High-grade liver injuries with contrast extravasation managed initially with interventional radiology versus observation: A secondary analysis of a WTA multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: High-grade liver injuries with extravasation (HGLI â€‹+ â€‹Extrav) are associated with morbidity/mortality. For low-grade injuries, an observation (OBS) first-strategy is beneficial over initial angiography (IR), however, it is unclear if OBS is safe for HGLI â€‹+ â€‹Extrav. Therefore, we evaluated the management of HGLI â€‹+ â€‹Extrav patients, hypothesizing IR patients will have decreased rates of operation and mortality. METHODS: HGLI â€‹+ â€‹Extrav patients managed with initial OBS or IR were included. The primary outcome was need for operation. Secondary outcomes included liver-related complications (LRCs) and mortality. RESULTS: From 59 patients, 23 (39.0%) were managed with OBS and 36 (61.0%) with IR. 75% of IR patients underwent angioembolization, whereas 13% of OBS patients underwent any IR, all undergoing angioembolization. IR patients had an increased rate of operation (13.9% vs. 0%, p â€‹= â€‹0.049), but no difference in LRCs (44.4% vs. 43.5%) or mortality (5.6% vs. 8.7%) versus OBS patients (both p â€‹> â€‹0.05). CONCLUSION: Over 60% of patients were managed with IR initially. IR patients had an increased rate of operation yet similar rates of LRCs and mortality, suggesting initial OBS reasonable in appropriately selected HGLI â€‹+ â€‹Extrav patients.

Triage of V-V ECMO referrals for COVID-19 respiratory failure.

BACKGROUND: As the pandemic progressed, the use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) for COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome increased, and patient triage and transfer to ECMO centers became important to optimize patient outcomes. Our objectives are to identify predictors of patient transfer for veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-V ECMO) evaluation as well as to describe the outcomes of accepted patients. METHODS: This is a single-center, retrospective analysis of V-V ECMO transfer requests for adult patients with known or suspected COVID-19 and respiratory failure from March 2020 until March 2021. Data were collected prospectively during the triage process for transfer requests as part of clinical patient care at our institution. RESULTS: Of 341 referred patients, 112 (33%) were accepted for transfer to our facility, whereas 229 (67%) patients were declined for transfer. The Classification and Regression Tree analysis showed that patients' high pressure during airway pressure release ventilation (APRV) and age were the variables most significantly associated with the decision to accept or decline patients for transfer. CONCLUSIONS: Our triage process enabled one-third of referred patients to be transferred for evaluation, with nearly 70% of those patients ultimately receiving ECMO support. High ventilator settings on APRV and young age were associated with acceptance for transfer. Accepted patients also had a higher incidence of adjunctive therapies (proning and paralysis) prior to transfer request, less cardiac or renal dysfunction, and a shorter duration of mechanical ventilation. Further research is warranted to investigate the outcomes of nontransferred patients.

Cannula associated deep vein thromboses in COVID-19 patients supported with VV ECMO.

BACKGROUND: VV ECMO is increasingly used as a rescue strategy for hypercarbic and hypoxic respiratory failure refractory to conventional management, and more than 14,000 patients with COVID-19 related respiratory failure have been supported with VV ECMO to date. One of the known complications of VV ECMO support is the development of cannula-associated deep vein thromboses (CaDVT). The purpose of this study was to identify the incidence of CaDVT in COVID-19 patients supported with VV ECMO as compared to non-COVID-19 patients. We hypothesized that due to the hypercoagulable state and longer duration of VV ECMO support required for patients with COVID-19, a higher incidence of CaDVT would be observed in these patients. METHODS: This is a single center, retrospective observational study. About 291 non-trauma adult patients who were cannulated for VV ECMO and managed at our institution from January 1, 2014 to January 10, 2022 were included. The primary outcome was the presence of CaDVT 24 h after decannulation in COVID-19 versus non-COVID-19 patients. Our secondary outcome was continued presence of DVT on follow up imaging. CaDVT were defined as venous thrombi detected at prior cannulation sites. RESULTS: Both groups had a high incidence of CaDVT. There was no significant difference in the incidence of CaDVT in COVID-19 patients compared to non-COVID-19 patients (95% vs 88%, p = 0.13). Patients with COVID-19 had an increased incidence of persistent CaDVT on repeat imaging (78% vs 56%, p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Given the high number of post-decannulation CaDVT in both groups, routine screening should be a part of post ECMO care in both populations. Repeat venous duplex ultrasound should be performed to assess for the need for ongoing treatment given the high incidence of CaDVT that persisted on repeat duplex scans.

Venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in patients with traumatic brain injuries and severe respiratory failure: A single-center retrospective analysis.

BACKGROUND: Venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) can support trauma patients with severe respiratory failure. Use in traumatic brain injury (TBI) may raise concerns of worsening complications from intracranial bleeding. However, VV ECMO can rapidly correct hypoxemia and hypercarbia, possibly preventing secondary brain injury. We hypothesize that adult trauma patients with TBI on VV ECMO have comparable survival with trauma patients without TBI. METHODS: A single-center, retrospective cohort study involving review of electronic medical records of trauma admissions between July 1, 2014, and August 30, 2022, with discharge diagnosis of TBI who were placed on VV ECMO during their hospital course was performed. RESULTS: Seventy-five trauma patients were treated with VV ECMO; 36 (48%) had TBI. Of those with TBI, 19 (53%) had a hemorrhagic component. Survival was similar between patients with and without a TBI (72% vs. 64%, p = 0.45). Traumatic brain injury survivors had a higher admission Glasgow Coma Scale (7 vs. 3, p < 0.001) than nonsurvivors. Evaluation of prognostic scoring systems on initial head computed tomography demonstrated that TBI VV ECMO survivors were more likely to have a Rotterdam score of 2 (62% vs. 20%, p = 0.03) and no survivors had a Marshall score of ≥4. Twenty-nine patients (81%) had a repeat head computed tomography on VV ECMO with one incidence of expanding hematoma and one new focus of bleeding. Neither patient with a new/worsening bleed received anticoagulation. Survivors demonstrated favorable neurologic outcomes at discharge and outpatient follow-up, based on their mean Rancho Los Amigos Scale (6.5; SD, 1.2), median Cerebral Performance Category (2; interquartile range, 1-2), and median Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended (7.5; interquartile range, 7-8). CONCLUSION: In this series, the majority of TBI patients survived and had good neurologic outcomes despite a low admission Glasgow Coma Scale. Venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation may minimize secondary brain injury and may be considered in select patients with TBI. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and Epidemiological; Level IV.

Direct Discharge from the Critical Care Resuscitation Unit: Results from a Longitudinal Assessment.

Background: The critical care resuscitation unit (CCRU) facilitates interhospital transfer (IHT) of critically ill patients for immediate interventions. Due to these patients' acuity, it is uncommon for patients to be directly discharged home from this unit, but it does happen on occasion. Since there is no literature regarding outcomes of patients being discharged from a resuscitation unit, our study investigated these patients' outcome at greater than 12 months after being discharged directly from the CCRU. Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study of all adult patients directly discharged from the CCRU between January 01, 2017, and December 31, 2020. The primary outcome was number of ED visits or hospitalizations within 6 months. Secondary outcomes were number of ED visits or hospitalizations within 6, 12, and >12 months from CCRU discharge. Results: We analyzed 145 patients' records. Mean age was 56 (standard deviation [SD] ± 19), with a majority being male (72%) and Caucasian (58%). The most common discharge destination was home (139 patients, 96% of total subjects) versus hospice (2%) or nursing facilities (2%). Most patients (55%) did not have any hospital revisits within the first 6 months of discharge, while 31% had 1-2 revisits, and 14% had ≥3 revisits. The most common discharge diagnoses were soft tissue infection (16.5%), aortic dissection (14%), and stroke (11%). Factors which were associated with a greater likelihood of any return hospital visit within 6 months receiving mechanical ventilation during CCRU stay (coefficient -2.23, 95% CI 0.01-0.87, P=0.036), while high hemoglobin on CCRU discharge was associated with no ED revisit (coeff. 0.42, 95% CI 1.15-2.06, P=0.004). Conclusions: Most patients who were discharged from the CCRU did not require any hospital revisits in the first 6 months. Requiring mechanical ventilation and having soft tissue infection were associated with high unplanned hospital revisits following discharge. Further research is needed to validate these findings.

Arterial Monitoring in Hypertensive Emergencies: Significance for the Critical Care Resuscitation Unit.

INTRODUCTION: Blood pressure measurement is important for treating patients. It is known that there is a discrepancy between cuff blood pressure vs arterial blood pressure measurement. However few studies have explored the clinical significance of discrepancies between cuff (CPB) vs arterial blood pressure (ABP). Our study investigated whether differences in CBP and ABP led to change in management for patients with hypertensive emergencies and factors associated with this change. METHODS: This prospective observational study included adult patients admitted between January 2019-May 2021 to a resuscitation unit with hypertensive emergencies. We defined clinical significance of discrepancies as a discrepancy between CBP and ABP that resulted in change of clinical management. We used stepwise multivariable logistic regression to measure associations between clinical factors and outcomes. RESULTS: Of 212 patients we analyzed, 88 (42%) had change in management. Mean difference between CBP and ABP was 17 milligrams of mercury (SD 14). Increasing the existing rate of antihypertensive infusion occurred in 38 (44%) patients. Higher body mass index (odds ratio [OR] 1.04, 95% confidence Interval [CI] 1.0001-1.08, P-value <0.05) and history of peripheral arterial disease (OR 0.16, 95% CI 0.03-0.97, P-value <0.05) were factors associated with clinical significance of discrepancies. CONCLUSION: Approximately 40% of hypertensive emergencies had a clinical significance of discrepancy warranting management change when arterial blood pressure was initiated. Further studies are necessary to confirm our observations and to investigate the benefit-risk ratio of ABP monitoring.

Examining Predictors of Early Admission and Transfer to the Critical Care Resuscitation Unit.

INTRODUCTION: Previous studies have demonstrated that rapid transfer to definitive care improves the outcomes for many time-sensitive conditions. The critical care resuscitation unit (CCRU) improves the operations of the University of Maryland Medical Center (UMMC) by expediting the transfers and resuscitations for critically ill patients who exceed the resources at other facilities. In this study we investigated CCRU transfer patterns to determine patient characteristics and logistical factors that influence bed assignments and transfer to the CCRU. We hypothesized that CCRU physicians prioritize transfer for critically ill patients. Therefore, those patients would be transferred faster. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of all non-traumatic adult patients transferred to the CCRU from other hospitals between January 1-December 31, 2018. The primary outcome was the interval from transfer request to CCRU bed assignment. The secondary outcome was the interval from transfer request to CCRU arrival. We used multivariate logistic regressions to determine associations with the outcomes of interest. RESULTS: A total of 1,741 patients were admitted to the CCRU during the 2018 calendar year. Of those patients, 1,422 were transferred from other facilities and were included in the final analysis. Patients' mean age was 57 ± 17 years with a median Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score of 3 [interquartile range 1-6]. Median time from transfer request to CCRU bed assignment was 8 (0-70) minutes. A total of 776 (55%) patients underwent surgical intervention after arrival. Using the median transfer request to bed assignment time, we found that patients requiring stroke neurology (odds ratio [OR] 5.49, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.85-10.86), having higher SOFA score (OR 1.04, 95% CI 1.001-1.07), and needing an immediate operation (OR 2.85, 95% CI 1.98-4.13) were associated with immediate bed assignment time (≤8 minutes). Patients who were operated on (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.55-0.99) were significantly less likely to have an immediate bed assignment time. CONCLUSION: The CCRU expedited the transfer of critically ill patients who needed urgent interventions from outside facilities. Higher SOFA scores and the need for urgent neurological or surgical intervention were associated with near-immediate CCRU bed assignment. Other institutions with similar models to the CCRU should perform studies to confirm our observations.

Most patients with non-hypertensive diseases at a critical care resuscitation unit require arterial pressure monitoring: a prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: Blood pressure (BP) monitoring is essential for patient care. Invasive arterial BP (IABP) is more accurate than non-invasive BP (NIBP), although the clinical significance of this difference is unknown. We hypothesized that IABP would result in a change of management (COM) among patients with non-hypertensive diseases in the acute phase of resuscitation. METHODS: This prospective study included adults admitted to the Critical Care Resuscitation Unit (CCRU) with non-hypertensive disease from February 1, 2019, to May 31, 2021. Management plans to maintain a mean arterial pressure >65 mmHg (1 mmHg=0.133 kPa) were recorded in real time for both NIBP and IABP measurements. A COM was defined as a discrepancy between IABP and NIBP that resulted in an increase/decrease or addition/discontinuation of a medication/infusion. Classification and regression tree analysis identified significant variables associated with a COM and assigned relative variable importance (RVI) values. RESULTS: Among the 206 patients analyzed, a COM occurred in 94 (45.6% [94/206]) patients. The most common COM was an increase in current infusion dosages (40 patients, 19.4%). Patients receiving norepinephrine at arterial cannulation were more likely to have a COM compared with those without (45 [47.9%] vs. 32 [28.6%], P=0.004). Receiving norepinephrine (relative variable importance [RVI] 100%) was the most significant factor associated with a COM. No complications were identified with IABP use. CONCLUSION: A COM occurred in 94 (45.6%) non-hypertensive patients in the CCRU. Receiving vasopressors was the greatest factor associated with COM. Clinicians should consider IABP monitoring more often in non-hypertensive patients requiring norepinephrine in the acute resuscitation phase. Further studies are necessary to confirm the risk-to-benefit ratios of IABP among these high-risk patients.

Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation With or Without Advanced Intervention for Massive Pulmonary Embolism.

INTRODUCTION: Massive pulmonary embolism (MPE) is a rare but highly fatal condition. Our study's objective was to evaluate the association between advanced interventions and survival among patients with MPE treated with venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO). METHODS: This is a retrospective review of the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization (ELSO) registry data. We included adult patients with MPE who were treated with VA-ECMO during 2010-2020. Our Primary outcome was survival to hospital discharge; secondary outcomes were ECMO duration among survivors and rates of ECMO-related complications. Clinical variables were compared using the Pearson chi-square and Kruskal-Wallis H tests. RESULTS: We included 802 patients; 80 (10%) received SPE and 18 (2%) received CDT. Overall, 426 (53%) survived to discharge; survival was not significantly different among those treated with SPE or CDT on VA-ECMO (70%) versus VA-ECMO alone (52%) or SPE or CDT before VA-ECMO (52%). Multivariable regression found a trend towards increased survival among those treated with SPE or CDT while on ECMO (AOR 1.8, 95% CI 0.9-3.6), but no significant correlation. There was no association between advanced interventions and ECMO duration among survivors, or rates of ECMO-related complications. CONCLUSION: Our study found no difference in survival in patients with MPE who received advanced interventions prior to ECMO, and a slight non-significant benefit in those who received advanced interventions while on ECMO.

Body mass index does not impact survival in COVID-19 patients requiring veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

INTRODUCTION: With the increased demand for veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) during the COVID-19 pandemic, guidelines for patient candidacy have often limited this modality for patients with a body mass index (BMI) less than 40 kg/m2. We hypothesize that COVID-19 VV ECMO patients with at least class III obesity (BMI ≥ 40) have decreased in-hospital mortality when compared to non-COVID-19 and non-class III obese COVID-19 VV ECMO populations. METHODS: This is a single-center retrospective study of COVID-19 VV ECMO patients from January 1, 2014, to November 30, 2021. Our institution used BMI ≥ 40 as part of a multi-disciplinary VV ECMO candidate screening process in COVID-19 patients. BMI criteria were not considered for exclusion criteria in non-COVID-19 patients. Univariate and multivariable analyses were performed to assess in-hospital mortality differences. RESULTS: A total of 380 patients were included in our analysis: The COVID-19 group had a lower survival rate that was not statistically significant (65.7% vs.74.9%, p = .07). The median BMI between BMI ≥ 40 COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients was not different (44.5 vs 45.5, p = .2). There was no difference in survival between the groups (73.3% vs. 78.5%, p = .58), nor was there a difference in survival between the COVID-19 BMI ≥ 40 and BMI < 40 patients (73.3, 62.7, p= .29). Multivariable logistic regression with the outcome of in-hospital mortality was performed and BMI was not found to be significant (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.89, 1.01; p = .92). CONCLUSION: BMI ≥ 40 was not an independent risk factor for decreased in-hospital survival in this cohort of VV ECMO patients at a high-volume center. BMI should not be the sole factor when deciding VV ECMO candidacy in patients with COVID-19.

A descriptive evaluation of causes of death in venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

Veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) has become an important support modality for patients with acute respiratory failure refractory to optimal medical therapy, such as low tidal volume mechanical ventilator support, early paralytic infusion, and early prone positioning. The objective of this cohort study was to investigate the causes and timing of in-hospital mortality in patients on VV ECMO. All patients, excluding trauma and bridge to lung transplant, admitted 8/2014-6/2019 to a specialty ICU for VV ECMO were reviewed. Two hundred twenty-five patients were included. In-hospital mortality was 24.4% (n = 55). Most non-survivors (46/55, 84%) died prior to lung recovery and decannulation from VV ECMO. Most common cause of death (COD) for patients who died on VV ECMO was removal of life sustaining therapy (LST) in setting of multisystem organ failure (MSOF) (n = 24). Nine patients died a median of 9 days [6, 11] after decannulation. Most common COD in these patients was palliative withdrawal of LST due to poor prognosis (n = 3). Non-survivors were older and had worse predictive mortality scores than survivors. We found that death in patients supported with VV ECMO in our study most often occurs prior to decannulation and lung recovery. This study demonstrated that the most common cause of death in patients supported with VV ECMO was removal of LST due MSOF. Acute hemorrhage (systemic or intracranial) was not found to be a common cause of death in our patient population.

An observation-first strategy for liver injuries with "blush" on computed tomography is safe and effective.

INTRODUCTION: The management of liver injuries in hemodynamically stable patients is variable and includes primary treatment strategies of observation (OBS), angiography (interventional radiology [IR]) with angioembolization (AE), or operative intervention (OR). We aimed to evaluate the management of patients with liver injuries with active extravasation on computed tomography (CT) imaging, hypothesizing that AE will have more complications without improving outcomes compared with OBS. METHODS: This is a prospective, multicenter, observational study. Patients who underwent CT within 2 hours after arrival with extravasation (e.g., blush) on imaging were included. Exclusion criteria included cirrhosis, nontraumatic hemorrhage, transfers from outside facilities, and pregnancy. No hemodynamic exclusion criteria were used. The primary outcome was liver-specific complications. Secondary outcomes include length of stay and mortality. Angioembolization patients were compared with patients treated without AE. Propensity score matching was used to match based on penetrating mechanism, liver injury severity, arrival vital signs, and early transfusion. RESULTS: Twenty-three centers enrolled 192 patients. Forty percent of patients (n = 77) were initially OBS. Eleven OBS patients (14%) failed nonoperative management and went to IR or OR. Sixty-one patients (32%) were managed with IR, and 42 (69%) of these had AE as an initial intervention. Fifty-four patients (28%) went to OR+/- IR. After propensity score matching (n = 34 per group), there was no difference in baseline characteristics between AE and OBS. The AE group experienced more complications with a higher rate of IR-placed drains for abscess or biloma (22% vs. 0%, p = 0.01) and an increased overall length of stay ( p = 0.01). No difference was noted in transfusions or mortality. CONCLUSION: Observation is highly effective with few requiring additional interventions. Angioembolization was associated with higher rate of secondary drain placement for abscesses or biloma. Given this, a trial of OBS and avoidance of empiric AE may be warranted in hemodynamically stable, liver-injured patient with extravasation on CT. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level II.

Decreased PRESET-Score corresponds with improved survival in COVID-19 veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

INTRODUCTION: The PREdiction of Survival on ECMO Therapy Score (PRESET-Score) predicts mortality while on veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) for acute respiratory distress syndrome. The aim of our study was to assess the association between PRESET-Score and survival in a large COVID-19 VV ECMO cohort. METHODS: This was a single-center retrospective study of COVID-19 VV ECMO patients from 15 March 2020, to 30 November 2021. Univariable and Multivariable analyses were performed to assess patient survival and score differences. RESULTS: A total of 105 patients were included in our analysis with a mean PRESET-Score of 6.74. Overall survival was 65.71%. The mean PRESET-Score was significantly lower in the survivor group (6.03 vs 8.11, p < 0.001). Patients with a PRESET-Score less than or equal to six had improved survival compared to those with a PRESET-Score greater than or equal to 8 (97.7% vs. 32.5%, p < 0.001). In a multivariable logistic regression, a lower PRESET-Score was also predictive of survival (OR 2.84, 95% CI 1.75, 4.63, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: We demonstrate that lower PRESET scores are associated with improved survival. The utilization of this validated, quantifiable, and objective scoring system to help identify COVID-19 patients with the greatest potential to benefit from VV-ECMO appears feasible. The incorporation of the PRESET-Score into institutional ECMO candidacy guidelines can help insure and improve access of this limited healthcare resource to all critically ill patients.

Time From Infiltrate on Chest Radiograph to Venovenous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in COVID-19 Affects Mortality.

Venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) has been used to treat severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) acute respiratory distress syndrome; however, patient selection criteria have evolved throughout the pandemic. In this study, we sought to determine the association of patient mortality with time from positive COVID-19 test and infiltrate on chest radiograph (x-ray) to VV ECMO cannulation. We hypothesized that an increasing duration between a positive COVID-19 test or infiltrates on chest x-ray and cannulation would be associated with increased mortality. This is a single-center retrospective chart review of COVID-19 VV ECMO patients from March 1, 2020 to July 28, 2021. Unadjusted and adjusted multivariate analyses were performed to assess for mortality differences. A total of 93 patients were included in our study. Increased time, in days, from infiltrate on chest x-ray to cannulation was associated with increased mortality in both unadjusted (5-9, P = 0.002) and adjusted regression analyses (odds ratio [OR]: 1.49, 95% CI: 1.22-1.81, P < 0.01). Time from positive test to cannulation was not found to be significant between survivors and nonsurvivors (7.5-11, P = 0.06). Time from infiltrate on chest x-ray to cannulation for VV ECMO should be considered when assessing patient candidacy. Further larger cohort and prospective studies are required.

Outcomes and Factors Associated with Occult Septic Shock in Emergency Department Patients with Soft Tissue Infection.

Introduction: Patients who develop occult septic shock (OSS) are associated with worse outcomes than those with early septic shock (ESS). Patients with skin and soft tissue infection (SSTI) may have underlying organ dysfunction due to OSS, yet the prevalence and the outcomes of patients with SSTI and early versus occult shock have not been described. This study compared the clinical characteristics of SSTI patients and the prevalence of having no septic shock (NSS), ESS, or OSS. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed charts of adult patients who were transferred from any emergency department to our academic center between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2016. Outcomes of interest were the development of OSS and acute kidney injury (AKI). We performed logistic regressions to measure the association between clinical factors with the outcomes and created probability plots to show the relationship between key clinical variables and outcomes of OSS or AKI. Results: Among 269 patients, 218 (81%) patients had NSS, 16 (6%) patients had ESS, and 35 (13%) patients had OSS. Patients with OSS had higher mean serum lactate concentrations than patients with NSS (3.5 vs. 2.1 mmol/L, P < 0.01). Higher sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score was associated with higher likelihood of developing OSS (odds ratio [OR] 1.41, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.23-1.62, P < 0.001). NSS was associated with very low odds of developing AKI (OR 0.16, 95% CI 0.08-0.33, P < 0.001). Conclusions: 13% of the patients with SSTI developed OSS. Patients with OSS had elevated serum lactate concentration and higher SOFA score than those with NSS. Increased SOFA score is a predictor for the development of OSS.

Is the Critical Care Resuscitation Unit Sustainable: A 5-Year Experience of a Beneficial and Novel Model.

Background: The 6-bed critical care resuscitation unit (CCRU) is a unique and specialized intensive care unit (ICU) that streamlines the interhospital transfer (IHT-transfer between different hospitals) process for a wide range of patients with critical illness or time-sensitive disease. Previous studies showed the unit successfully increased the number of ICU admissions while reducing the time of transfer in the first year of its establishment. However, its sustainability is unknown. Methods: This was a descriptive retrospective analysis of adult, non-trauma patients who were transferred to an 800-bed quaternary medical center. Patients transferred to our medical center between January 1, 2014 and December 31, 2018 were eligible. We used interrupted time series (ITS) and descriptive analyses to describe the trend and compare the transfer process between patients who were transferred to the CCRU versus those transferred to other adult inpatient units. Results: From 2014 to 2018, 50,599 patients were transferred to our medical center; 31,582 (62%) were non-trauma adults. Compared with the year prior to the opening of the CCRU, ITS showed a significant increase in IHT after the establishment of the CCRU. The CCRU received a total of 7,788 (25%) IHTs during this period or approximately 20% of total transfers per year. Most transfers (41%) occurred via ground. Median and interquartile range [IQR] of transfer times to other ICUs (156 [65-1027] minutes) were longer than the CCRU (46 [22-139] minutes, P < 0.001). For the CCRU, the most common accepting services were cardiac surgery (16%), neurosurgery (11%), and emergency general surgery (10%). Conclusions: The CCRU increases the overall number of transfers to our institution, improves patient access to specialty care while decreasing transfer time, and continues to be a sustainable model over time. Additional research is needed to determine if transferring patients to the CCRU would continue to improve patients' outcomes and hospital revenue.

Association between resuscitation in the critical care resuscitation unit and in-hospital mortality.

INTRODUCTION: Patients who present in shock have high expected mortality and early resuscitation is crucial to improve their outcomes. The Critical Care Resuscitation Unit (CCRU) is a specialized unit at the University of Maryland Medical Center (UMMC) that prioritizes early resuscitation of critically ill patients. We hypothesized that lactate clearance and reduction of Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score during CCRU stay would be associated with lower in-hospital mortality. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of adult patients who were admitted to the CCRU between 01/01/2018-12/31/2018 and had a diagnosis of severe shock, determined by serum lactate ≥4 mmol/L. We excluded patients who died during CCRU stay. We used multivariable logistic regression to evaluate the association between lactate clearance and reduction in SOFA scores during CCRU stay and in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: Out of 1740 patients admitted to the CCRU in 2018, 172 (10%) had serum lactate ≥4 mmol/L. Twenty-two (13%) patients died during their CCRU stay. Our primary analysis included 129 patients with lactate clearance data and 136 patients with SOFA data. Average patients' age was 54 years, and median length of stay in the CCRU was 6 h 55 min. The average lactate and SOFA score on admission were 7.4 (3.8) mmol/L and 8.3 (4.7), respectively. Average lactate clearance was 1.9 (3.1) and average SOFA score reduction was 0.2 (2.9). In multivariable logistic regressions evaluating SOFA score and lactate separately, SOFA score reduction during CCRU stay was associated with lower in-hospital mortality (OR 0.83, 95% CI: 0.70-0.97) but lactate clearance was not (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.78-1.03). In forward stepwise multivariable analysis containing both SOFA score and lactate values, SOFA score clearance during CCRU stay was still associated with decreased in-hospital mortality (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.72-0.98). CONCLUSIONS: Care in the CCRU is more effective at reducing lactate than SOFA scores in patients with severe shock. However, SOFA score reduction in the resuscitation phase during the CCRU stay was associated with decreased odds of in-hospital mortality in this group of patients. Further studies are necessary to confirm our observations.

Invasive arterial blood pressure monitoring may aid in the medical management of hypertensive patients with acute aortic disease.

INTRODUCTION: Blood pressure (BP) monitoring and management is essential in the treatment of acute aortic disease (AoD). Previous studies had shown differences between invasive arterial BP monitoring (ABPM) and non-invasive cuff BP monitoring (CBPM), but not whether ABPM would result in patients' change of clinical management. We hypothesized that ABPM would change BP management in AoD patients. METHODS: This was a prospective observational study of adult patients with AoD admitted to the Critical Care Resuscitation Unit from January 2019 to February 2021. Patients with AoD and both ABPM and CBPM measurements were included. Clinician's BP management goals were assessed in real time before and after arterial catheter placement according to current guidelines. We defined change of management as change of current antihypertensive infusion rate or adding a new agent. We used multivariable logistic and ordinal regressions to determine relevant predictors. RESULTS: We analyzed 117 patients, and 56 (47%) had type A dissection. ABPM was frequently ≥10 mmHg higher than CBPM values. Among 40 (34%) patients with changes in management, 58% (23/40) had [ABPM-CBPM] differences ≥20 mmHg. ABPM prompted increasing current antihypertensive infusion in 68% (27/40) of patients. Peripheral artery disease (OR 13, 95% CI 1.18-50+) was associated with changes in clinical management, and ordinal regression showed hypertension and serum lactate to be associated with differences between ABPM and CBPM. CONCLUSIONS: ABPM was frequently higher than CBPM, resulting in 34% of changes of management, most commonly increasing anti-hypertensive infusion rates.

Discrepancy Between Invasive and Noninvasive Blood Pressure Measurements in Patients with Sepsis by Vasopressor Status.

INTRODUCTION: Blood pressure (BP) monitoring is an essential component of sepsis management. The Surviving Sepsis Guidelines recommend invasive arterial BP (IABP) monitoring, although the benefits over non-invasive BP (NIBP) monitoring are unclear. This study investigated discrepancies between IABP and NIBP measurement and their clinical significance. We hypothesized that IABP monitoring would be associated with changes in management among patients with sepsis requiring vasopressors. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of adult patients admitted to the critical care resuscitation unit at a quaternary medical center between January 1-December 31, 2017. We included patients with sepsis conditions AND IABP monitoring. We defined a clinically significant BP discrepancy (BPD) between NIBP and IABP measurement as a difference of > 10 millimeters of mercury (mm Hg) AND change of BP management to maintain mean arterial pressure ≥ 65 mm Hg. RESULTS: We analyzed 127 patients. Among 57 (45%) requiring vasopressors, 9 (16%) patients had a clinically significant BPD vs 2 patients (3% odds ratio [OR] 6.4; 95% CI: 1.2-30; P = 0.01) without vasopressors. In multivariable logistic regression, higher Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score (OR 1.33; 95% CI: 1.02-1.73; P = 0.03) and serum lactate (OR 1.27; 95% CI: 1.003-1.60, P = 0.04) were associated with increased likelihood of clinically significant BPD. There were no complications (95% CI: 0-0.02) from arterial catheter insertions. CONCLUSION: Among our population of septic patients, the use of vasopressors was associated with increased odds of a clinically significant blood pressure discrepancy between IABP and NIBP measurement. Additionally, higher SOFA score and serum lactate were associated with higher likelihood of clinically significant blood pressure discrepancy. Further studies are needed to confirm our observations and investigate the benefits vs the risk of harm of IABP monitoring in patients with sepsis.