RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Non-invasive oxygenation strategies have a prominent role in the treatment of acute hypoxemic respiratory failure during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). While the efficacy of these therapies has been studied in hospitalized patients with COVID-19, the clinical outcomes associated with oxygen masks, high-flow oxygen therapy by nasal cannula and non-invasive mechanical ventilation in critically ill intensive care unit (ICU) patients remain unclear. METHODS: In this retrospective study, we used the best of nine covariate balancing algorithms on all baseline covariates in critically ill COVID-19 patients supported with > 10 L of supplemental oxygen at one of the 26 participating ICUs in Catalonia, Spain, between March 14 and April 15, 2020. RESULTS: Of the 1093 non-invasively oxygenated patients at ICU admission treated with one of the three stand-alone non-invasive oxygenation strategies, 897 (82%) required endotracheal intubation and 310 (28%) died during the ICU stay. High-flow oxygen therapy by nasal cannula (n = 439) and non-invasive mechanical ventilation (n = 101) were associated with a lower rate of endotracheal intubation (70% and 88%, respectively) than oxygen masks (n = 553 and 91% intubated), p < 0.001. Compared to oxygen masks, high-flow oxygen therapy by nasal cannula was associated with lower ICU mortality (hazard ratio 0.75 [95% CI 0.58-0.98), and the hazard ratio for ICU mortality was 1.21 [95% CI 0.80-1.83] for non-invasive mechanical ventilation. CONCLUSION: In critically ill COVID-19 ICU patients and, in the absence of conclusive data, high-flow oxygen therapy by nasal cannula may be the approach of choice as the primary non-invasive oxygenation support strategy.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Ventilación no Invasiva , Insuficiencia Respiratoria , COVID-19/terapia , Cánula , Humanos , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , Intubación Intratraqueal , Terapia por Inhalación de Oxígeno , Insuficiencia Respiratoria/terapia , Estudios Retrospectivos , SARS-CoV-2 , EspañaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Our purpose was to determine the intensive care units' (ICU's) medical staff surge capacity during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak in Spring 2020 in Spain. METHODS: A multicenter retrospective survey was performed addressing the medical specialties present in the ICUs and the increase in bed capacity during this period. RESULTS: Sixty-seven centers (62.04%) answered the questionnaire. The ICU bed capacity during the pandemic outbreak increased by 160% (95% confidence interval [CI], 128.97-191.03%). The average number of beds per intensive care medicine (ICM) specialist was 1.5 ± 0.60 and 3.71 ± 2.44 beds/specialist before and during the COVID-19 outbreak, respectively. Non-ICM specialists and residents were present in 50 (74.63%) and 23 (34.3%) ICUs during the outbreak, respectively. The number of physicians (ICM and non-ICM residents and specialists) in the ICU increased by 89.40% (95% CI, 64.26114.53%). The increase in ICM specialists was, however, 4.94% (95% CI, -1.35-11.23%). Most non-ICM physicians were anesthetists, followed by pediatricians and cardiologists. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of ICUs in our study were able to rapidly expand critical care capacity by adapting areas outside of the normal ICU to manage critically ill patients, and by extending the critical care staff with noncritical care physicians working as force multipliers.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Medicina , Médicos , COVID-19/epidemiología , Cuidados Críticos , Humanos , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , Pandemias , Estudios Retrospectivos , España/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
Nephrotoxicity limits the effective use of colistin for the treatment of multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacteria (MDR-GNB) infections. We previously defined a steady-state colistin plasma concentration (Css) of 2.42 mg/L that predicted nephrotoxicity at end of treatment (EOT). The objective of this study was to validate this breakpoint in a prospective cohort. This was a multicentre, prospective, observational study conducted at three hospitals with a cohort of patients treated for MDR-GNB infection with colistin methanesulfonate from September 2011 until January 2015. Nephrotoxicity was evaluated at Day 7 and at EOT using the RIFLE criteria. Css values were measured and analysed using HPLC. Taking the previously defined breakpoint for colistin concentration as a criterion, patients were divided into two groups (Css, ≤2.42 mg/L vs. >2.42 mg/L). Sixty-four patients were included. Seven patients (10.9%) had a Css > 2.42 mg/L and were compared with the remaining patients. Bivariate analysis showed that patients with a Css > 2.42 mg/L were older and had a significantly higher incidence of nephrotoxicity at Day 7 and EOT. Although not statistically significant, nephrotoxicity occurred earlier in these patients (6.2 days vs. 9.2 days in patients with lower Css; P = 0.091). Multivariate analysis of nephrotoxicity showed that Css > 2.42 mg/L was the only predictive factor. Nephrotoxicity was more frequent and occurred earlier in patients with colistin plasma concentrations higher than the previously defined breakpoint (2.42 mg/L). Colistin therapeutic drug monitoring should be routinely considered to avoid reaching this toxicity threshold and potential clinical consequences.
Asunto(s)
Lesión Renal Aguda , Antibacterianos/efectos adversos , Antibacterianos/análisis , Colistina/análogos & derivados , Plasma/química , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Antibacterianos/administración & dosificación , Cromatografía Líquida de Alta Presión , Colistina/administración & dosificación , Colistina/efectos adversos , Colistina/análisis , Monitoreo de Drogas , Femenino , Infecciones por Bacterias Gramnegativas/tratamiento farmacológico , Hospitales , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Prospectivos , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
PURPOSE: Information about healthcare-associated pneumonia (HCAP) in critically ill patients is scarce. METHODS: This prospective study compared clinical presentation, outcomes, microbial etiology, and treatment of HCAP, community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), and immunocompromised patients (ICP) with severe pneumonia admitted to 34 Spanish ICUs. RESULTS: A total of 726 patients with pneumonia (449 CAP, 133 HCAP, and 144 ICP) were recruited during 1 year from April 2011. HCAP patients had more comorbidities and worse clinical status (Barthel score). HCAP and ICP patients needed mechanical ventilation and tracheotomy more frequently than CAP patients. Streptococcus pneumoniae was the most frequent pathogen in all three groups (CAP, 34.2 %; HCAP, 19.5 %; ICP, 23.4 %; p = 0.001). The overall incidence of Gram-negative pathogens, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), and Pseudomonas aeruginosa was low, but higher in HCAP and ICP patients than CAP. Empirical treatment was in line with CAP guidelines in 73.5 % of patients with CAP, in 45.5 % of those with HCAP, and in 40 % of those with ICP. The incidence of inappropriate empirical antibiotic therapy was 6.5 % in CAP, 14.4 % in HCAP, and 21.8 % in ICP (p < 0.001). Mortality was highest in ICP (38.6 %) and did not differ between CAP (18.4 %) and HCAP (21.2 %). CONCLUSIONS: HCAP accounts for one-fifth of cases of severe pneumonia in patients admitted to Spanish ICUs. The empirical antibiotic therapy recommended for CAP would be appropriate for 90 % of patients with HCAP in our population, and consequently the decision to include coverage of multidrug-resistant pathogens for HCAP should be cautiously judged in order to prevent the overuse of antimicrobials.
Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Enfermedad Crítica , Infección Hospitalaria , Neumonía/microbiología , Estudios de Cohortes , Infecciones Comunitarias Adquiridas/tratamiento farmacológico , Infecciones Comunitarias Adquiridas/epidemiología , Infecciones Comunitarias Adquiridas/microbiología , Infección Hospitalaria/tratamiento farmacológico , Infección Hospitalaria/epidemiología , Infección Hospitalaria/microbiología , Femenino , Humanos , Huésped Inmunocomprometido , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Neumonía/tratamiento farmacológico , Neumonía/epidemiología , Neumonía Neumocócica/epidemiología , España/epidemiología , Streptococcus pneumoniae , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
RATIONALE: Ventilation in the prone position for about 7 h/d in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), acute lung injury, or acute respiratory failure does not decrease mortality. Whether it is beneficial to administer prone ventilation early, and for longer periods of time, is unknown. METHODS: We enrolled 136 patients within 48 h of tracheal intubation for severe ARDS, 60 randomized to supine and 76 to prone ventilation. Guidelines were established for ventilator settings and weaning. The prone group was targeted to receive continuous prone ventilation treatment for 20 h/d. RESULTS: The intensive care unit mortality was 58% (35/60) in the patients ventilated supine and 43% (33/76) in the patients ventilated prone (p = 0.12). The latter had a higher simplified acute physiology score II at inclusion. Multivariate analysis showed that simplified acute physiology score II at inclusion (odds ratio [OR], 1.07; p < 0.001), number of days elapsed between ARDS diagnosis and inclusion (OR, 2.83; p < 0.001), and randomization to supine position (OR, 2.53; p = 0.03) were independent risk factors for mortality. A total of 718 turning procedures were done, and prone position was applied for a mean of 17 h/d for a mean of 10 d. A total of 28 complications were reported, and most were rapidly reversible. CONCLUSION: Prone ventilation is feasible and safe, and may reduce mortality in patients with severe ARDS when it is initiated early and applied for most of the day.