ABSTRACT
@#BACKGROUND: The present study aimed to determine the short-term and long-term outcomes of critically ill patients with acute respiratory insufficiency who had received sedation or no sedation. METHODS: The data of 91 patients who had received mechanical ventilation in the first 24 hours between November 2008 and October 2009 were retrospectively analyzed. These patients were divided into two groups: a sedation group (n=28) and a non-sedation group (n=63). The patients were also grouped in two groups: deep sedation group and daily interruption and /or light sedation group. RESULTS: Overall, the 91 patients who had received ventilation ≥48 hours were analyzed. Multivariate analysis demonstrated two independent risk factors for in-hospital death: sequential organ failure assessment score (P=0.019, RR 1.355, 95％CI 1.051–1.747, B=0.304, SE=0.130, Wald=50483) and sedation (P=0.041, RR 5.015, 95％CI 1.072–23.459, B=1.612, SE=0.787, Wald=4.195). Compared with the patients who had received no sedation, those who had received sedation had a longer duration of ventilation, a longer stay in intensive care unit and hospital, and an increased in-hospital mortality rate. The Kaplan-Meier method showed that patients who had received sedation had a lower 60-month survival rate than those who had received no sedation (76.7％ vs. 88.9％, Log-rank test=3.630, P=0.057). Compared with the patients who had received deep sedation, those who had received daily interruption or light sedation showed a decreased in-hospital mortality rate (57.1％ vs. 9.5％, P=0.008). The 60-month survival of the patients who had received deep sedation was significantly lower than that of those who had daily interruption or light sedation (38.1％vs. 90.5％, Log-rank test=6.783, P=0.009). CONCLUSIONS: Sedation was associated with in-hospital death. The patients who had received sedation had a longer duration of ventilation, a longer stay in intensive care unit and in hospital, and an increased in-hospital mortality rate compared with the patients who did not receive sedation. Compared with daily interruption or light sedation, deep sedation increased the in-hospital mortality and decreased the 60-month survival for patients who had received sedation.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Consensus guidelines suggested that both dopamine and norepinephrine may be used, but specific doses are not recommended. The aim of this study is to determine the predictive role of vasopressors in patients with shock in intensive care unit.METHODS: One hundred and twenty-two patients, who had received vasopressors for 1 hour or more in intensive care unit (ICU) between October 2008 and October 2011, were included.There were 85 men and 37 women, with a median age of 65 years (55-73 years). Their clinical data were retrospectively collected and analyzed.RESULTS: The median simplified acute physiological score 3 (SAPS 3) was 50 (42-55). Multivariate analysis showed that septic shock (P=0.018, relative risk: 4.094; 95% confi dential interval: 1.274-13.156), SAPS 3 score at ICU admission (P=0.028, relative risk: 1.079; 95% confidential interval: 1.008-1.155), and norepinephrine administration (P<0.001, relative risk: 9.353; 95% confidential interval: 2.667-32.807) were independent predictors of ICU death. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis demonstrated that administration of norepinephrine ≥0.7 μg/kg per minute resulted in a sensitivity of 75.9% and a specifi city of 90.3% for the likelihood of ICU death. In patients who received norepinephrine ≥0.7 μg/kg per minute there was more ICU death (71.4% vs. 44.8%) and in-hospital death (76.2% vs. 48.3%) than in those who received norepinephrine <0.7 μg/kg per minute. These patients had also a decreased 510-day survival rate compared with those who received norepinephrine <0.7 μg/kg per minute (19.2% vs. 64.2%).CONCLUSION: Septic shock, SAPS 3 score at ICU admission, and norepinephrine administration were independent predictors of ICU death for patients with shock. Patients who received norepinephrine ≥0.7 μg/kg per minute had an increased ICU mortality, an increased in-hospital mortality, and a decreased 510-day survival rate.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: This study aimed to investigate the risk factors and outcome of critically ill cancer patients with postoperative acute respiratory insuffi ciency.METHODS: The data of 190 critically ill cancer patients with postoperative acute respiratory insuffi ciency were retrospectively reviewed. The data of 321 patients with no acute respiratory insuffi ciency as controls were also colected. Clinical variables of the fi rst 24 hours after admission to intensive care unit were colected, including age, sex, comorbid disease, type of surgery, admission type, presence of shock, presence of acute kidney injury, presence of acute lung injury/acute respiratory distress syndrome, acute physiologic and chronic health evaluation (APACHE II) score, sepsis-related organ failure assessment (SOFA), and PaO2/FiO2 ratio. Duration of mechanical ventilation, length of intensive care unit stay, intensive care unit death, length of hospitalization, hospital death and one-year survival were calculated.RESULTS: The incidence of acute respiratory insufficiency was 37.2% (190/321). Multivariate logistic analysis showed a history of chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases (P=0.001), surgery-related infection (P=0.004), hypo-volemic shock (P<0.001), and emergency surgery (P=0.018), were independent risk factors of postoperative acute respiratory insufficiency. Compared with the patients without acute respiratory insuffi ciency, the patients with acute respiratory insuffi ciency had a prolonged length of intensive care unit stay (P<0.001), a prolonged length of hospitalization (P=0.006), increased intensive care unit mortality (P=0.001), and hospital mortality (P<0.001). Septic shock was shown to be the only independent prognostic factor of intensive care unit death for the patients with acute respiratory insufficiency (P=0.029, RR: 8.522, 95%CI: 1.243-58.437, B=2.143, SE=0.982, Wald=4.758). Compared with the patients without acute respiratory insufficiency, those with acute respiratory insuffi ciency had a shortened one-year survival rate (78.7% vs. 97.1%,P<0.001).CONCLUSION: A history of chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases, surgery-related infection, hypovolemic shock and emergency surgery were risk factors of critically ill cancer patients with postoperative acute respiratory insuffi ciency. Septic shock was the only independent prognostic factor of intensive care unit death in patients with acute respiratory insufficiency. Compared with patients without acute respiratory insufficiency, those with acute respiratory insufficiency had adverse short-term outcome and a decreased one-year survival rate.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Several risk scoures have been used in predicting acute kidney injury (AKI) of patients undergoing general or specific operations such as cardiac surgery. This study aimed to evaluate the use of two AKI risk scores in patients who underwent non-cardiac surgery but required intensive care. METHODS: The clinical data of patients who had been admitted to ICU during the first 24 hours of ICU stay between September 2009 and August 2010 at the Cancer Institute, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College were retrospectively collected and analyzed. AKI was diagnosed based on the acute kidney injury network (AKIN) criteria. Two AKI risk scores were calculated: Kheterpal and Abelha factors. RESULTS: The incidence of AKI was 10.3％. Patients who developed AKI had a increased ICU mortality of 10.9％ vs. 1.0％ and an in-hospital mortality of 13.0 vs. 1.5％, compared with those without AKI. There was a significant difference between the classification of Kheterpal's AKI risk scores and the occurrence of AKI (P<0.001). There was no significant difference between the number of Abelha's AKI risk scores and the occurrence of AKI (P=0.499). Receiver operating characteristic curves demonstrated an area under the curve of 0.655±0.043 (P=0.001, 95％ confidence interval: 0.571–0.739) for Kheterpal's AKI risk score and 0.507±0.044 (P=0.879, 95％ confidence interval: 0.422–0.592) for Abelha's AKI risk score. CONCLUSION: Kheterpal's AKI risk scores are more accurate than Abelha's AKI risk scores in predicting the occurrence of AKI in patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery with moderate predictive capability.