Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 45
Filtrar
1.
Acute Med Surg ; 8(1): e706, 2021.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34815889

RESUMO

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has spread worldwide since early 2020, and there are still no signs of resolution. The Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock (J-SSCG) 2020 Special Committee created the Japanese rapid/living recommendations on drug management for COVID-19 using the experience of creating the J-SSCG. Methods: The Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to determine the certainty of the evidence and strength of the recommendations. The first edition of this guideline was released on September 9, 2020, and this document is the revised edition (version 4.0; released on September 9, 2021). Clinical questions (CQs) were set for the following seven drugs: favipiravir (CQ1), remdesivir (CQ2), corticosteroids (CQ4), tocilizumab (CQ5), anticoagulants (CQ7), baricitinib (CQ8), and casirivimab/imdevimab (CQ9). Two CQs (hydroxychloroquine [CQ3] and ciclesonide [CQ6]) were retrieved in this updated version. Recommendations: Favipiravir is not suggested for all patients with COVID-19 (GRADE 2C). Remdesivir is suggested for patients with moderate COVID-19 requiring supplemental oxygen/hospitalization (GRADE 2B). Corticosteroids are recommended for patients with moderate COVID-19 requiring supplemental oxygen/hospitalization (GRADE 1B) and for patients with severe COVID-19 requiring mechanical ventilation/intensive care (GRADE 1A); however, their administration is not recommended for patients with mild COVID-19 not requiring supplemental oxygen (GRADE 1B). Tocilizumab is suggested for patients with moderate COVID-19 requiring supplemental oxygen/hospitalization (GRADE 2B). Anticoagulant administration is recommended for patients with moderate COVID-19 requiring supplemental oxygen/hospitalization and patients with severe COVID-19 requiring mechanical ventilation/intensive care (good practice statement). Baricitinib is suggested for patients with moderate COVID-19 requiring supplemental oxygen/hospitalization (GRADE 2C). Casirivimab/imdevimab is recommended for patients with mild COVID-19 not requiring supplemental oxygen (GRADE 1B). We hope that these updated clinical practice guidelines will help medical professionals involved in the care of patients with COVID-19.

2.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 9: CD013335, 2021 09 27.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34596901

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The main goal of enteral nutrition (EN) is to manage malnutrition in order to improve clinical outcomes. However, EN may increase the risks of vomiting or aspiration pneumonia during gastrointestinal dysfunction. Consequently, monitoring of gastric residual volume (GRV), that is, to measure GRV periodically and modulate the speed of enteral feeding according to GRV, has been recommended as a management goal in many intensive care units. Yet, there is a lack of robust evidence that GRV monitoring reduces the level of complications during EN. The best protocol of GRV monitoring is currently unknown, and thus the precise efficacy and safety profiles of GRV monitoring remain to be ascertained. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the efficacy and safety of GRV monitoring during EN. SEARCH METHODS: We searched electronic databases including CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL for relevant studies on 3 May 2021. We also checked reference lists of included studies for additional information and contacted experts in the field. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), randomized cross-over trials, and cluster-RCTs investigating the effects of GRV monitoring during EN. We imposed no restrictions on the language of publication. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened the search results for eligible studies and extracted trial-level information from each included study, including methodology and design, characteristics of study participants, interventions, and outcome measures. We assessed risk of bias for each study using Cochrane's risk of bias tool. We followed guidance from the GRADE framework to assess the overall certainty of evidence across outcomes. We used a random-effects analytical model to perform quantitative synthesis of the evidence. We calculated risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for dichotomous and mean difference (MD) with 95% CIs for continuous outcomes. MAIN RESULTS: We included eight studies involving 1585 participants. All studies were RCTs conducted in ICU settings. Two studies (417 participants) compared less-frequent (less than eight hours) monitoring of GRV against a regimen of more-frequent (eight hours or greater) monitoring. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of frequent monitoring of GRV on mortality rate (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.37; I² = 8%; very low-certainty evidence), incidence of pneumonia (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.83; heterogeneity not applicable; very low-certainty evidence), length of hospital stay (MD 2.00 days, 95% CI -2.15 to 6.15; heterogeneity not applicable; very low-certainty evidence), and incidence of vomiting (RR 0.14, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.09; heterogeneity not applicable; very low-certainty evidence). Two studies (500 participants) compared no GRV monitoring with frequent (12 hours or less) monitoring. Similarly, the evidence is very uncertain about the effect of no monitoring of GRV on mortality rate (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.23; I² = 51%; very low-certainty evidence), incidence of pneumonia (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.13; heterogeneity not applicable; very low-certainty evidence), length of hospital stay (MD -1.53 days, 95% CI -4.47 to 1.40; I² = 0%; very low-certainty evidence), and incidence of vomiting (RR 1.47, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.93; I² = 0%; very low-certainty evidence). One study (322 participants) assessed the impact of GRV threshold (500 mL per six hours) on clinical outcomes. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of the threshold for GRV at time of aspiration on mortality rate (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.38; heterogeneity not applicable; very low-certainty evidence), incidence of pneumonia (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.46; heterogeneity not applicable; very low-certainty evidence), and length of hospital stay (MD -0.90 days, 95% CI -2.60 to 4.40; heterogeneity not applicable; very low-certainty evidence). Two studies (140 participants) explored the effects of returning or discarding the aspirated/drained GRV. The evidence is uncertain about the effect of discarding or returning the aspirated/drained GRV on the incidence of vomiting (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.06 to 15.63; heterogeneity not applicable; very low-certainty evidence) and volume aspirated from the stomach (MD -7.30 mL, 95% CI -26.67 to 12.06, I² = 0%; very low-certainty evidence) We found no studies comparing the effects of protocol-based EN strategies that included GRV-related criteria against strategies that did not include such criteria. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of GRV on clinical outcomes including mortality, pneumonia, vomiting, and length of hospital stay.


Assuntos
Nutrição Enteral , Unidades de Terapia Intensiva , Nutrição Enteral/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Tempo de Internação , Volume Residual , Estômago
3.
Acute Med Surg ; 8(1): e659, 2021.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34484801

RESUMO

The Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock 2020 (J-SSCG 2020), a Japanese-specific set of clinical practice guidelines for sepsis and septic shock created as revised from J-SSCG 2016 jointly by the Japanese Society of Intensive Care Medicine and the Japanese Association for Acute Medicine, was first released in September 2020 and published in February 2021. An English-language version of these guidelines was created based on the contents of the original Japanese-language version. The purpose of this guideline is to assist medical staff in making appropriate decisions to improve the prognosis of patients undergoing treatment for sepsis and septic shock. We aimed to provide high-quality guidelines that are easy to use and understand for specialists, general clinicians, and multidisciplinary medical professionals. J-SSCG 2016 took up new subjects that were not present in SSCG 2016 (e.g., ICU-acquired weakness [ICU-AW], post-intensive care syndrome [PICS], and body temperature management). The J-SSCG 2020 covered a total of 22 areas with four additional new areas (patient- and family-centered care, sepsis treatment system, neuro-intensive treatment, and stress ulcers). A total of 118 important clinical issues (clinical questions, CQs) were extracted regardless of the presence or absence of evidence. These CQs also include those that have been given particular focus within Japan. This is a large-scale guideline covering multiple fields; thus, in addition to the 25 committee members, we had the participation and support of a total of 226 members who are professionals (physicians, nurses, physiotherapists, clinical engineers, and pharmacists) and medical workers with a history of sepsis or critical illness. The GRADE method was adopted for making recommendations, and the modified Delphi method was used to determine recommendations by voting from all committee members. As a result, 79 GRADE-based recommendations, 5 Good Practice Statements (GPS), 18 expert consensuses, 27 answers to background questions (BQs), and summaries of definitions and diagnosis of sepsis were created as responses to 118 CQs. We also incorporated visual information for each CQ according to the time course of treatment, and we will also distribute this as an app. The J-SSCG 2020 is expected to be widely used as a useful bedside guideline in the field of sepsis treatment both in Japan and overseas involving multiple disciplines.

4.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 9: CD013330, 2021 09 14.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34519356

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a common complication amongst people who are critically ill, and it is associated with an increased risk of death. For people with severe AKI, continuous kidney replacement therapy (CKRT), which is delivered over 24 hours, is needed when they become haemodynamically unstable. When CKRT is interrupted due to clotting of the extracorporeal circuit, the delivered dose is decreased and thus leading to undertreatment. OBJECTIVES: This review assessed the efficacy of non-pharmacological measures to maintain circuit patency in CKRT. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 25 January 2021 which includes records identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal, and ClinicalTrials.gov. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) (parallel-group and cross-over studies), cluster RCTs and quasi-RCTs that examined non-pharmacological interventions to prevent clotting of extracorporeal circuits during CKRT.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three pairs of review authors independently extracted information including participants, interventions/comparators, outcomes, study methods, and risk of bias. The primary outcomes were circuit lifespan and death due to any cause at day 28. We used a random-effects model to perform quantitative synthesis (meta-analysis). We assessed risk of bias in included studies using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias. Summary estimates of effect were obtained using a random-effects model, and results were expressed as risk ratios (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous outcomes, and mean difference (MD) and 95% CI for continuous outcomes. Confidence in the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. MAIN RESULTS: A total of 20 studies involving 1143 randomised participants were included in the review. The methodological quality of the included studies was low, mainly due to the unclear randomisation process and blinding of the intervention. We found evidence on the following 11 comparisons: (i) continuous venovenous haemodialysis (CVVHD) versus continuous venovenous haemofiltration (CVVH) or continuous venovenous haemodiafiltration (CVVHDF); (ii) CVVHDF versus CVVH; (iii) higher blood flow (≥ 250 mL/minute) versus standard blood flow (< 250 mL/minute); (iv) AN69 membrane (AN69ST) versus other membranes; (v) pre-dilution versus post-dilution; (vi) a longer catheter (> 20 cm) placing the tip targeting the right atrium versus a shorter catheter (≤ 20 cm) placing the tip in the superior vena cava; (vii) surface-modified double-lumen catheter versus standard double-lumen catheter with identical geometry and flow design; (viii) single-site infusion anticoagulation versus double-site infusion anticoagulation; (ix) flat plate filter versus hollow fibre filter of the same membrane type; (x) a filter with a larger membrane surface area versus a smaller one; and (xi) a filter with more and shorter hollow fibre versus a standard filter of the same membrane type. Circuit lifespan was reported in 9 comparisons. Low certainty evidence indicated that CVVHDF (versus CVVH: MD 10.15 hours, 95% CI 5.15 to 15.15; 1 study, 62 circuits), pre-dilution haemofiltration (versus post-dilution haemofiltration: MD 9.34 hours, 95% CI -2.60 to 21.29; 2 studies, 47 circuits; I² = 13%), placing the tip of a longer catheter targeting the right atrium (versus placing a shorter catheter targeting the tip in the superior vena cava: MD 6.50 hours, 95% CI 1.48 to 11.52; 1 study, 420 circuits), and surface-modified double-lumen catheter (versus standard double-lumen catheter: MD 16.00 hours, 95% CI 13.49 to 18.51; 1 study, 262 circuits) may prolong circuit lifespan. However, higher blood flow may not increase circuit lifespan (versus standard blood flow: MD 0.64, 95% CI -3.37 to 4.64; 2 studies, 499 circuits; I² = 70%). More and shorter hollow fibre filters (versus standard filters: MD -5.87 hours, 95% CI -10.18 to -1.56; 1 study, 6 circuits) may reduce circuit lifespan. Death from any cause was reported in four comparisons We are uncertain whether CVVHDF versus CVVH, CVVHD versus CVVH or CVVHDF, longer versus a shorter catheter, or surface-modified double-lumen catheters versus standard double-lumen catheters reduced death due to any cause, in very low certainty evidence. Recovery of kidney function was reported in three comparisons. We are uncertain whether CVVHDF versus CVVH, CVVHDF versus CVVH, or surface-modified double-lumen catheters versus standard double-lumen catheters increased recovery of kidney function. Vascular access complications were reported in two comparisons. Low certainty evidence indicated using a longer catheter (versus a shorter catheter: RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.74) may reduce vascular access complications, however the use of surface-modified double lumen catheters versus standard double-lumen catheters may make little or no difference to vascular access complications. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The use of CVVHDF as compared with CVVH, pre-dilution haemofiltration, a longer catheter, and surface-modified double-lumen catheter may be useful in prolonging the circuit lifespan, while higher blood flow and more and shorter hollow fibre filter may reduce circuit life. The Overall, the certainty of evidence was assessed to be low to very low due to the small sample size of the included studies. Data from future rigorous and transparent research are much needed in order to fully understand the effects of non-pharmacological interventions in preventing circuit coagulation amongst people with AKI receiving CKRT.


Assuntos
Injúria Renal Aguda , Terapia de Substituição Renal Contínua , Injúria Renal Aguda/prevenção & controle , Coagulação Sanguínea , Humanos , Rim , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto
5.
J Intensive Care ; 9(1): 53, 2021 Aug 25.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34433491

RESUMO

The Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock 2020 (J-SSCG 2020), a Japanese-specific set of clinical practice guidelines for sepsis and septic shock created as revised from J-SSCG 2016 jointly by the Japanese Society of Intensive Care Medicine and the Japanese Association for Acute Medicine, was first released in September 2020 and published in February 2021. An English-language version of these guidelines was created based on the contents of the original Japanese-language version. The purpose of this guideline is to assist medical staff in making appropriate decisions to improve the prognosis of patients undergoing treatment for sepsis and septic shock. We aimed to provide high-quality guidelines that are easy to use and understand for specialists, general clinicians, and multidisciplinary medical professionals. J-SSCG 2016 took up new subjects that were not present in SSCG 2016 (e.g., ICU-acquired weakness [ICU-AW], post-intensive care syndrome [PICS], and body temperature management). The J-SSCG 2020 covered a total of 22 areas with four additional new areas (patient- and family-centered care, sepsis treatment system, neuro-intensive treatment, and stress ulcers). A total of 118 important clinical issues (clinical questions, CQs) were extracted regardless of the presence or absence of evidence. These CQs also include those that have been given particular focus within Japan. This is a large-scale guideline covering multiple fields; thus, in addition to the 25 committee members, we had the participation and support of a total of 226 members who are professionals (physicians, nurses, physiotherapists, clinical engineers, and pharmacists) and medical workers with a history of sepsis or critical illness. The GRADE method was adopted for making recommendations, and the modified Delphi method was used to determine recommendations by voting from all committee members.As a result, 79 GRADE-based recommendations, 5 Good Practice Statements (GPS), 18 expert consensuses, 27 answers to background questions (BQs), and summaries of definitions and diagnosis of sepsis were created as responses to 118 CQs. We also incorporated visual information for each CQ according to the time course of treatment, and we will also distribute this as an app. The J-SSCG 2020 is expected to be widely used as a useful bedside guideline in the field of sepsis treatment both in Japan and overseas involving multiple disciplines.

6.
Acute Med Surg ; : e664, 2021 May 04.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34178358

RESUMO

The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has spread worldwide since early 2020, and there are still no signs of resolution. The Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock (J-SSCG) 2020 Special Committee created the Japanese Rapid/Living recommendations on drug management for COVID-19 using the experience of creating the J-SSCGs. The Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to determine the certainty of the evidence and strength of the recommendations. The first edition of this guideline was released on September 9, 2020, and this document is the revised edition (ver. 3.1) (released on March 30, 2021). Clinical questions (CQs) were set for the following seven drugs: favipiravir (CQ1), remdesivir (CQ-2), hydroxychloroquine (CQ-3), corticosteroids (CQ-4), tocilizumab (CQ-5), ciclesonide (CQ-6), and anticoagulants (CQ-7). Favipiravir is recommended for patients with mild COVID-19 not requiring supplemental oxygen (GRADE 2C); remdesivir for moderate COVID-19 patients requiring supplemental oxygen/hospitalization (GRADE 2B); hydroxychloroquine is not recommended for all COVID-19 patients (GRADE 1B); corticosteroids are recommended for moderate COVID-19 patients requiring supplemental oxygen/hospitalization (GRADE 1B) and severe COVID-19 patients requiring ventilator management/intensive care (GRADE 1A); however, their administration is not recommended for mild COVID-19 patients not requiring supplemental oxygen (GRADE 1B); tocilizumab is recommended for moderate COVID-19 patients requiring supplemental oxygen/hospitalization (GRADE 2B); and anticoagulant therapy for moderate COVID-19 patients requiring supplemental oxygen/hospitalization and severe COVID-19 patients requiring ventilator management/intensive care (GRADE 2C). We hope that these clinical practice guidelines will aid medical professionals involved in the care of COVID-19 patients.

7.
Pancreas ; 50(3): 371-377, 2021 03 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33835968

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: In patients with severe acute pancreatitis (SAP), early enteral nutrition (EN) is recommended by major clinical practice guidelines, but the exact timing for the initiation of EN is unknown. METHODS: We conducted a post hoc analysis of the database for a multicenter (44 institutions) retrospective study of patients with SAP in Japan. The patients were classified into 3 groups according to the timing of EN initiation after the diagnosis of SAP: within 24 hours, between 24 and 48 hours, and more than 48 hours. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: Of the 1094 study patients, 176, 120, and 798 patients started EN within 24 hours, between 24 and 48 hours, and more than 48 hours after SAP diagnosis, respectively. On multivariable analysis, hospital mortality was significantly better with EN within 48 hours than with more than 48 hours (adjusted odds ratio, 0.49; 95% confidence interval, 0.29-0.83; P < 0.001) but did not significantly differ between the groups with EN starting within 24 hours and between 24 and 48 hours (P = 0.29). CONCLUSIONS: Enteral nutrition within 24 hours may not confer any additional benefit on clinical outcomes compared with EN between 24 and 48 hours.

8.
Crit Care ; 25(1): 135, 2021 04 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33836812

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: High-flow nasal cannula oxygenation (HFNC) and noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation (NPPV) possibly decrease tracheal reintubation rates better than conventional oxygen therapy (COT); however, few large-scale studies have compared HFNC and NPPV. We conducted a network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare the effectiveness of three post-extubation respiratory support devices (HFNC, NPPV, and COT) in reducing the mortality and reintubation risk. METHODS: The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Ichushi databases were searched. COT, NPPV, and HFNC use were assessed in patients who were aged ≥ 16 years, underwent invasive mechanical ventilation for > 12 h for acute respiratory failure, and were scheduled for extubation after spontaneous breathing trials. The GRADE Working Group Approach was performed using a frequentist-based approach with multivariate random-effect meta-analysis. Short-term mortality and reintubation and post-extubation respiratory failure rates were compared. RESULTS: After evaluating 4631 records, 15 studies and 2600 patients were included. The main cause of acute hypoxic respiratory failure was pneumonia. Although NPPV/HFNC use did not significantly lower the mortality risk (relative risk [95% confidence interval] 0.75 [0.53-1.06] and 0.92 [0.67-1.27]; low and moderate certainty, respectively), HFNC use significantly lowered the reintubation risk (0.54 [0.32-0.89]; high certainty) compared to COT use. The associations of mortality with NPPV and HFNC use with respect to either outcome did not differ significantly (short-term mortality and reintubation, relative risk [95% confidence interval] 0.81 [0.61-1.08] and 1.02 [0.53-1.97]; moderate and very low certainty, respectively). CONCLUSION: NPPV or HFNC use may not reduce the risk of short-term mortality; however, they may reduce the risk of endotracheal reintubation. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER AND DATE OF REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42020139112, 01/21/2020).


Assuntos
Extubação/métodos , Oxigenoterapia/normas , Insuficiência Respiratória/terapia , Extubação/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Oxigenoterapia/métodos , Insuficiência Respiratória/fisiopatologia , Desmame do Respirador/métodos
9.
J Intensive Care ; 9(1): 32, 2021 Apr 12.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33845916

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Noninvasive respiratory support devices may reduce the tracheal intubation rate compared with conventional oxygen therapy (COT). To date, few studies have compared high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) use with noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation (NPPV). We conducted a network meta-analysis to compare the effectiveness of three respiratory support devices in patients with acute respiratory failure. METHODS: The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Ichushi databases were searched. Studies including adults aged ≥ 16 years with acute hypoxic respiratory failure and randomized-controlled trials that compared two different oxygenation devices (COT, NPPV, or HFNC) before tracheal intubation were included. A frequentist-based approach with a multivariate random-effects meta-analysis was used. The network meta-analysis was performed using the GRADE Working Group approach. The outcomes were short-term mortality and intubation rate. RESULTS: Among 5507 records, 27 studies (4618 patients) were included. The main cause of acute hypoxic respiratory failure was pneumonia. Compared with COT, NPPV and HFNC use tended to reduce mortality (relative risk, 0.88 and 0.93, respectively; 95% confidence intervals, 0.76-1.01 and 0.80-1.08, respectively; both low certainty) and lower the risk of endotracheal intubation (0.81 and 0.78; 0.72-0.91 and 0.68-0.89, respectively; both low certainty); however, short-term mortality or intubation rates did not differ (0.94 and 1.04, respectively; 0.78-1.15 and 0.88-1.22, respectively; both low certainty) between NPPV and HFNC use. CONCLUSION: NPPV and HFNC use are associated with a decreased risk of endotracheal intubation; however, there are no significant differences in short-term mortality. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42020139105 , 01/21/2020).

10.
J Clin Med Res ; 13(1): 48-63, 2021 Jan.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33613800

RESUMO

Background: The effects of plateau pressure during the initial days of mechanical ventilation on outcomes for patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome have not been fully examined. We conducted meta-regression analysis of plateau pressure during the first 7 days using randomized control trials to investigate the optimal upper limits of plateau pressure on different days of mechanical ventilation. Methods: Randomized controlled trials comparing two mechanical ventilation strategies with lower and higher plateau pressures in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome were included. Meta-regression analysis was performed to determine the association of plateau pressure with mortality on days 1, 3, and 7 of mechanical ventilation. Results: After evaluation of 2,975 citations from a comprehensive search across electronic databases, 14 studies were included in the final qualitative analysis. A total of 4,984 patients were included in the quantitative analysis. As a result of the pairwise comparison, overall short-term mortality was significantly higher for patients with plateau pressures over 32 cm H2O during the first 3 days after intensive care unit (ICU) admission (day 1: relative risk (RR), 0.77; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.66 - 0.89; I2 = 0%; day 3: RR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.64 - 0.90; I2 = 0%), but not on day 7 (RR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.65 - 1.04; I2 = 16%). Plateau pressures below 27 cm H2O and 30 cm H2O were not associated with an absolute risk reduction of short-term mortality. According to univariable meta-regression analysis, mortality was significantly associated with plateau pressure on day 1 (ß = 0.01 (95% CI, 0.002 - 0.024), P = 0.02). On days 3 and 7, however, no significant difference was detected. When the cutoffs were set at 27, 30 and 32 cm H2O on day 1, which showed a significant difference, plateau pressure tended to be associated with increased mortality at pressures above the cut-off values, and there were no significant differences at pressures below the cut-off values, regardless of the cutoff used. Conclusions: This study suggests that the optimal cut-off value for plateau pressure may be 27 cm H2O especially during the initial period of mechanical ventilation, although this association may not continue during the latter period of mechanical ventilation.

11.
J Intensive Care ; 9(1): 3, 2021 Jan 06.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33407891

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The lack of precise information on the epidemiology of peripheral intravascular catheter (PIVC)-related phlebitis and complications in critically ill patients results in the absence of appropriate preventive measures. Therefore, we aimed to describe the epidemiology of the use of PIVCs and the incidence/occurrence of phlebitis and complications in the intensive care unit (ICU). METHODS: This prospective multicenter cohort study was conducted in 23 ICUs in Japan. All consecutive patients aged ≥ 18 years admitted to the ICU were enrolled. PIVCs inserted prior to ICU admission and those newly inserted after ICU admission were included in the analysis. Characteristics of the ICU, patients, and PIVCs were recorded. The primary and secondary outcomes were the occurrence and incidence rate of PIVC-related phlebitis and complications (catheter-related blood stream infection [CRBSI] and catheter failure) during the ICU stay. RESULTS: We included 2741 patients and 7118 PIVCs, of which 48.2% were inserted in the ICU. PIVC-related phlebitis occurred in 7.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] 6.9-8.2%) of catheters (3.3 cases / 100 catheter-days) and 12.9% (95% CI 11.7-14.2%) of patients (6.3 cases / 100 catheter-days). Most PIVCs were removed immediately after diagnosis of phlebitis (71.9%). Grade 1 was the most common phlebitis (72.6%), while grade 4 was the least common (1.5%). The incidence rate of CRBSI was 0.8% (95% CI 0.4-1.2%). In cases of catheter failure, the proportion and incidence rate per 100 intravenous catheter-days of catheter failure were 21% (95% CI 20.0-21.9%) and 9.1 (95% CI 8.7-10.0), respectively. CONCLUSION: PIVC-related phlebitis and complications were common in critically ill patients. The results suggest the importance of preventing PIVC-related complications, even in critically ill patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: UMIN-CTR, the Japanese clinical trial registry (registration number: UMIN000028019 , July 1, 2017).

12.
Acute Med Surg ; 7(1): e561, 2020.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32999728

RESUMO

Aim: Sepsis treatment has been standardized in many countries worldwide. However, treatment of sepsis in Japan has developed independently, and how Japanese physicians actually treat sepsis patients nationwide remains uninvestigated. The aim of this study was to clarify the current practice for septic patients in Japan and how it differs from standard care throughout the world. Methods: This study was designed as a prospective, cross-sectional, self-reported questionnaire- and Web-based electronic survey in Japan. The survey was undertaken to assess respondents' clinical practices and preferences regarding treatment strategies, sepsis assessment, and management in the setting of critical illness. An exploratory factor analysis and a hierarchical cluster analysis were carried out to identify the treatments distinctive to Japan, called "Galápagos therapies". Results: The final analysis included 295 respondents. According to the factor analysis, we defined anticoagulant therapy for disseminated intravascular coagulation, antimediator renal replacement therapy, and others as Galápagos therapies. These Galápagos therapies were undertaken by approximately two-thirds of the Japanese physicians who responded. We classified Japanese physicians according to three patterns of clinical practice carried out for sepsis: (i) those who do not perform Galápagos therapies but do perform worldwide standardized care, (ii) those who perform Galápagos therapies on top of worldwide standardized care, (iii) those who do not perform worldwide standardized care. Conclusion: On the basis of a nationwide questionnaire-based survey in Japan, we clarified distinctive sepsis treatments performed in Japan, such as antimediator renal replacement therapy and treatment for sepsis-induced disseminated intravascular coagulation.

13.
J Intensive Care ; 8: 61, 2020.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32817796

RESUMO

Background: Intracranial pressure control has long been recognized as an important requirement for patients with severe traumatic brain injury. Hypertonic saline has drawn attention as an alternative to mannitol in this setting. The aim of this study was to assess the effects of hypertonic saline versus mannitol on clinical outcomes in patients with traumatic brain injury in prehospital, emergency department, and intensive care unit settings by systematically reviewing the literature and synthesizing the evidence from randomized controlled trials. Methods: We searched the MEDLINE database, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the Igaku Chuo Zasshi (ICHUSHI) Web database with no date restrictions. We selected randomized controlled trials in which the clinical outcomes of adult patients with traumatic brain injury were compared between hypertonic saline and mannitol strategies. Two investigators independently screened the search results and conducted the data extraction. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. The secondary outcomes were 90-day and 180-day mortality, good neurological outcomes, reduction in intracranial pressure, and serum sodium level. Random effects estimators with weights calculated by the inverse variance method were used to determine the pooled risk ratios. Results: A total of 125 patients from four randomized trials were included, and all the studies were conducted in the intensive care unit. Among 105 patients from three trials that evaluated the primary outcome, 50 patients were assigned to the hypertonic saline group and 55 patients were assigned to the mannitol group. During the observation period, death was observed for 16 patients in the hypertonic saline group (32.0%) and 21 patients in the mannitol group (38.2%). The risks were not significant between the two infusion strategies (pooled risk ratio, 0.82; 95% confidence interval, 0.49-1.37). There were also no significant differences between the two groups in the other secondary outcomes. However, the certainty of the evidence was rated very low for all outcomes. Conclusions: Our findings revealed no significant difference in the all-cause mortality rates between patients receiving hypertonic saline or mannitol to control intracranial pressure. Further investigation is warranted because we only included a limited number of studies.

14.
Pancreatology ; 20(3): 307-317, 2020 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32198057

RESUMO

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) has a high mortality rate despite ongoing attempts to improve prognosis through a various therapeutic modalities. This study aimed to delineate etiology-based routes that may guide clinical decisions for the treatment of SAP. METHODS: Using data from a recent retrospective multicenter study in Japan, we analyzed the association between clinical outcomes, mainly in-hospital mortality and pancreatic infection, and various etiologies while considering confounding factors. We performed additional multivariate analyses and built decision tree models. RESULTS: The 1097 participating patients were classified into the following groups by etiology: alcohol (n = 436, 39.7%); cholelithiasis (n = 230, 21.0%); idiopathic (n = 227, 20.7%); and others (n = 204, 18.6%). Mortality at hospital discharge was 8.4%, 12.2%, 16.7%, and 16.2% in the alcohol, cholelithiasis, idiopathic, and others groups, respectively. According to multivariable analysis, early enteral nutrition (EN) was significantly associated with reduced in-hospital mortality only in the cholelithiasis group. However, there was a consistent association between age and the need for mechanical ventilation and increased mortality, regardless of etiology. Our decision tree models presented different contributing factors depending on the etiology and patient background. Interaction analysis showed that EN and the use of prophylactic antibiotics may influence these results differently according to etiology. CONCLUSIONS: No study has yet used comprehensive models to investigate etiology-related prognostic factors for SAP; our results can, therefore, be used as a reference for improving clinical decisions.


Assuntos
Pancreatite/etiologia , Pancreatite/mortalidade , Adulto , Fatores Etários , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Colelitíase/complicações , Colelitíase/mortalidade , Nutrição Enteral , Feminino , Mortalidade Hospitalar , Humanos , Japão/epidemiologia , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Pancreatite Alcoólica/mortalidade , Prognóstico , Respiração Artificial , Estudos Retrospectivos , Resultado do Tratamento
15.
Acute Med Surg ; 7(1): e468, 2020.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31988780

RESUMO

Aim: An index that accurately measures intravascular volume is paramount for the optimal resuscitation of sepsis. Selecting an adequate indicator to substitute for central venous pressure (CVP) has remained an issue. The objective of our study was to compare the usefulness of standard early goal-directed therapy (EGDT) with CVP (EGDT-CVP) and modified EGDT with global end-diastolic volume index (GEDI; EGDT-GEDI) for sepsis. Methods: This was a multicenter prospective randomized controlled study. All patients with sepsis who were expected to require mechanical ventilator support for a minimum of 48 h were included. The patients were classified into an EGDT-CVP group and an EGDT-GEDI group. All participants underwent the extubation protocol. The primary outcome was the ventilator-free days over a 28-day period. Results: The ventilator-free days was not significantly different between the two groups (P = 0.59). However, the EGDT-GEDI group showed a trend of shorter ventilator support duration (5.1 days [2.0-8.7 days] versus 3.9 days [2.4-5.7 days], P = 0.27) and length of stay in the intensive care unit (7.2 days [3.8-10.7 days] versus 5.1 days [3.7-8.8 days], P = 0.05) and a smaller 3-day infusion balance than the EGDT-CVP group (4,405 mL [1,092-8,163 mL] versus 3,046 mL [830-6,806 mL], P = 0.34), but the differences were not statistically significant. Conclusion: Although there was no significant efficacy, EGDT guided by GEDI showed a trend of shorter length of stay in the intensive care unit and lower 3-day infusion balance than the EGDT-CVP group in sepsis. The GEDI monitoring did not appear to improve the ventilator-free days over a 28-day period.

16.
J Gastrointest Surg ; 24(9): 2037-2045, 2020 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31428962

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Infected acute necrotic collections (ANC) and walled-off necrosis (WON) of the pancreas are associated with high mortality. The difference in mortality between open necrosectomy and minimally invasive therapies in these patients remains unclear. METHODS: This retrospective multicenter cohort study was conducted among 44 institutions in Japan from 2009 to 2013. Patients who had undergone invasive treatment for suspected infected ANC/WON were enrolled and classified into open necrosectomy and minimally invasive treatment (laparoscopic, percutaneous, and endoscopic) groups. The association of each treatment with mortality was evaluated and compared. RESULTS: Of 1159 patients with severe acute pancreatitis, 122 with suspected infected ANC or WON underwent the following treatments: open necrosectomy (33) and minimally invasive treatment (89), (laparoscopic three, percutaneous 49, endoscopic 37). Although the open necrosectomy group had a significantly higher mortality on univariate analysis (p = 0.047), multivariate analysis showed no significant associations between open necrosectomy or Charlson index and mortality (p = 0.29, p = 0.19, respectively). However, age (for each additional 10 years, p = 0.012, odds ratio [OR] 1.50, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.09-2.06) and revised Atlanta criteria-severe (p = 0.001, OR 7.84, 95% CI 2.40-25.6) were significantly associated with mortality. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with acute pancreatitis and infected ANC/WON, age and revised Atlanta criteria-severe classification are significantly associated with mortality whereas open necrosectomy is not. The mortality risk for patients undergoing open necrosectomy and minimally invasive treatment does not differ significantly. Although minimally invasive surgery is generally preferred for patients with infected ANC/WON, open necrosectomy may be considered if clinically indicated.


Assuntos
Pancreatite Necrosante Aguda , Doença Aguda , Estudos de Coortes , Drenagem , Humanos , Japão/epidemiologia , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Minimamente Invasivos , Pancreatite Necrosante Aguda/cirurgia , Estudos Retrospectivos , Resultado do Tratamento
17.
Pancreas ; 48(4): 537-543, 2019 04.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30946245

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: Antimicrobial prophylaxis is not generally recommended for patients with severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) owing to the limited clinical benefits. Nonetheless, it is frequently administered in actual practice given the patients' critical condition and the lack of solid evidence showing adverse effects of antimicrobial prophylaxis. We evaluated herein an association between antimicrobial prophylaxis and invasive pancreatic candidiasis as an adverse effect in patients with SAP. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of all consecutive patients with SAP who were admitted to the study institutions (n = 44) between January 1, 2009, and December 31, 2013. We performed multivariable logistic regression analysis adjusting for the extent of pancreatic necrosis and surgical interventions for invasive pancreatic candidiasis. RESULTS: Of the 1097 patients with SAP, 850 (77.5%) received antimicrobial prophylaxis, and 21 (1.9%) had invasive pancreatic candidiasis. In multivariable logistic regression analysis, antimicrobial prophylaxis was significantly associated with the development of invasive pancreatic candidiasis (adjusted odds ratio, 4.23; 95% confidence interval, 1.14-27.6) (P = 0.029). CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that antimicrobial prophylaxis may contribute to the development of invasive pancreatic candidiasis, and therefore, the routine use of antimicrobial prophylaxis for SAP may be discouraged.


Assuntos
Antibacterianos/uso terapêutico , Antibioticoprofilaxia/métodos , Candidíase Invasiva/diagnóstico , Pancreatite/tratamento farmacológico , Doença Aguda , Adulto , Idoso , Antibacterianos/efeitos adversos , Antibioticoprofilaxia/efeitos adversos , Candidíase Invasiva/etiologia , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Avaliação de Resultados em Cuidados de Saúde/métodos , Avaliação de Resultados em Cuidados de Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Pancreatite/microbiologia , Pancreatite/patologia , Pancreatite Necrosante Aguda/tratamento farmacológico , Pancreatite Necrosante Aguda/microbiologia , Pancreatite Necrosante Aguda/patologia , Estudos Retrospectivos , Índice de Gravidade de Doença
18.
J Clin Gastroenterol ; 53(5): 385-391, 2019.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29688917

RESUMO

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Although fluid resuscitation is critical in acute pancreatitis, the optimal fluid volume is unknown. The aim of this study is to evaluate the association between the volume of fluid administered and clinical outcomes in patients with severe acute pancreatitis (SAP). METHODS: We conducted a multicenter retrospective study at 44 institutions in Japan. Inclusion criteria were age 18 years or older, and diagnosed with SAP from 2009 to 2013. Patients were stratified into 2 groups: administered fluid volume <6000 and ≥6000 mL in the first 24 hours. We evaluated the association between the 2 groups and clinical outcomes using multivariable logistic regression analysis. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of pancreatic infection and the need for surgical intervention. RESULTS: We analyzed 1097 patients, and the mean fluid volume administered was 5618±3018 mL (mean±SD), with 708 and 389 patients stratified into the fluid <6000 mL and fluid ≥6000 mL groups, respectively. Overall in-hospital mortality was 12.3%. The fluid ≥6000 mL group had significantly higher mortality than the fluid <6000 mL group (univariable analysis, 15.9% vs. 10.3%; P<0.05). In multivariable logistic regression analysis, administration of ≥6000 mL of fluid within the first 24 hours was significantly associated with reduced mortality (odds ratio, 0.58; P<0.05). No significant association was found between the administered fluid volume and pancreatic infection, or between the volume administered and the need for surgical intervention. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with SAP, administration of a large fluid volume within the first 24 hours is associated with decreased mortality.


Assuntos
Hidratação , Pancreatite/terapia , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Feminino , Humanos , Japão , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Pancreatite/mortalidade , Sistema de Registros , Estudos Retrospectivos , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Análise de Sobrevida , Adulto Jovem
19.
Thromb Res ; 171: 136-142, 2018 11.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30312798

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: The benefits and harm caused by anticoagulant treatments for sepsis induced disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) remain unclear. Therefore, we performed a network meta-analysis to assess the effect of available anticoagulant treatments on patient mortality, DIC resolution and the incidence of bleeding complication in patients with septic DIC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We considered all studies from four recent systematic reviews and searched the PubMed, MEDLINE, and Cochrane databases for other studies that investigated anticoagulant treatment for septic DIC using antithrombin, thrombomodulin, heparin, or protease inhibitors in adult critically ill patients. These four anticoagulants and placebo were compared. The primary outcome in this study was patient mortality, and the secondary outcomes were the DIC resolution rate and incidence of bleeding complications. RESULTS: The network meta-analysis included 1340 patients from nine studies. There were no significant differences in the risks of mortality and bleeding complications among all direct comparisons and the network meta-analysis. Using a placebo was associated with a significantly lower rate of DIC resolution, compared to antithrombin in the direct comparison (odds ratio [OR]: 0.20, 95% credible interval [95% CrI]: 0.046-0.81) and in the network meta-analysis (OR: 0.20, 95% CrI: 0.043-0.84). CONCLUSIONS: Our study revealed no significant differences in the risks for mortality and bleeding complications when a placebo and all four anticoagulants were compared in septic DIC patients. The results also indicated that antithrombin was associated with a five-fold higher likelihood of DIC resolution, compared to placebo.


Assuntos
Anticoagulantes/uso terapêutico , Coagulação Intravascular Disseminada/tratamento farmacológico , Coagulação Intravascular Disseminada/etiologia , Sepse/complicações , Adulto , Idoso , Anticoagulantes/efeitos adversos , Antitrombinas/efeitos adversos , Antitrombinas/uso terapêutico , Estado Terminal/epidemiologia , Estado Terminal/mortalidade , Coagulação Intravascular Disseminada/mortalidade , Feminino , Hemorragia/induzido quimicamente , Hemorragia/mortalidade , Heparina/efeitos adversos , Heparina/uso terapêutico , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Inibidores de Proteases/efeitos adversos , Inibidores de Proteases/uso terapêutico , Fatores de Risco , Sepse/mortalidade , Trombomodulina/uso terapêutico
20.
BMJ Open ; 8(9): e021408, 2018 09 10.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30206081

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Several systematic reviews and meta-analyses have demonstrated that prolonged (≥16 hours) prone positioning can reduce the mortality associated with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). However, the effectiveness and optimal duration of prone positioning was not fully evaluated. To fill these gaps, we will first investigate the effectiveness of prone positioning compared with the conventional management of patients with ARDS, regarding outcomes using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Second, if statistical heterogeneity in effectiveness with regard to short-term mortality (intensive care unit death or ≤30-day mortality) is shown, we will conduct a meta-regression analysis to explore the association between duration and effectiveness, and determine the optimal duration of prone positioning. METHOD AND ANALYSIS: Relevant studies are collected using PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and the WHO International Clinical Trials Platform Search Portal. Randomised controlled trials comparing prone and supine positioning in adults with ARDS will be included in the meta-analysis. Two independent investigators will screen trials obtained by search eligibility and extract data from selected studies to standardised data recording forms. For each selected trial, the risk of bias and quality of evidence will be evaluated using the GRADE system. Meta-regression analyses will be performed to identify the most important factors associated with short-term mortality, and subgroup analysis will be used to analyse the following: duration of mechanical ventilation in the prone position per day, patient severity, tidal volume and cause of ARDS. If heterogeneity or inconsistency among the studies is detected, subgroup analysis will be conducted on factors that may cause heterogeneity. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study requires no ethical approval. The results obtained from this systematic review and meta-analysis will be disseminated through international conference presentations and publication in a peer-reviewed journal. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42017078340.


Assuntos
Metanálise como Assunto , Decúbito Ventral , Síndrome do Desconforto Respiratório/terapia , Revisões Sistemáticas como Assunto , Humanos , Projetos de Pesquisa , Fatores de Tempo
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...