Thinking Clearly: The History of Brain Dysfunction in Critical Illness.

Brain dysfunction during critical illness (ie, delirium and coma) is extremely common, and its lasting effect has only become increasingly understood in the last two decades. Brain dysfunction in the intensive care unit (ICU) is an independent predictor of both increased mortality and long-term impairments in cognition among survivors. As critical care medicine has grown, important insights regarding brain dysfunction in the ICU have shaped our practice including the importance of light sedation and the avoidance of deliriogenic drugs such as benzodiazepines. Best practices are now strategically incorporated in targeted bundles of care like the ICU Liberation Campaign's ABCDEF Bundle.

Brain autopsies of critically ill COVID-19 patients demonstrate heterogeneous profile of acute vascular injury, inflammation and age-linked chronic brain diseases.

BACKGROUND: This study examined neuropathological findings of patients who died following hospitalization in an intensive care unit with SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: Data originate from 20 decedents who underwent brain autopsy followed by ex-vivo imaging and dissection. Systematic neuropathologic examinations were performed to assess histopathologic changes including cerebrovascular disease and tissue injury, neurodegenerative diseases, and inflammatory response. Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and fixed tissues were evaluated for the presence of viral RNA and protein. RESULTS: The mean age-at-death was 66.2 years (range: 26-97 years) and 14 were male. The patient's medical history included cardiovascular risk factors or diseases (n = 11, 55%) and dementia (n = 5, 25%). Brain examination revealed a range of acute and chronic pathologies. Acute vascular pathologic changes were common in 16 (80%) subjects and included infarctions (n = 11, 55%) followed by acute hypoxic/ischemic injury (n = 9, 45%) and hemorrhages (n = 7, 35%). These acute pathologic changes were identified in both younger and older groups and those with and without vascular risk factors or diseases. Moderate-to-severe microglial activation were noted in 16 (80%) brains, while moderate-to-severe T lymphocyte accumulation was present in 5 (25%) brains. Encephalitis-like changes included lymphocytic cuffing (n = 6, 30%) and neuronophagia or microglial nodule (most prominent in the brainstem, n = 6, 30%) were also observed. A single brain showed vasculitis-like changes and one other exhibited foci of necrosis with ball-ring hemorrhages reminiscent of acute hemorrhagic leukoencephalopathy changes. Chronic pathologies were identified in only older decedents: 7 brains exhibited neurodegenerative diseases and 8 brains showed vascular disease pathologies. CSF and brain samples did not show evidence of viral RNA or protein. CONCLUSIONS: Acute tissue injuries and microglial activation were the most common abnormalities in COVID-19 brains. Focal evidence of encephalitis-like changes was noted despite the lack of detectable virus. The majority of older subjects showed age-related brain pathologies even in the absence of known neurologic disease. Findings of this study suggest that acute brain injury superimposed on common pre-existing brain disease may put older subjects at higher risk of post-COVID neurologic sequelae.

Instruments Assessing Cognitive Impairment in Survivors of Critical Illness and Reporting of Race Norms: A Systematic Review.

To conduct a systematic review to summarize cognitive instruments being used in long-term outcome studies of survivors of adult critical illness, as well as evaluate whether these measures are reported as using patient demographic norms, specifically race norms. DATA SOURCES: A comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed (National Center for Biotechnology Information), Excerpta Medica dataBASE (Ovid), Psychological Information Database (ProQuest), and Web of Science (Clarivate) for English language studies published since 2002. STUDY SELECTION: Studies were eligible if the population included adult ICU survivors assessed for postdischarge cognitive outcomes. DATA EXTRACTION: Two independent reviewers screened abstracts, examined full text, and extracted data from all eligible articles. DATA SYNTHESIS: A total of 98 articles (55 unique cohorts: 22 general ICU, 14 Acute respiratory distress syndrome/Acute respiratory failure/Sepsis, 19 COVID-19 and other subpopulations) were eligible for data extraction and synthesis. Among general ICU survivors, the majority of studies (n = 15, 68%) assessed cognition using multiple instruments, of which the most common was the Mini-Mental State Examination. Only nine of the 22 studies (41%) explicitly reported using patient demographic norms for scoring neuropsychological cognitive tests. Of the nine, all reported using age as a norming characteristic, education was reported in eight (89%), sex/gender was reported in five (55%), and race/ethnicity was reported in three (33%). Among Acute respiratory distress syndrome/Acute respiratory failure/Sepsis survivors, norming characteristics were reported in only four (28%) of the 14 studies, of which all reported using age and none reported using race/ethnicity. CONCLUSIONS: Less than half of the studies measuring cognitive outcomes in ICU survivors reported the use of norming characteristics. There is substantial heterogeneity in how studies reported the use of cognitive instruments, and hence, the prevalence of the use of patient norms may be underestimated. These findings are important in the development of appropriate standards for use and reporting of neuropsychological tests among ICU survivors.

Systemic interleukin-6 inhibition ameliorates acute neuropsychiatric phenotypes in a murine model of acute lung injury.

Acute neuropsychiatric impairments occur in over 70% of patients with acute lung injury. Mechanical ventilation is a well-known precipitant of acute lung injury and is strongly associated with the development of acute delirium and anxiety phenotypes. In prior studies, we demonstrated that IL-6 mediates neuropathological changes in the frontal cortex and hippocampus of animals with mechanical ventilation-induced brain injury; however, the effect of systemic IL-6 inhibition on structural and functional acute neuropsychiatric phenotypes is not known. We hypothesized that a murine model of mechanical ventilation-induced acute lung injury (VILI) would induce neural injury to the amygdala and hippocampus, brain regions that are implicated in diverse neuropsychiatric conditions, and corresponding delirium- and anxiety-like functional impairments. Furthermore, we hypothesized that these structural and functional changes would reverse with systemic IL-6 inhibition. VILI was induced using high tidal volume (35 cc/kg) mechanical ventilation. Cleaved caspase-3 (CC3) expression was quantified as a neural injury marker and found to be significantly increased in the VILI group compared to spontaneously breathing or anesthetized and mechanically ventilated mice with 10 cc/kg tidal volume. VILI mice treated with systemic IL-6 inhibition had significantly reduced amygdalar and hippocampal CC3 expression compared to saline-treated animals and demonstrated amelioration in acute neuropsychiatric behaviors in open field, elevated plus maze, and Y-maze tests. Overall, these data provide evidence of a pathogenic role of systemic IL-6 in mediating structural and functional acute neuropsychiatric symptoms in VILI and provide preclinical justification to assess IL-6 inhibition as a potential intervention to ameliorate acute neuropsychiatric phenotypes following VILI.

The future of intensive care: delirium should no longer be an issue.

In the ideal intensive care unit (ICU) of the future, all patients are free from delirium, a syndrome of brain dysfunction frequently observed in critical illness and associated with worse ICU-related outcomes and long-term cognitive impairment. Although screening for delirium requires limited time and effort, this devastating disorder remains underestimated during routine ICU care. The COVID-19 pandemic brought a catastrophic reduction in delirium monitoring, prevention, and patient care due to organizational issues, lack of personnel, increased use of benzodiazepines and restricted family visitation. These limitations led to increases in delirium incidence, a situation that should never be repeated. Good sedation practices should be complemented by novel ICU design and connectivity, which will facilitate non-pharmacological sedation, anxiolysis and comfort that can be supplemented by balanced pharmacological interventions when necessary. Improvements in the ICU sound, light control, floor planning, and room arrangement can facilitate a healing environment that minimizes stressors and aids delirium prevention and management. The fundamental prerequisite to realize the delirium-free ICU, is an awake non-sedated, pain-free comfortable patient whose management follows the A to F (A-F) bundle. Moreover, the bundle should be expanded with three additional letters, incorporating humanitarian care: gaining (G) insight into patient needs, delivering holistic care with a 'home-like' (H) environment, and redefining ICU architectural design (I). Above all, the delirium-free world relies upon people, with personal challenges for critical care teams to optimize design, environmental factors, management, time spent with the patient and family and to humanize ICU care.

Limb ischemia due to spontaneous heparin-induced thrombocytopenia as the primary presentation of acute COVID-19 infection.

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) occurs with the development of IgG antibodies that bind complexes of heparin and platelet factor 4 (PF4), which activate platelets and result in a profoundly prothrombotic condition. In rare instances, this syndrome develops in the absence of proximate heparin administration, referred to as spontaneous HIT, for which less than three dozen cases have been reported. Spontaneous HIT is considered a subtype of "autoimmune HIT" (aHIT), characterized by platelet activation in the serotonin release assay (SRA) without the addition of exogenous heparin. Here, we report spontaneous HIT as the presenting feature in a patient with 2019 coronavirus disease infection (COVID-19).A 66-year-old male presented with progressive leg pain and was found to have a platelet count of 39 × 109/L and multiple lower extremity arterial thromboses requiring fasciotomy and thrombectomy. He had no recent hospitalization, heparin exposure, vaccinations, or known thrombophilia. He had a strongly positive IgG-specific enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for heparin-PF4 antibodies, and the SRA was strongly positive both with and without the addition of heparin. He was treated successfully with bivalirudin, intravenous immunoglobulin, and apixaban.

Design and Rationale of the Sevoflurane for Sedation in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (SESAR) Randomized Controlled Trial.

Preclinical studies have shown that volatile anesthetics may have beneficial effects on injured lungs, and pilot clinical data support improved arterial oxygenation, attenuated inflammation, and decreased lung epithelial injury in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) receiving inhaled sevoflurane compared to intravenous midazolam. Whether sevoflurane is effective in improving clinical outcomes among patients with ARDS is unknown, and the benefits and risks of inhaled sedation in ARDS require further evaluation. Here, we describe the SESAR (Sevoflurane for Sedation in ARDS) trial designed to address this question. SESAR is a two-arm, investigator-initiated, multicenter, prospective, randomized, stratified, parallel-group clinical trial with blinded outcome assessment designed to test the efficacy of sedation with sevoflurane compared to intravenous propofol in patients with moderate to severe ARDS. The primary outcome is the number of days alive and off the ventilator at 28 days, considering death as a competing event, and the key secondary outcome is 90 day survival. The planned enrollment is 700 adult participants at 37 French academic and non-academic centers. Safety and long-term outcomes will be evaluated, and biomarker measurements will help better understand mechanisms of action. The trial is funded by the French Ministry of Health, the European Society of Anaesthesiology, and Sedana Medical.

Strategies to Optimize ICU Liberation (A to F) Bundle Performance in Critically Ill Adults With Coronavirus Disease 2019.

OBJECTIVES: The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic has stretched ICU resources in an unprecedented fashion and outstripped personal protective equipment supplies. The combination of a novel disease, resource limitations, and risks to medical personnel health have created new barriers to implementing the ICU Liberation ("A" for Assessment, Prevention, and Manage pain; "B" for Both Spontaneous Awakening Trials and Spontaneous Breathing Trials; "C" for Choice of Analgesia and Sedation; "D" for Delirium Assess, Prevent, and Manage; "E" for Early Mobility and Exercise; and "F" for Family Engagement and Empowerment [ABCDEF]) Bundle, a proven ICU care approach that reduces delirium, shortens mechanical ventilation duration, prevents post-ICU syndrome, and reduces healthcare costs. This narrative review acknowledges barriers and offers strategies to optimize Bundle performance in coronavirus disease 2019 patients requiring mechanical ventilation. DATA SOURCES STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: The most relevant literature, media reports, and author experiences were assessed for inclusion in this narrative review including PubMed, national newspapers, and critical care/pharmacology textbooks. DATA SYNTHESIS: Uncertainty regarding coronavirus disease 2019 clinical course, shifts in attitude, and changes in routine behavior have hindered Bundle use. A domino effect results from: 1) changes to critical care hierarchy, priorities, and ICU team composition; 2) significant personal protective equipment shortages cause; 3) reduced/restricted physical bedside presence favoring; 4) increased depth of sedation and use of neuromuscular blockade; 5) which exacerbate drug shortages; and 6) which require prolonged use of limited ventilator resources. Other identified barriers include manageable knowledge deficits among non-ICU clinicians unfamiliar with the Bundle or among PICU specialists deploying pediatric-based Bundle approaches who are unfamiliar with adult medicine. Both groups have been enlisted to augment the adult ICU work force to meet demand. Strategies were identified to facilitate Bundle performance to liberate patients from the ICU. CONCLUSIONS: We acknowledge current challenges that interfere with comprehensive management of critically ill patients during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Rapid response to new circumstances precisely requires established safety mechanisms and protocols like the ABCDEF Bundle to increase ICU and ventilator capacity and help survivors maximize recovery from coronavirus disease 2019 as early as possible.

Associations between persistent symptoms after mild COVID-19 and long-term health status, quality of life, and psychological distress.

BACKGROUND: We sought to assess whether persistent COVID-19 symptoms beyond 6 months (Long-COVID) among patients with mild COVID-19 is associated with poorer health status, quality of life, and psychological distress. METHODS: This was a multicenter prospective cohort study that included adult outpatients with acute COVID-19 from eight sites during 2-week sampling periods from April 1 and July 28, 2020. Participants were contacted 6-11 months after their first positive SARS-CoV-2 to complete a survey, which collected information on the severity of eight COVID-19 symptoms using a 4-point scale ranging from 0 (not present) to 3 (severe) at 1 month before COVID-19 (pre-illness) and at follow-up; the difference for each was calculated as an attributable persistent symptom severity score. A total attributable persistent COVID-19 symptom burden score was calculated by summing the attributable persistent severity scores for all eight symptoms. Outcomes measured at long-term follow-up comprised overall health status (EuroQol visual analogue scale), quality of life (EQ-5D-5L), and psychological distress (Patient Health Questionnaire-4). The association between the total attributable persistent COVID-19 burden score and each outcome was analyzed using multivariable proportional odds regression. RESULTS: Of the 2092 outpatients with COVID-19, 436 (21%) responded to the survey. The median (IQR) attributable persistent COVID-19 symptom burden score was 2 (0, 4); higher scores were associated with lower overall health status (aOR 0.63; 95% CI: 0.57-0.69), lower quality of life (aOR: 0.65; 95%CI: 0.59-0.72), and higher psychological distress (aOR: 1.40; 95%CI, 1.28-1.54) after adjusting for age, race, ethnicity, education, and income. CONCLUSIONS: In participants with mild acute COVID-19, the burden of persistent symptoms was significantly associated with poorer long-term health status, poorer quality of life, and psychological distress.

Efficacy and safety of baricitinib plus standard of care for the treatment of critically ill hospitalised adults with COVID-19 on invasive mechanical ventilation or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: an exploratory, randomised, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The oral, selective Janus kinase 1/2 inhibitor baricitinib has shown efficacy in studies of hospitalised adults with COVID-19. COV-BARRIER (NCT04421027) was a multinational, phase 3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of baricitinib in patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of baricitinib plus standard of care in critically ill hospitalised adults with COVID-19 requiring invasive mechanical ventilation or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. METHODS: This exploratory trial followed the study design of COV-BARRIER in a critically ill cohort not included in the main phase 3 trial. The study was conducted across 18 hospitals in Argentina, Brazil, Mexico, and the USA. Participants (aged ≥18 years) hospitalised with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection on baseline invasive mechanical ventilation or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation were randomly assigned (1:1) to baricitinib (4 mg) or placebo once daily for up to 14 days in combination with standard of care. Participants, study staff, and investigators were masked to study group assignment. Prespecified endpoints included all-cause mortality through days 28 and 60, number of ventilator-free days, duration of hospitalisation, and time to recovery through day 28. The efficacy analysis was done in the intention-to-treat population and the safety analysis was done in the safety population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04421027. FINDINGS: Between Dec 23, 2020, and April 10, 2021, 101 participants were enrolled into the exploratory trial and assigned to baricitinib (n=51) or placebo (n=50) plus standard of care. Standard of care included baseline systemic corticosteroid use in 87 (86%) participants. Treatment with baricitinib significantly reduced 28-day all-cause mortality compared with placebo (20 [39%] of 51 participants died in the baricitinib group vs 29 [58%] of 50 in the placebo group; hazard ratio [HR] 0·54 [95% CI 0·31-0·96]; p=0·030; 46% relative reduction; absolute risk reduction 19%). A significant reduction in 60-day mortality was also observed in the baricitinib group compared with the placebo group (23 [45%] events vs 31 [62%]; HR 0·56 [95% CI 0·33-0·97]; p=0·027; 44% relative reduction; absolute risk reduction 17%). In every six baricitinib-treated participants, one additional death was prevented compared with placebo at days 28 and 60. The number of ventilator-free days did not differ significantly between treatment groups (mean 8·1 days [SD 10·2] in the baricitinib group vs 5·5 days [8·4] in the placebo group; p=0·21). The mean duration of hospitalisation in baricitinib-treated participants was not significantly shorter than in placebo-treated participants (23·7 days [SD 7·1] vs 26·1 days [3·9]; p=0·050). The rates of infections, blood clots, and adverse cardiovascular events were similar between treatment groups. INTERPRETATION: In critically ill hospitalised patients with COVID-19 who were receiving invasive mechanical ventilation or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, treatment with baricitinib compared with placebo (in combination with standard of care, including corticosteroids) reduced mortality, which is consistent with the mortality reduction observed in less severely ill patients in the hospitalised primary COV-BARRIER study population. However, this was an exploratory trial with a relatively small sample size; therefore, further phase 3 trials are needed to confirm these findings. FUNDING: Eli Lilly and Company.

Factors Associated With Spontaneous Awakening Trial and Spontaneous Breathing Trial Performance in Adults With Critical Illness: Analysis of a Multicenter, Nationwide, Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Broad-scale adoption of spontaneous awakening trials (SATs) and spontaneous breathing trials (SBTs) into everyday practice has been slow, and uncertainty exists regarding what factors facilitate or impede their routine delivery. RESEARCH QUESTION: What patient, practice, and pharmacologic factors are associated with SAT and SBT performance and to what extent do they predict overall SAT/SBT performance? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: This secondary analysis used data collected from a national quality improvement collaborative composed of 68 diverse ICUs. Adults with critical illness adults who received mechanical ventilation and/or continuously infused sedative medications were included. We performed mixed-effects logistic regression modeling, created receiver operating characteristic curves, and calculated the area under the curve (AUC). RESULTS: Included in the SAT and SBT analysis were 4,847 and 4,938 patients, respectively. In multivariable models controlling for admitting patient characteristics, factors independently associated with higher odds of a next-day SAT and SBT included physical restraint use (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.63; 95% CI, 1.42-1.87; AOR, 1.83; 95% CI, 1.60-2.09), documented target sedation level (AOR, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.41-2.01; AOR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.24-1.72), more frequent level of arousal assessments (AOR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.03-1.43; AOR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.13-1.54), and dexmedetomidine administration (AOR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.05-1.45; AOR, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.27-1.80). Factors independently associated with lower odds of a next-day SAT and SBT included deep sedation/coma (AOR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.60-0.80; AOR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.28-0.37) and benzodiazepine (AOR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.72-0.95; AOR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.59-0.77) or ketamine (AOR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.16-0.71; AOR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.18-0.88) administration. Models incorporating admitting, daily, and unit variations displayed moderate discriminant accuracy in predicting next-day SAT (AUC, 0.73) and SBT (AUC, 0.72) performance. INTERPRETATION: There are a number of modifiable factors associated with SAT/SBT performance that are amenable to the development and testing of implementation interventions.

Efficacy and safety of baricitinib for the treatment of hospitalised adults with COVID-19 (COV-BARRIER): a randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Baricitinib is an oral selective Janus kinase 1/2 inhibitor with known anti-inflammatory properties. This study evaluates the efficacy and safety of baricitinib in combination with standard of care for the treatment of hospitalised adults with COVID-19. METHODS: In this phase 3, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial, participants were enrolled from 101 centres across 12 countries in Asia, Europe, North America, and South America. Hospitalised adults with COVID-19 receiving standard of care were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive once-daily baricitinib (4 mg) or matched placebo for up to 14 days. Standard of care included systemic corticosteroids, such as dexamethasone, and antivirals, including remdesivir. The composite primary endpoint was the proportion who progressed to high-flow oxygen, non-invasive ventilation, invasive mechanical ventilation, or death by day 28, assessed in the intention-to-treat population. All-cause mortality by day 28 was a key secondary endpoint, and all-cause mortality by day 60 was an exploratory endpoint; both were assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety analyses were done in the safety population defined as all randomly allocated participants who received at least one dose of study drug and who were not lost to follow-up before the first post-baseline visit. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04421027. FINDINGS: Between June 11, 2020, and Jan 15, 2021, 1525 participants were randomly assigned to the baricitinib group (n=764) or the placebo group (n=761). 1204 (79·3%) of 1518 participants with available data were receiving systemic corticosteroids at baseline, of whom 1099 (91·3%) were on dexamethasone; 287 (18·9%) participants were receiving remdesivir. Overall, 27·8% of participants receiving baricitinib and 30·5% receiving placebo progressed to meet the primary endpoint (odds ratio 0·85 [95% CI 0·67 to 1·08], p=0·18), with an absolute risk difference of -2·7 percentage points (95% CI -7·3 to 1·9). The 28-day all-cause mortality was 8% (n=62) for baricitinib and 13% (n=100) for placebo (hazard ratio [HR] 0·57 [95% CI 0·41-0·78]; nominal p=0·0018), a 38·2% relative reduction in mortality; one additional death was prevented per 20 baricitinib-treated participants. The 60-day all-cause mortality was 10% (n=79) for baricitinib and 15% (n=116) for placebo (HR 0·62 [95% CI 0·47-0·83]; p=0·0050). The frequencies of serious adverse events (110 [15%] of 750 in the baricitinib group vs 135 [18%] of 752 in the placebo group), serious infections (64 [9%] vs 74 [10%]), and venous thromboembolic events (20 [3%] vs 19 [3%]) were similar between the two groups. INTERPRETATION: Although there was no significant reduction in the frequency of disease progression overall, treatment with baricitinib in addition to standard of care (including dexamethasone) had a similar safety profile to that of standard of care alone, and was associated with reduced mortality in hospitalised adults with COVID-19. FUNDING: Eli Lilly and Company. TRANSLATIONS: For the French, Japanese, Portuguese, Russian and Spanish translations of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Delirium in critical illness: clinical manifestations, outcomes, and management.

Delirium is the most common manifestation of brain dysfunction in critically ill patients. In the intensive care unit (ICU), duration of delirium is independently predictive of excess death, length of stay, cost of care, and acquired dementia. There are numerous neurotransmitter/functional and/or injury-causing hypotheses rather than a unifying mechanism for delirium. Without using a validated delirium instrument, delirium can be misdiagnosed (under, but also overdiagnosed and trivialized), supporting the recommendation to use a monitoring instrument routinely. The best-validated ICU bedside instruments are CAM-ICU and ICDSC, both of which also detect subsyndromal delirium. Both tools have some inherent limitations in the neurologically injured patients, yet still provide valuable information about delirium once the sequelae of the primary injury settle into a new post-injury baseline. Now it is known that antipsychotics and other psychoactive medications do not reliably improve brain function in critically ill delirious patients. ICU teams should systematically screen for predisposing and precipitating factors. These include exacerbations of cardiac/respiratory failure or sepsis, metabolic disturbances (hypoglycemia, dysnatremia, uremia and ammonemia) receipt of psychoactive medications, and sensory deprivation through prolonged immobilization, uncorrected vision and hearing deficits, poor sleep hygiene, and isolation from loved ones so common during COVID-19 pandemic. The ABCDEF (A2F) bundle is a means to facilitate implementation of the 2018 Pain, Agitation/Sedation, Delirium, Immobility, and Sleep Disruption in Adult Patients in the ICU (PADIS) Guidelines. In over 25,000 patients across nearly 100 institutions, the A2F bundle has been shown in a dose-response fashion (i.e., greater bundle compliance) to yield improved survival, length of stay, coma and delirium duration, cost, and less ICU bounce-backs and discharge to nursing homes.

Statistical analysis plan for the Surgery for Cancer with Option of Palliative Care Expert (SCOPE) trial: a randomized controlled trial of a specialist palliative care intervention for patients undergoing surgery for cancer.

BACKGROUND: The impact of specialist palliative care intervention in patients undergoing surgery for cancer has not been studied extensively. The SCOPE randomized controlled trial will investigate the effect of specialist palliative care intervention in cancer patients undergoing surgery for selected abdominal malignancies. The study protocol of the SCOPE Trial was published in December 2019. METHODS AND DESIGN: The SCOPE Trial is a single-center, single-blind, prospective, randomized controlled trial that will investigate specialist palliative care intervention for cancer patients undergoing surgery for selected abdominal malignancies. The study plans to enroll 236 patients that will be randomized to specialist palliative care (intervention arm) and usual care (control arm) in a 1:1 ratio. RESULTS: The primary outcome of the study is the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) Trial Outcome Index (TOI) at 90 days postoperatively. Secondary outcomes of the study include the total FACT-G score at 90 days postoperatively, days alive at home without an emergency room visit within 90 days of operation, and all-cause mortality at 1 year after operation. Time frames for all outcomes will start on the day of surgery. CONCLUSION: This manuscript serves as the formal statistical analysis plan (version 1.0) for the SCOPE randomized controlled trial. The statistical analysis plan was completed on 6 April 2021. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03436290 . Registered on 16 February 2018.

IL-6 Inhibition Reduces Neuronal Injury in a Murine Model of Ventilator-induced Lung Injury.

Mechanical ventilation is a known risk factor for delirium, a cognitive impairment characterized by dysfunction of the frontal cortex and hippocampus. Although IL-6 is upregulated in mechanical ventilation-induced lung injury (VILI) and may contribute to delirium, it is not known whether the inhibition of systemic IL-6 mitigates delirium-relevant neuropathology. To histologically define neuropathological effects of IL-6 inhibition in an experimental VILI model, VILI was simulated in anesthetized adult mice using a 35 cc/kg tidal volume mechanical ventilation model. There were two control groups, as follow: 1) spontaneously breathing or 2) anesthetized and mechanically ventilated with 10 cc/kg tidal volume to distinguish effects of anesthesia from VILI. Two hours before inducing VILI, mice were treated with either anti-IL-6 antibody, anti-IL-6 receptor antibody, or saline. Neuronal injury, stress, and inflammation were assessed using immunohistochemistry. CC3 (cleaved caspase-3), a neuronal apoptosis marker, was significantly increased in the frontal (P < 0.001) and hippocampal (P < 0.0001) brain regions and accompanied by significant increases in c-Fos and heat shock protein-90 in the frontal cortices of VILI mice compared with control mice (P < 0.001). These findings were not related to cerebral hypoxia, and there was no evidence of irreversible neuronal death. Frontal and hippocampal neuronal CC3 were significantly reduced with anti-IL-6 antibody (P < 0.01 and P < 0.0001, respectively) and anti-IL-6 receptor antibody (P < 0.05 and P < 0.0001, respectively) compared with saline VILI mice. In summary, VILI induces potentially reversible neuronal injury and inflammation in the frontal cortex and hippocampus, which is mitigated with systemic IL-6 inhibition. These data suggest a potentially novel neuroprotective role of systemic IL-6 inhibition that justifies further investigation.

Stress and Fear: Clinical Implications for Providers and Patients (in the Time of COVID-19 and Beyond).

In light of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, we explore the role of stress, fear, and the impact of positive and negative emotions on health and disease. We then introduce strategies to help mitigate stress within the health care team, and provide a rationale for their efficacy. Additionally, we identify strategies to optimize patient care and explain their heightened importance in today's environment.