech cardiac procedures (ventricular tachycardia and atrial fibrillation ablation, protected percutaneous coronary intervention, transcatheter aortic valve implantation, MitraClip® (Abbott Laboratories; Abbott Park, IL, USA), percutaneous patent foramen ovale closure, left atrial appendage closure, and dysfunctional lead extraction), discuss the role of procedural sedation and analgesia in this setting, and explore future perspectives.

Perioperative Dexmedetomidine Supplement Decreases Delirium Incidence After Adult Cardiac Surgery: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Controlled Study.

OBJECTIVE: Conflicting data exist on the effect of dexmedetomidine on delirium. For the present study, a randomized trial was performed to investigate the effect of perioperative dexmedetomidine on the rate of postoperative delirium after cardiac surgery. DESIGN: A randomized controlled trial. SETTING: University hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Patients (n = 169) undergoing elective cardiac surgery (coronary artery bypass graft surgery, valve surgery, or combined surgery) with cardiopulmonary bypass. INTERVENTIONS: Patients received a sevoflurane-based general anesthesia and were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive a dexmedetomidine infusion that started in the operating room (0.7 µg/kg/h) and continued into the intensive care unit (0.4 µg/kg/h) or an equivolume infusion of placebo. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A decrease in the rate of delirium in the dexmedetomidine group compared with the placebo group was demonstrated (6 of 84 [7.1%] v 16 of 85 [18.8%]; p = 0.02; odds ratio [OR] 0.33 [95% confidence interval {CI} 0.12-0.90]). Reduced intensive care unit and hospital lengths of stay also were observed (18 [18-22] hours v 22 [18-39] hours; p = 0.002 and 17 [7-20] days v 19 [8-21] days; p = 0.04, respectively). Mortality at 30 days was 2 (2.4%) in both groups. On multivariate analysis, only dexmedetomidine administration (OR 0.24 [95% CI 0.08-0.74]) and cardiopulmonary bypass time (OR 1.02 [95% CI 1.01-1.03] for increases of 1 min) were independent predictors of delirium development. CONCLUSIONS: Dexmedetomidine administered during and after general anesthesia for cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass decreased the rate of postoperative delirium and intensive care unit and hospital lengths of stay.

Why are Asian countries outperforming the Western world in controlling COVID-19 pandemic?

COVID-19 already caused more than 1,260,000 deaths around the world. However, mortality rates are not equal amongst the different countries. Mortality rates are ranging from less than 1 death per million in Taiwan, Vietnam and Thailand to 1,112 deaths per million in Belgium. In the present article, we report a striking difference in mean per million mortality between Asian and European countries (2.7 vs 197 deaths per million population, p < 0.001). In addition, we confirmed that the later a specific country was hit by the epidemic, the milder the impact on mortality during the first 50 days was. We analyzed several factors that may have contributed to this discrepancy including population age, previous experience of epidemics in the modern era, social acceptance of physical distancing and face masks, percentage of active smokers and lastly genetic prothrombotic mutations.

Corticosteroids for Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) With Different Disease Severity: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.

OBJECTIVES: Efficacy and safety of corticosteroids in patients with 2019-nCoV (novel coronavirus 2019) infection still are debated. Because large randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and a well-conducted meta-analysis on the use of corticosteroids, focused on patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in intensive care units, recently were published, a meta-analysis of RCTs on corticosteroids therapy in patients with different disease severity was performed to evaluate the effect on survival. DESIGN: A meta-analyses of RCTs was performed. SETTING: Patients admitted to hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with coronavirus disease. INTERVENTIONS: Administration of corticosteroids. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A search was performed for RCTs of adult patients with acute hypoxemic failure related to 2019-nCoV infection who received corticosteroids versus any comparator. The primary endpoint was mortality rate. Five RCTs involving 7,692 patients were included. Overall mortality of patients treated with corticosteroids was slightly but significantly lower than mortality of controls (26% v 28%, relative risk {RR} = 0.89 [95% confidence interval {CI} 0.82-0.96], p = 0.003). The same beneficial effect was found in the subgroup of patients requiring mechanical ventilation (RR = 0.85 [95% CI 0.72-1.00], p = 0.05 number needed to treat {NNT} = 19). Remarkably, corticosteroids increased mortality in the subgroup of patients not requiring oxygen (17% v 13%, RR = 1.23 [95% CI 1.00-1.62], p = 0.05 number needed to harm {NNH} = 29). Tests for comparison between mechanically ventilated subgroups and those not requiring oxygen confirmed that treatment with corticosteroids had a statistically significant different effect on survival. Patients treated with corticosteroids had a significantly lower risk of need for mechanical ventilation. CONCLUSIONS: Corticosteroids may be considered in severe critically ill patients with COVID-19 but must be discouraged in patients not requiring oxygen therapy. Urgently, further trials are warranted before implementing this treatment worldwide.

Effects of COVID-19 pandemic on out-of-hospital cardiac arrests: A systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: In addition to the directly attributed mortality, COVID-19 is also likely to increase mortality indirectly. In this systematic review, we investigate the direct and indirect effects of COVID-19 on out-of-hospital cardiac arrests. METHODS: We searched PubMed, BioMedCentral, Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for studies comparing out-of-hospital cardiac arrests occurring during the pandemic and a non-pandemic period. Risk of bias was assessed with the ROBINS-I tool. The primary endpoint was return of spontaneous circulation. Secondary endpoints were bystander-initiated cardiopulmonary resuscitation, survival to hospital discharge, and survival with favourable neurological outcome. RESULTS: We identified six studies. In two studies, rates of return of spontaneous circulation and survival to hospital discharge decreased significantly during the pandemic. Especially in Europe, bystander-witnessed cases, bystander-initiated cardiopulmonary resuscitation and resuscitation attempted by emergency medical services were reduced during the pandemic. Also, ambulance response times were significantly delayed across all studies and patients presenting with non-shockable rhythms increased in two studies. In 2020, 3.9-5.9% of tested patients were SARS-CoV-2 positive and 4.8-26% had suggestive symptoms (fever and cough or dyspnoea). CONCLUSIONS: Out-of-hospital cardiac arrests had worse short-term outcomes during the pandemic than a non-pandemic period suggesting direct effects of COVID-19 infection and indirect effects from lockdown and disruption of healthcare systems. Patients at high risk of deterioration should be identified outside the hospital to promptly initiate treatment and reduce fatalities. Study registration PROSPERO CRD42020195794.

Long-term outcome of perioperative low cardiac output syndrome in cardiac surgery: 1-year results of a multicenter randomized trial.

PURPOSE: Perioperative myocardial dysfunction occurs frequently in cardiac surgery, and is a risk factor for morbidity and mortality. Levosimendan has been suggested to reduce mortality of patients with perioperative myocardial dysfunction. However, long-term outcome data on its efficacy in cardiac surgery are lacking. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Cardiac surgery patients with perioperative myocardial dysfunction were randomized to levosimendan or placebo, in addition to standard inotropic care. One-year mortality data were collected. RESULTS: We randomized 506 patients (248 to levosimendan 258 to placebo). At 1-year follow-up, 41 patients (16.5%) died in the levosimendan group, while 47 (18.3%) died in the placebo group (absolute risk difference -1.8; 95% CI -8.4 to 4.9; P = .60). Female sex, history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, previous myocardial infarction, serum creatinine, hematocrit, mean arterial pressure, and duration of cardiopulmonary bypass were independently associated with 1-year mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Levosimendan administration does not improve 1-year survival in cardiac surgery patients with perioperative myocardial dysfunction. One-year mortality in these patients is 17%. Six predictive factors for long-term mortality were identified. STUDY REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT00994825 (ClinicalTrials.gov).