A Randomized Trial of Intravenous Amino Acids for Kidney Protection.

BACKGROUND: Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a serious and common complication of cardiac surgery, for which reduced kidney perfusion is a key contributing factor. Intravenous amino acids increase kidney perfusion and recruit renal functional reserve. However, the efficacy of amino acids in reducing the occurrence of AKI after cardiac surgery is uncertain. METHODS: In a multinational, double-blind trial, we randomly assigned adult patients who were scheduled to undergo cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass to receive an intravenous infusion of either a balanced mixture of amino acids, at a dose of 2 g per kilogram of ideal body weight per day, or placebo (Ringer's solution) for up to 3 days. The primary outcome was the occurrence of AKI, defined according to the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes creatinine criteria. Secondary outcomes included the severity of AKI, the use and duration of kidney-replacement therapy, and all-cause 30-day mortality. RESULTS: We recruited 3511 patients at 22 centers in three countries and assigned 1759 patients to the amino acid group and 1752 to the placebo group. AKI occurred in 474 patients (26.9%) in the amino acid group and in 555 (31.7%) in the placebo group (relative risk, 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.77 to 0.94; P = 0.002). Stage 3 AKI occurred in 29 patients (1.6%) and 52 patients (3.0%), respectively (relative risk, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.35 to 0.87). Kidney-replacement therapy was used in 24 patients (1.4%) in the amino acid group and in 33 patients (1.9%) in the placebo group. There were no substantial differences between the two groups in other secondary outcomes or in adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Among adult patients undergoing cardiac surgery, infusion of amino acids reduced the occurrence of AKI. (Funded by the Italian Ministry of Health; PROTECTION ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03709264.).

Low Versus High Blood Pressure Targets in Critically Ill and Surgical Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

OBJECTIVES: Hypotension is associated with adverse outcomes in critically ill and perioperative patients. However, these assumptions are supported by observational studies. This meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials aims to compare the impact of lower versus higher blood pressure targets on mortality. DATA SOURCES: We searched PubMed, Cochrane, and Scholar from inception to February 10, 2024. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized trials comparing lower versus higher blood pressure targets in the management of critically ill and perioperative settings. DATA EXTRACTION: The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at the longest follow-up available. This review was registered in the Prospective International Register of Systematic Reviews, CRD42023452928. DATA SYNTHESIS: Of 2940 studies identified by the search string, 28 (12 in critically ill and 16 in perioperative settings) were included totaling 15,672 patients. Patients in the low blood pressure target group had lower mortality (23 studies included: 1019/7679 [13.3%] vs. 1103/7649 [14.4%]; relative risk 0.93; 95% CI, 0.87-0.99; p = 0.03; I2 = 0%). This corresponded to a 97.4% probability of any increase in mortality with a Bayesian approach. These findings were mainly driven by studies performed in the ICU setting and with treatment lasting more than 24 hours; however, the magnitude and direction of the results were similar in the majority of sensitivity analyses including the analysis restricted to low risk of bias studies. We also observed a lower rate of atrial fibrillation and fewer patients requiring transfusion in low-pressure target groups. No differences were found in the other secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Based on pooled randomized trial evidence, a lower compared with a higher blood pressure target results in a reduction of mortality, atrial fibrillation, and transfusion requirements. Lower blood pressure targets may be beneficial but there is ongoing uncertainty. However, the present meta-analysis does not confirm previous findings and recommendations. These results might inform future guidelines and promote the study of the concept of protective hemodynamics.

Macklin Effect: From Pathophysiology to Clinical Implication.

Air leak syndromes (such as pneumomediastinum, pneumothorax, or subcutaneous emphysema) are frequent complications of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Unfortunately, the development of air leaks is associated with worse outcomes. In addition, it has been hypothesized that the development of pneumomediastinum could be a marker of disease severity in patients with respiratory failure receiving noninvasive respiratory support or assisted ventilation. The so-called Macklin effect (or pulmonary interstitial emphysema) is the air dissection of the lung bronchovascular tree from peripheral to central airways following injury to distal alveoli. Ultimately, the progression of the Macklin effect leads to the development of pneumomediastinum, subcutaneous emphysema, or pneumothorax. The Macklin effect is identifiable on a chest computed tomography (CT) scan. The Macklin effect could be an accurate predictor of barotrauma in patients with ARDS (sensitivity = 89.2% [95% CI: 74.6-96.9]; specificity = 95.6% [95% CI: 90.6-98.4]), and may be a marker of disease severity. Accordingly, the detection of the Macklin effect on a chest CT scan could be used to select which patients with ARDS might benefit from different treatment algorithms, including advanced respiratory monitoring, early intubation, or, potentially, the institution of early extracorporeal support with or without invasive ventilation. In this video, the authors summarize the pathophysiology and potential clinical significance and applications of the Macklin effect in patients with acute respiratory failure.

Methylene Blue Reduces Mortality in Critically Ill and Perioperative Patients: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials.

Vasodilatory hypotension is common in critically ill and perioperative patients, and is associated with adverse outcomes. As a nitric oxide production inhibitor, methylene blue (MB) exerts its vasoconstrictor property and is an adjuvant for catecholamine-refractory vasodilatory shock. However, the effects of MB on clinically relevant outcomes remain unclear. Therefore, the authors performed a meta-analysis of randomized trials on MB in critically ill and perioperative patients. The authors searched through databases for randomized trials on MB in critically ill and perioperative patients, which yielded 11 studies consisting of 556 patients. The primary outcome was mortality at the longest follow-up. Secondary outcomes included hemodynamic parameters and organ dysfunction (PROSPERO: CRD42023409243). Nine out of the 11 included randomized trials reported mortality, which was significantly lower in the MB group (risk ratio, 0.60 [95% CI 0.43-0.84] p = 0.003), with findings confirmed in septic shock and cardiac surgery subgroups. The authors found reduced lengths of stay in the intensive care unit (mean difference [MD], -0.9 days [95% CI -1.06 to -0.77] p < 0.001) and in the hospital (MD, -2.2 days [95% CI, -2.68 to -1.70] p < 0.001) in the MB group. MB was associated with increased mean arterial pressure (MD, 8.4 mmHg [95% CI 5.01-11.75] p < 0.001) and systemic vascular resistance (MD, 94.5 dyn/s/cm5 [95% CI 17.73-171.15] p = 0.02), with no difference in cardiac output (standardized MD, 0.16 [95% CI, -0.25 to 0.57] p = 0.45). This meta-analysis showed that MB reverses vasodilation in critically ill and perioperative patients and might improve survival. Further adequately powered randomized trials are needed to confirm these findings.

Prolonged vs Intermittent Infusions of ß-Lactam Antibiotics in Adults With Sepsis or Septic Shock: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Importance: There is uncertainty about whether prolonged infusions of ß-lactam antibiotics improve clinically important outcomes in critically ill adults with sepsis or septic shock. Objective: To determine whether prolonged ß-lactam antibiotic infusions are associated with a reduced risk of death in critically ill adults with sepsis or septic shock compared with intermittent infusions. Data Sources: The primary search was conducted with MEDLINE (via PubMed), CINAHL, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception to May 2, 2024. Study Selection: Randomized clinical trials comparing prolonged (continuous or extended) and intermittent infusions of ß-lactam antibiotics in critically ill adults with sepsis or septic shock. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Data extraction and risk of bias were assessed independently by 2 reviewers. Certainty of evidence was evaluated with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. A bayesian framework was used as the primary analysis approach and a frequentist framework as the secondary approach. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was all-cause 90-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included intensive care unit (ICU) mortality and clinical cure. Results: From 18 eligible randomized clinical trials that included 9108 critically ill adults with sepsis or septic shock (median age, 54 years; IQR, 48-57; 5961 men [65%]), 17 trials (9014 participants) contributed data to the primary outcome. The pooled estimated risk ratio for all-cause 90-day mortality for prolonged infusions of ß-lactam antibiotics compared with intermittent infusions was 0.86 (95% credible interval, 0.72-0.98; I2 = 21.5%; high certainty), with a 99.1% posterior probability that prolonged infusions were associated with lower 90-day mortality. Prolonged infusion of ß-lactam antibiotics was associated with a reduced risk of intensive care unit mortality (risk ratio, 0.84; 95% credible interval, 0.70-0.97; high certainty) and an increase in clinical cure (risk ratio, 1.16; 95% credible interval, 1.07-1.31; moderate certainty). Conclusions and Relevance: Among adults in the intensive care unit who had sepsis or septic shock, the use of prolonged ß-lactam antibiotic infusions was associated with a reduced risk of 90-day mortality compared with intermittent infusions. The current evidence presents a high degree of certainty for clinicians to consider prolonged infusions as a standard of care in the management of sepsis and septic shock. Trial Registration: PROSPERO Identifier: CRD42023399434.

Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Without Invasive Ventilation for Respiratory Failure in Adults: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVES: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is an advanced treatment for acute severe respiratory failure. Patients on ECMO are frequently maintained sedated and immobilized until weaning from ECMO, first, and then from mechanical ventilation. Avoidance of sedation and invasive ventilation during ECMO may have potential advantages. We performed a systematic literature review to assess efficacy and safety of awake ECMO without invasive ventilation in patients with respiratory failure. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched for studies reporting outcome of awake ECMO for adult patients with respiratory failure. STUDY SELECTION: We included all studies reporting outcome of awake ECMO in patients with respiratory failure. Studies on ECMO for cardiovascular failure, cardiac arrest, or perioperative support and studies on pediatric patients were excluded. Two investigators independently screened and selected studies for inclusion. DATA EXTRACTION: Two investigators abstracted data on study characteristics, rate of awake ECMO failure, and mortality. Primary outcome was rate of awake ECMO failure (need for intubation). Pooled estimates with corresponding 95% CIs were calculated. Subgroup analyses by setting were performed. DATA SYNTHESIS: A total of 57 studies (28 case reports) included data from 467 awake ECMO patients. The subgroup of patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome showed a pooled estimate for awake ECMO failure of 39.3% (95% CI, 24.0-54.7%), while in patients bridged to lung transplantation, pooled estimate was 23.4% (95% CI, 13.3-33.5%). Longest follow-up mortality was 121 of 439 (pooled estimate, 28%; 95% CI, 22.3-33.6%). Mortality in patients who failed awake ECMO strategy was 43 of 74 (pooled estimate, 57.2%; 95% CI, 40.2-74.3%). Two cases of cannula self-removal were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Awake ECMO is feasible in selected patients, although the effect on outcome remains to be demonstrated. Mortality is almost 60% in patients who failed awake ECMO strategy.

Reparixin improves survival in critically ill and transplant patients: A meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Reparixin, an anti-inflammatory drug that inhibits interleukin 8 (IL-8) activity, might be life-saving for high-risk in-hospital patients without increasing the risk of infection according to a previous meta-analysis. With the increasing availability of randomised data the aim of the current study is to update previous findings by including any randomised control trials (RCTs) investigating the impact of reparixin on survival of critically ill or transplant patients. METHODS: A search strategy was developed to identify all RCTs involving reparixin in critically ill or transplant patients, with the exclusion of oncological patients. Two trained and independent authors conducted a thorough search of relevant databases. In addition, backward snowballing was employed. Language restrictions were not imposed. RESULTS: Our analysis included a total of nine studies involving 733 patients: 437 received reparixin and 296 the comparator. The reparixin group had a significantly lower all-cause mortality rate compared to the control group [15/437 (3.4%) vs. 19/294 (6.4%), odds ratio = 0.47 (95% confidence interval 0.23-0.96), p-value for effect .04, I2 = 22%, number needed to treat = 33]. These findings had the same direction and magnitude of effect across COVID-19 patients (n = 325) and non-COVID-19 patients (n = 408). Furthermore, there were no significant differences in the rate of pneumonia, sepsis or non-serious infections between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this meta-analysis indicate that reparixin, an anti-inflammatory drug, improved survival in critically ill or transplant patients (including both COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients) without increasing the risk of infection.

Propofol and survival: an updated meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Propofol is one of the most widely used hypnotic agents in the world. Nonetheless, propofol might have detrimental effects on clinically relevant outcomes, possibly due to inhibition of other interventions' organ protective properties. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to evaluate if propofol reduced survival compared to any other hypnotic agent in any clinical setting. METHODS: We searched eligible studies in PubMed, Google Scholar, and the Cochrane Register of Clinical Trials. The following inclusion criteria were used: random treatment allocation and comparison between propofol and any comparator in any clinical setting. The primary outcome was mortality at the longest follow-up available. We conducted a fixed-effects meta-analysis for the risk ratio (RR). Using this RR and 95% confidence interval, we estimated the probability of any harm (RR > 1) through Bayesian statistics. We registered this systematic review and meta-analysis in PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42022323143). RESULTS: We identified 252 randomized trials comprising 30,757 patients. Mortality was higher in the propofol group than in the comparator group (760/14,754 [5.2%] vs. 682/16,003 [4.3%]; RR = 1.10; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.20; p = 0.03; I2 = 0%; number needed to harm = 235), corresponding to a 98.4% probability of any increase in mortality. A statistically significant mortality increase in the propofol group was confirmed in subgroups of cardiac surgery, adult patients, volatile agent as comparator, large studies, and studies with low mortality in the comparator arm. CONCLUSIONS: Propofol may reduce survival in perioperative and critically ill patients. This needs careful assessment of the risk versus benefit of propofol compared to other agents while planning for large, pragmatic multicentric randomized controlled trials to provide a definitive answer.

Intraoperative hypotension and postoperative outcomes: a meta-analysis of randomised trials.

INTRODUCTION: Intraoperative hypotension is associated with adverse postoperative outcomes; however these findings are supported only by observational studies. The aim of this meta-analysis of randomised trials was to compare the postoperative effects permissive management with targeted management of intraoperative blood pressure. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase up to June 2023 for studies comparing permissive (mean arterial pressure ≤60 mm Hg) with targeted (mean arterial pressure >60 mm Hg) intraoperative blood pressure management. Primary outcome was all-cause mortality at the longest follow-up available. Secondary outcomes were atrial fibrillation, myocardial infarction, acute kidney injury, delirium, stroke, number of patients requiring transfusion, time on mechanical ventilation, and length of hospital stay. RESULTS: We included 10 randomised trials including a total of 9359 patients. Mortality was similar between permissive and targeted blood pressure management groups (89/4644 [1.9%] vs 99/4643 [2.1%], odds ratio 0.88, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.65-1.18, P=0.38, I2=0% with nine studies included). Atrial fibrillation (102/3896 [2.6%] vs 130/3887 [3.3%] odds ratio 0.71, 95% CI 0.53-0.96, P=0.03, I2=0%), and length of hospital stay (mean difference -0.20 days, 95% CI -0.26 to -0.13, P<0.001, I2=0%) were reduced in the permissive management group. No significant differences were found in subgroup analysis for cardiac and noncardiac surgery. CONCLUSION: Pooled randomised evidence shows that a target intraoperative mean arterial pressure ≤60 mm Hg is not associated with increased mortality; nevertheless it is surprisingly associated with a reduced rate of atrial fibrillation and of length of hospital stay. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW PROTOCOL: PROSPERO CRD42023393725.

Non-Invasive Ventilation in the Prehospital Emergency Setting: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Noninvasive ventilation is a well-established treatment for acute respiratory failure, being increasingly applied in the prehospital setting. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to investigate whether early prehospital initiation of noninvasive ventilation reduces mortality compared to standard oxygen therapy. METHODS: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception to February 7th, 2022, for studies comparing prehospital noninvasive ventilation performed by emergency medical services versus standard oxygen therapy in patients with acute respiratory failure. The primary outcome was mortality at the longest follow-up available. RESULTS: We included ten randomized studies and two quasi-randomized studies for a total of 1485 patients. Prehospital treatment with noninvasive ventilation compared with standard oxygen therapy did not significantly reduce mortality at the longest follow-up available (107/810 [13%] vs 114/772 [15%]; RR = 0.89; 95% CI, 0.70-1.13; P = 0.34; I2=24%). The endotracheal intubation rate was reduced when receiving prehospital noninvasive ventilation (38/776 [4.9%] vs 81/743 [11%]; RR = 0.44; 95% CI, 0.31-0.63; P < 0.001; I2=0%; number needed to treat 17). The intensive care admission rate (114/532 [21%] vs 129/507 [25%]; RR = 0.85; 95% CI, 0.69-1.04; P = 0.11; I2=0%) and length of hospital stay (mean difference=-1.29 days; 95% CI, -3.35-0.77; P = 0.21; I2=82%) were similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Adults with acute respiratory failure treated in the prehospital setting with noninvasive ventilation had a lower risk of intubation than those managed with standard oxygen therapy, with similar risk of death, intensive care admission, and length of hospital stay. REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42021284947.

Refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation: A meta-analysis of randomized trials.

BACKGROUND: In adults with refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, when conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) alone does not achieve return of spontaneous circulation, extracorporeal CPR is attempted to restore perfusion and improve outcomes. Considering the contrasting findings of recent studies, we conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to ascertain the effect of extracorporeal CPR on survival and neurological outcome. METHODS: Pubmed via MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched up to February 3, 2023, for randomized controlled trials comparing extracorporeal CPR versus conventional CPR in adults with refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Survival with a favorable neurological outcome at the longest follow-up available was the primary outcome. RESULTS: Among four randomized controlled trials included, extracorporeal CPR compared with conventional CPR increased survival with favorable neurological outcome at the longest follow-up available for all rhythms (59/220 [27%] vs. 39/213 [18%]; OR = 1.72; 95% CI, 1.09-2.70; p = 0.02; I2  = 26%; number needed to treat of 9), for initial shockable rhythms only (55/164 [34%] vs. 38/165 [23%]; OR = 1.90; 95% CI, 1.16-3.13; p = 0.01; I2  = 23%; number needed to treat of 7), and at hospital discharge or 30 days (55/220 [25%] vs. 34/212 [16%]; OR = 1.82; 95% CI, 1.13-2.92; p = 0.01; I2  = 0.0%). Overall survival at the longest follow-up available was similar (61/220 [25%] vs. 34/212 [16%]; OR = 1.82; 95% CI, 1.13-2.92; p = 0.59; I2  = 58%). CONCLUSIONS: Extracorporeal CPR compared with conventional CPR increased survival with favorable neurological outcome in adults with refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, especially when the initial rhythm was shockable. REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42023396482.

The Effect of Heparin Full-Dose Anticoagulation on Survival of Hospitalized, Non-critically Ill COVID-19 Patients: A Meta-analysis of High Quality Studies.

BACKGROUND: International COVID-19 guidelines recommend thromboprophylaxis for non-critically ill inpatients to prevent thrombotic complications. It is still debated whether full-dose thromboprophylaxis reduces all-cause mortality. The main aim of this updated systematic review and meta-analysis is to evaluate the effect of full-dose heparin-based thromboprophylaxis on survival in hospitalized non-critically ill COVID-19 patients. METHODS: A systematic review was performed across Pubmed/Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of clinical trials, Clinicaltrials.gov, and medRxiv.org from inception to November 2022. We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing full-dose heparin-based anticoagulation to prophylactic or intermediate dose anticoagulation or standard treatment in hospitalized non-critically ill COVID-19 patients. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation was applied. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at the longest follow-up available. RESULTS: We identified 6 multicenter RCTs involving 3297 patients from 13 countries across 4 continents. The rate of all-cause mortality was 6.2% (103/1662) in the full-dose group vs 7.7% (126/1635) in the prophylactic or intermediate dose group (Risk Ratio [RR] = 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.59-0.98; P = 0.037). The probabilities of any mortality difference and of NNT ≤ 100 were estimated at 98.2% and 84.5%, respectively. The risk of bias was low for all included RCTs and the strength of the evidence was "moderate." CONCLUSION: Our meta-analysis of high-quality multicenter RCTs suggests that full-dose anticoagulation with heparin or low molecular weight heparin reduces all-cause mortality in hospitalized non-critically ill COVID-19 patients. STUDY REGISTRATION: PROSPERO, review no. CRD42022348993.

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.

Is Gastrointestinal Bleeding a Problem for COVID-19 Intensive Care Unit Patients?

The objective of this study was to describe the COVID-19 intensive care unit population and analyze the characteristics and outcomes of gastrointestinal bleeding patients. An observational prospective study design was used following the STROBE checklist. All patients admitted between February and April 2020 to the intensive care unit were included. Main outcome measures were first bleeding event timing, sociodemographic and clinical data before admission, and gastrointestinal symptoms. A total of 116 COVID-19 patients were included; 16 (13.8%) developed gastrointestinal bleeding, 15 were males (93.7%), and the median age was 65.64 ± 7.33 years. All 16 patients were mechanically ventilated, one (6.3%) already had gastrointestinal symptoms, 13 (81.3%) had at least one concomitant disease, and six (37.5%) died. Bleeding episodes occurred on a mean of 16.9 ± 9.5 days after admission. Nine cases (56.3%) had effects on their hemodynamics, hemoglobin levels, or transfusion requirements; six (37.5%) required diagnostic imaging; and two (12.5%) underwent endoscopy procedures. The Mann-Whitney test showed statistically significant differences between the two groups of patients concerning comorbidities. Gastrointestinal bleeding can occur in critically ill patients with COVID-19. Having a solid tumor or chronic liver disease seems to increase that risk. Nurses caring for COVID-19 patients are urged to individualize patients at higher risk in order to improve safety.

Volatile Anesthetics versus Total Intravenous Anesthesia for Cardiac Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Volatile (inhaled) anesthetic agents have cardioprotective effects, which might improve clinical outcomes in patients undergoing coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG). METHODS: We conducted a pragmatic, multicenter, single-blind, controlled trial at 36 centers in 13 countries. Patients scheduled to undergo elective CABG were randomly assigned to an intraoperative anesthetic regimen that included a volatile anesthetic (desflurane, isoflurane, or sevoflurane) or to total intravenous anesthesia. The primary outcome was death from any cause at 1 year. RESULTS: A total of 5400 patients were randomly assigned: 2709 to the volatile anesthetics group and 2691 to the total intravenous anesthesia group. On-pump CABG was performed in 64% of patients, with a mean duration of cardiopulmonary bypass of 79 minutes. The two groups were similar with respect to demographic and clinical characteristics at baseline, the duration of cardiopulmonary bypass, and the number of grafts. At the time of the second interim analysis, the data and safety monitoring board advised that the trial should be stopped for futility. No significant difference between the groups with respect to deaths from any cause was seen at 1 year (2.8% in the volatile anesthetics group and 3.0% in the total intravenous anesthesia group; relative risk, 0.94; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69 to 1.29; P = 0.71), with data available for 5353 patients (99.1%), or at 30 days (1.4% and 1.3%, respectively; relative risk, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.70 to 1.76), with data available for 5398 patients (99.9%). There were no significant differences between the groups in any of the secondary outcomes or in the incidence of prespecified adverse events, including myocardial infarction. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients undergoing elective CABG, anesthesia with a volatile agent did not result in significantly fewer deaths at 1 year than total intravenous anesthesia. (Funded by the Italian Ministry of Health; MYRIAD ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02105610.).

Barotrauma in Coronavirus Disease 2019 Patients Undergoing Invasive Mechanical Ventilation: A Systematic Literature Review.

OBJECTIVE: There are concerns of a high barotrauma rate in coronavirus disease 2019 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome receiving invasive mechanical ventilation. However, a few studies were published, and reported rates were highly variable. We performed a systematic literature review to identify rates of barotrauma, pneumothorax, and pneumomediastinum in coronavirus disease 2019 acute respiratory distress syndrome patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation. DATA SOURCE: PubMed and Scopus were searched for studies reporting barotrauma event rate in adult coronavirus disease 2019 patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation. STUDY SELECTION: We included all studies investigating adult patients with coronavirus disease 2019 acute respiratory distress syndrome requiring mechanical ventilation. Case reports, studies performed outside ICU setting, and pediatric studies were excluded. Two investigators independently screened and selected studies for inclusion. DATA EXTRACTION: Two investigators abstracted data on study characteristics, rate of pneumothorax, pneumomediastinum and overall barotrauma events, and mortality. When available, data from noncoronavirus disease 2019 acute respiratory distress syndrome patients were also collected. Pooled estimates for barotrauma, pneumothorax, and pneumomediastinum were calculated. DATA SYNTHESIS: A total of 13 studies with 1,814 invasively ventilated coronavirus disease 2019 patients and 493 noncoronavirus disease 2019 patients were included. A total of 266/1,814 patients (14.7%) had at least one barotrauma event (pooled estimates, 16.1% [95% CI, 11.8-20.4%]). Pneumothorax occurred in 132/1,435 patients (pooled estimates, 10.7%; 95% CI, 6.7-14.7%), whereas pneumomediastinum occurred in 162/1,432 patients (pooled estimates, 11.2%; 95% CI, 8.0-14.3%). Mortality in coronavirus disease 2019 patients who developed barotrauma was 111/198 patients (pooled estimates, 61.6%; 95% CI, 50.2-73.0%). In noncoronavirus disease 2019 acute respiratory distress syndrome patients, barotrauma occurred in 31/493 patients (6.3%; pooled estimates, 5.7%; 95% CI, -2.1% to 13.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Barotrauma occurs in one out of six coronavirus disease 2019 acute respiratory distress syndrome patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation and is associated with a mortality rate of about 60%. Barotrauma rate may be higher than noncoronavirus disease 2019 controls.

Direct oral anticoagulants in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation and extreme body weight.

BACKGROUND: Limited clinical data exist describing the use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in patient with extreme body weight. Thus, the International Society of Thrombosis and Haemostasis (ISTH) recommends avoiding DOACs in patients with weight >120 Kg, and on the contrary, no restrictions exist for underweight patients. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of extreme body weight on DOAC activity and to compare the clinical outcomes of patients with an extreme body weight versus patients with a normal weight (61-119 Kg) treated with DOACs. METHODS: Single tertiary care Italian centre multidisciplinary registry including nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients treated with DOACs. Based on weight, three subcohorts were defined: (i) underweight patients (≤60 Kg); (ii) patients with a normal weight (61-119 Kg, as control group); and (iii) overweight patients (≥120 Kg). Primary efficacy endpoint was 2-year rate of thromboembolic events. Primary safety endpoint was 2-year rate of major bleeding. Event-free survival curves among groups were compared using Cox-Mantel test. RESULTS: 812 NVAF patients were included, 108 patients weighed ≤60 Kg (13%, underweight), 688 weighed between 61 and 119 Kg (85%, normal weight), and 16 weighed ≥120 Kg (2%, overweight). In particular, among underweight patients, dabigatran was prescribed in 26% patients, apixaban in 27%, rivaroxaban in 28% and edoxaban in 22% ones. Instead, among overweight patients, 44% were treated with dabigatran, 25% with apixaban, 25% with rivaroxaban and 4% with edoxaban. Underweight patients were older, more frequently women, with lower creatinine clearance and a history of previous strokes, resulting in higher CHA2DS2-VASc score than in both remaining groups. Up to 2 years, no statistically significant difference was observed between the three groups of weight for thromboembolic events (P = .765) and for overall bleeding (P = .125), but a trend towards decreased overall bleeding rates was noticed as weight increased (24.1% vs 16.7% vs 12.5%, respectively). CONCLUSION: In this tertiary care centre registry, 15% of patients treated with DOACs presented an extreme weight. Compared to patients with a normal weight, no significant rates of thromboembolic events were observed for underweight or overweight patients. A trend towards decreased overall bleeding frequency as weight increased was highlighted up to 2 years. The present results should be considered as preliminary and hypothesis generating.

Myocardial injury in patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia: Pivotal role of inflammation in COVID-19.

AIMS: Infection by SARS-CoV-2 may result in a systemic disease and a proportion of patients ranging 15%-44% experienced cardiac injury (CI) diagnosed by abnormal troponin levels. The aim of the present study was to analyse the clinical characteristics of a large series of hospitalized patients for COVID-19 in order to identify predisposing and/or protective factors of CI and the outcome. METHODS AND RESULTS: This is an observational, retrospective study on patients hospitalized in two Italian centres (San Raffaele Hospital and Cremona Hospital) for COVID-19 and at least one high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTnt) measurement during hospitalization. CI was defined if at least one hs-cTnt value was above the 99th percentile. The primary end-point was the occurrence of CI during hospitalization. We included 750 patients (median age 67, IQR 56-77 years; 69% males), of whom 46.9% had history of hypertension, 14.7% of chronic coronary disease and 22.3% of chronic kidney disease (CKD). Abnormal troponin levels (median troponin 74, IQR 34-147 ng/l) were detected in 390 patients (52%) during the hospitalization. At multivariable analysis age, CKD, cancer, C-reactive protein (CRP) levels were independently associated with CI. Independent predictors of very high troponin levels were chronic kidney disease and CRP levels. Patients with CI showed higher rate of all-cause mortality (40.0% vs. 9.1%, p = 0.001) compared to those without CI. CONCLUSION: This large, multicentre Italian study confirmed the high prevalence of CI and its prognostic role in hospitalized patients with COVID-19, highlighting the leading role of systemic inflammation for the occurrence of CI.

Association Between Type of Anaesthesia and Clinical Outcome in Patients Undergoing Endovascular Repair of Thoraco-Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms by Fenestrated and Branched Endografts.

OBJECTIVE: Although endovascular repair of thoraco-abdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) is the treatment of choice in the high risk population that is ineligible for an open surgical approach, little is known about the association between the type of anaesthesia and complications. This study compared the short term clinical outcomes of patients undergoing the visceral step of TAAA with fenestrated endograft aortic repair (FEVAR) and branched endograft aortic repair (BEVAR) under general anaesthesia (GA) with sedation with monitored care anaesthesia (MAC). METHODS: This single centre, retrospective, observational study recruited 124 consecutive patients undergoing elective F/BEVAR from 2014 - 2021. The primary endpoint was the short term complication rate according to the type of anaesthesia. Secondary endpoints included: need for inotropes or vasopressors for hypotension, time spent in the operating room, and admission to the intensive care unit. Propensity score matching was generated to account for the between group imbalance in the pre-operative covariables. RESULTS: After propensity score matching, 42 patients under GA were matched with 42 under MAC. The two groups showed no difference in cardiac and non-cardiac complications. Among the secondary outcomes, a higher number of patients in the GA group required inotropes or vasopressors compared with MAC (33% vs. 9%; p = .031). Although GA and MAC showed the same 30 day technical success (81% vs. 83%; p = .078), non-significant lower rates of major adverse events (10% vs. 12%; p = .72), one year re-intervention (14% vs. 21%; p = .39), and one year target vessel instability (10% vs. 21%; p = .39) were observed in the GA group. Overall, the in hospital mortality rate was 4%, with no difference between GA and MAC (2% vs. 5%; p = 1.0). CONCLUSION: The type of anaesthesia seemed to have no effect on procedure success, peri-operative morbidity, or mortality in patients undergoing F/BEVAR.

Effects on health-related quality of life of interventions affecting survival in critically ill patients: a systematic review.

Survival has been considered the cornerstone for clinical outcome evaluation in critically ill patients admitted to intensive care unit (ICU). There is evidence that ICU survivors commonly show impairments in long-term outcomes such as quality of life (QoL) considering them as the most relevant ones. In the last years, the concept of patient-important outcomes has been introduced and increasingly reported in peer-reviewed publications. In the present systematic review, we evaluated how many randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were conducted on critically ill patients and reporting a benefit on survival reported also data on QoL. All RCTs investigating nonsurgical interventions that significantly reduced mortality in critically ill patients were searched on MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus and Embase from inception until August 2021. In a second stage, for all the included studies, the outcome QoL was investigated. The primary outcome was to evaluate how many RCTs analyzing interventions reducing mortality reported also data on QoL. The secondary endpoint was to investigate if QoL resulted improved, worsened or not modified. Data on QoL were reported as evaluated outcome in 7 of the 239 studies (2.9%). The tools to evaluate QoL and QoL time points were heterogeneous. Four interventions showed a significant impact on QoL: Two interventions improved survival and QoL (pravastatin in subarachnoid hemorrhage, dexmedetomidine in elderly patients after noncardiac surgery), while two interventions reduced mortality but negatively influenced QoL (caloric restriction in patients with refeeding syndrome and systematic ICU admission in elderly patients). In conclusion, only a minority of RCTs in which an intervention demonstrated to affect mortality in critically ill patients reported also data on QoL. Future research in critical care should include patient-important outcomes like QoL besides mortality. Data on this topic should be collected in conformity with PROs statement and core outcome sets to guarantee quality and comparability of results.