Statistical analysis plan for the replacing protein via enteral nutrition in a stepwise approach in critically ill patients (REPLENISH) randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: The optimal amount and timing of protein intake in critically ill patients are unknown. REPLENISH (Replacing Protein via Enteral Nutrition in a Stepwise Approach in Critically Ill Patients) trial evaluates whether supplemental enteral protein added to standard enteral nutrition to achieve a high amount of enteral protein given from ICU day five until ICU discharge or ICU day 90 as compared to no supplemental enteral protein to achieve a moderate amount of enteral protein would reduce all-cause 90-day mortality in adult critically ill mechanically ventilated patients. METHODS: In this multicenter randomized trial, critically ill patients will be randomized to receive supplemental enteral protein (1.2 g/kg/day) added to standard enteral nutrition to achieve a high amount of enteral protein (range of 2-2.4 g/kg/day) or no supplemental enteral protein to achieve a moderate amount of enteral protein (0.8-1.2 g/kg/day). The primary outcome is 90-day all-cause mortality; other outcomes include functional and health-related quality-of-life assessments at 90 days. The study sample size of 2502 patients will have 80% power to detect a 5% absolute risk reduction in 90-day mortality from 30 to 25%. Consistent with international guidelines, this statistical analysis plan specifies the methods for evaluating primary and secondary outcomes and subgroups. Applying this statistical analysis plan to the REPLENISH trial will facilitate unbiased analyses of clinical data. CONCLUSION: Ethics approval was obtained from the institutional review board, Ministry of National Guard Health Affairs, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia (RC19/414/R). Approvals were also obtained from the institutional review boards of each participating institution. Our findings will be disseminated in an international peer-reviewed journal and presented at relevant conferences and meetings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04475666 . Registered on July 17, 2020.

Outcomes and Long-Term Survival of Adolescent and Young Adult Patients Admitted to the Intensive Care Unit Following Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation: A Single-Center Experience of 152 Patients.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Prognostic factors reliably predicting outcomes for critically ill adolescent and young adult (AYA) patients undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) are lacking. We assessed transplant and intensive care unit (ICU)-related factors impacting patient outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: AYA patients who underwent allo-HSCT and required ICU admission at a Tertiary care Centre, during the period of 2003-2013, were included in this retrospective review. This was a non-interventional study. Only outcomes after the first allo-HSCT and index ICU admissions were analyzed. Disease-, transplant-, and ICU-related variables were analyzed to identify risk factors predictive of survival. RESULTS: Overall, 152 patients were included (males, 60.5%); median age at transplantation was 24 years (interquartile range [IQR] 18-32.5); median age at admission to the ICU was 25.8 years (IQR 19-34). Eighty-four percent underwent transplantation for a hematological malignancy; 129 (85%) received myeloablative conditioning. Seventy-one percent of ICU admissions occurred within the first year after allo-HSCT. ICU admission was primarily due to respiratory failure (47.3%) and sepsis (43.4%). One hundred and three patients (68%) died within 28 days of ICU admission. The 1- and 5-year overall survival rates were 19% and 17%, respectively. Main causes for ICU-related death were refractory septic shock with multiorgan failure (n = 49, 32%) and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) (n = 39, 26%). Univariate analysis showed that ICU mortality was associated with an Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II score >20, a sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA score) > 12, a high lactate level, anemia, thrombocytopenia, leukopenia, hyperbilirubinemia, a high international normalized ratio (INR) and acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD). Multivariate analysis identified thrombocytopenia, high INR, and acute GVHD as independent predictors of mortality. CONCLUSIONS: In AYA allo-HSCT patients admitted to the ICU, mortality remains high. Higher SOFA and APACHE scores, the need for organ support, thrombocytopenia, coagulopathy, and acute GVHD predict poor outcomes.

Ultrasound surveillance for deep venous thrombosis and subsequent venous thromboembolism in adults with trauma: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Studies have shown routine ultrasound surveillance (RUSS) will facilitate deep vein thrombosis (DVT) detection in patients with trauma and reduce the subsequent incidence of pulmonary embolism (PE); however, the findings were inconsistent. In adults with trauma at a high risk of venous thromboembolism, this systematic review and meta-analysis compared RUSS outcomes with those of "no RUSS." METHODS: Three databases were screened for relevant articles from inception to October 18, 2021. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing RUSS with no RUSS were included. We used relative risks (RRs), odds ratios (ORs), and mean differences to pool effect estimates for dichotomous and continuous outcomes. The cochrane risk of bias or the risk of bias in non-randomized studies of interventions were used to assess bias risk. The grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluation framework assessed the certainty of the evidence. FINDINGS: Out of 1685 articles, 5 met the inclusion criteria (RCT: 1; observational studies: 4). Observational studies suggested RUSS is associated with higher odds of DVT detection (OR, 4.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.13-7.57; very low certainty). Whereas higher risks of DVT were associated with RUSS in the RCT (distal DVT: RR, 15.48; 95% CI, 7.62-31.48; low certainty, and proximal DVT: RR, 2.37; 95% CI, 1.04-5.39; very low certainty). Reduced odds of PE risk were observed with the RUSS (OR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.24-0.91; very low certainty). Observational studies indicated that RUSS had an uncertain effect on mortality (OR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.06-3.49). In the RCT, times to proximal and distal DVT diagnoses were shorter with RUSS (proximal DVT, mean difference 2.25 days shorter [95% CI, 5.74-1.24]; distal DVT, mean differences 1.56 days shorter [95% CI, 4.22-1.12]; very low certainty for both). Increasing bleeding risk was not linked to the RUSS group (RR, 1.24; 95% CI, 0.31-4.92). INTERPRETATION: The RUSS efficacy in adults with trauma at high risk for venous thromboembolism showed that it increases DVT detection, decreases PE incidence, and shortens the time to DVT diagnosis, with an uncertain impact on mortality. The evidence is low or very low in certainty because of bias, inconsistency, imprecision, and indirectness.

Replacing protein via enteral nutrition in a stepwise approach in critically ill patients: the REPLENISH randomized clinical trial protocol.

BACKGROUND: Protein intake is recommended in critically ill patients to mitigate the negative effects of critical illness-induced catabolism and muscle wasting. However, the optimal dose of enteral protein remains unknown. We hypothesize that supplemental enteral protein (1.2 g/kg/day) added to standard enteral nutrition formula to achieve high amount of enteral protein (range 2-2.4 g/kg/day) given from ICU day 5 until ICU discharge or ICU day 90 as compared to no supplemental enteral protein to achieve moderate amount enteral protein (0.8-1.2 g/kg/day) would reduce all-cause 90-day mortality in adult critically ill mechanically ventilated patients. METHODS: The REPLENISH (Replacing Protein Via Enteral Nutrition in a Stepwise Approach in Critically Ill Patients) trial is an open-label, multicenter randomized clinical trial. Patients will be randomized to the supplemental protein group or the control group. Patients in both groups will receive the primary enteral formula as per the treating team, which includes a maximum protein 1.2 g/kg/day. The supplemental protein group will receive, in addition, supplemental protein at 1.2 g/kg/day starting the fifth ICU day. The control group will receive the primary formula without supplemental protein. The primary outcome is 90-day all-cause mortality. Other outcomes include functional and quality of life assessments at 90 days. The trial will enroll 2502 patients. DISCUSSION: The study has been initiated in September 2021. Interim analysis is planned at one third and two thirds of the target sample size. The study is expected to be completed by the end of 2025. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04475666 . Registered on July 17, 2020.

Saudi Critical Care Society clinical practice guidelines on the prevention of venous thromboembolism in adults with trauma: reviewed for evidence-based integrity and endorsed by the Scandinavian Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine.

BACKGROUND: To develop evidence-based clinical practice guidelines on venous thromboembolism (VTE) prevention in adults with trauma in inpatient settings. METHODS: The Saudi Critical Care Society (SCCS) sponsored guidelines development and included 22 multidisciplinary panel members who completed conflict-of-interest forms. The panel developed and answered structured guidelines questions. For each question, the literature was searched for relevant studies. To summarize treatment effects, meta-analyses were conducted or updated. Quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, then the evidence-to-decision (EtD) framework was used to generate recommendations. Recommendations covered the following prioritized domains: timing of pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis initiation in non-operative blunt solid organ injuries; isolated blunt traumatic brain injury (TBI); isolated blunt spine trauma or fracture and/or spinal cord injury (SCI); type and dose of pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis; mechanical VTE prophylaxis; routine duplex ultrasonography (US) surveillance; and inferior vena cava filters (IVCFs). RESULTS: The panel issued 12 clinical practice recommendations-one, a strong recommendation, 10 weak, and one with no recommendation due to insufficient evidence. The panel suggests starting early pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis for non-operative blunt solid organ injuries, isolated blunt TBIs, and SCIs. The panel suggests using low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) over unfractionated heparin (UFH) and suggests either intermediate-high dose LMWH or conventional dosing LMWH. For adults with trauma who are not pharmacologic candidates, the panel strongly recommends using mechanical VTE prophylaxis with intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC). The panel suggests using either combined VTE prophylaxis with mechanical and pharmacologic methods or pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis alone. Additionally, the panel suggests routine bilateral lower extremity US in adults with trauma with elevated risk of VTE who are ineligible for pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis and suggests against the routine placement of prophylactic IVCFs. Because of insufficient evidence, the panel did not issue any recommendation on the use of early pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis in adults with isolated blunt TBI requiring neurosurgical intervention. CONCLUSION: The SCCS guidelines for VTE prevention in adults with trauma were based on the best available evidence and identified areas for further research. The framework may facilitate adaptation of recommendations by national/international guideline policymakers.

Saudi Critical Care Society clinical practice guidelines on the prevention of venous thromboembolism in adults with trauma: reviewed for evidence-based integrity and endorsed by the Scandinavian Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine

To develop evidence-based clinical practice guidelines on venous thromboembolism (VTE) prevention in adults with trauma in inpatient settings. The Saudi Critical Care Society (SCCS) sponsored guidelines development and included 22 multidisciplinary panel members who completed conflict-of-interest forms. The panel developed and answered structured guidelines questions. For each question, the literature was searched for relevant studies. To summarize treatment effects, meta-analyses were conducted or updated. Quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, then the evidence-to-decision (EtD) framework was used to generate recommendations. Recommendations covered the following prioritized domains: timing of pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis initiation in non-operative blunt solid organ injuries; isolated blunt traumatic brain injury (TBI); isolated blunt spine trauma or fracture and/or spinal cord injury (SCI); type and dose of pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis; mechanical VTE prophylaxis; routine duplex ultrasonography (US) surveillance; and inferior vena cava filters (IVCFs). The panel issued 12 clinical practice recommendations­one, a strong recommendation, 10 weak, and one with no recommendation due to insufficient evidence. The panel suggests starting early pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis for non-operative blunt solid organ injuries, isolated blunt TBIs, and SCIs. The panel suggests using low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) over unfractionated heparin (UFH) and suggests either intermediate­high dose LMWH or conventional dosing LMWH. For adults with trauma who are not pharmacologic candidates, the panel strongly recommends using mechanical VTE prophylaxis with intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC). The panel suggests using either combined VTE prophylaxis with mechanical and pharmacologic methods or pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis alone. Additionally, the panel suggests routine bilateral lower extremity US in adults with trauma with elevated risk of VTE who are ineligible for pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis and suggests against the routine placement of prophylactic IVCFs. Because of insufficient evidence, the panel did not issue any recommendation on the use of early pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis in adults with isolated blunt TBI requiring neurosurgical intervention. The SCCS guidelines for VTE prevention in adults with trauma were based on the best available evidence and identified areas for further research. The framework may facilitate adaptation of recommendations by national/international guideline policymakers.

Prognostic markers in patients with COVID-19 requiring intensive care support.

Objectives: Several hematological and immunological markers, particularly neutrophil count, predict the severity of COVID-19. This study aimed at assessing hematological and coagulation parameters at different time points, to predict the complications or outcomes of patients with COVID-19 admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). Methods: We conducted a prospective observational multicenter study in ICU departments. A total of 118 patients with COVID-19 admitted to the ICU were included. Clinical data and blood samples from routine hematology and coagulation tests were collected at admission, and on days 3, 7, and 14. The main outcome measures were high-flow-O2 requirement, thrombosis, and 30-day mortality. Results: The venous thromboembolism score increased from a mean of 5.10 ± 2 on day 0 to 6.40 ± 2.80 on day 14 (P = 0.0002). The disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) score significantly correlated with thrombosis (P = 0.031). A total of 41.20% of patients in the ICU had a DIC score ≥4, and 11.40% had a score <4. Mortality was negatively associated with patients on high-flow O2, 9 patients (10.80%) (P = 0.040), and positively associated with patients receiving ventilation, 16 patients (27.50%) (P < 0.001). An increase in white blood cell count (subdistribution hazard ratio (SHR): 0.91; 95% CI: 0.80-1) and neutrophil count (SHR: 1; 95% CI: 1.01-1.05) was associated with greater disease severity and D-dimer level (SHR: 1.60; 95% CI: 1.10-2.5). Conclusion: The venous thromboembolism score was significantly higher for patients who died than those who recovered. Furthermore, mechanical ventilation was associated with high mortality, whereas the risk of thrombosis and ICU admission correlated with high D-dimer values and DIC scores. Therefore, D-dimer levels and DIC scores are prognostic markers that may predict disease severity in patients with COVID-19.

A retrospective analysis of the frequency of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia in the intensive care unit at a tertiary care center in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

BACKGROUND: Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is an extremely serious and potentially fatal condition that can develop in patients taking heparin-based medications, such as unfractionated heparin (UFH) or low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH). The incidence and risk factors for HIT in critically ill patients, however, are not well defined. METHODS: We retrospectively collected data on HIT test results, route of heparin administration, age, sex, heparin type (UFH or LMWH), and date of illness from patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) and regular nursing floor (non-ICU) at our hospital between January 2011 and December 2014. We screened patients for HIT using the 4T score and confirmed the diagnosis through laboratory testing (direct enzyme immunoassay immunoglobulin G [IgG] or a platelet-activating antibody). RESULTS: We screened a total of 946 patients, 56 (5.9%) of whom were positive for HIT. Among 776 patients receiving UFH and 180 receiving LMWH, 2.8 and 6.6% developed HIT, respectively (P = 0.051). We then classified our patients into two groups: ICU, and non-ICU. In the non-ICU group (n = 317), 4 (2.7%) patients receiving LMWH and 25 (5.1%) receiving UFH were positive for HIT (P = 0.221). In the ICU group (n = 639), 1 (3.1%) patient receiving LMWH and 26 (9.1%) receiving UFH were positive for HIT (P = 0.249). The ICU group, therefore, had a higher cumulative incidence rate of HIT than the non-ICU group (8.5 vs. 4.5%). CONCLUSION: HIT was more common in ICU patients than non-ICU patients and in more patients receiving UFH than LMWH, although the differences were not statistically significant. Early diagnosis and appropriate treatment are essential to prevent adverse outcomes in patients with HIT.

Point prevalence of delirium among critically ill patients in Saudi Arabia: A multicenter observational study.

Background: Delirium in critically ill patients is independently associated with poor clinical outcomes. There is a scarcity of published data on the prevalence of delirium among critically ill patients in Saudi Arabia. Therefore, we sought to determine, in a multicenter fashion, the prevalence of delirium in critically ill patients in Saudi Arabia and explore associated risk factors. Methods: A cross-sectional point prevalence study was conducted on January 28, 2020, at 14 intensive care units (ICUs) across 3 universities and 11 other tertiary care hospitals in Saudi Arabia. Delirium was screened once using the Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist. We excluded patients who were unable to participate in a valid delirium assessment, patients admitted with traumatic brain injury, and patients with documented dementia in their medical charts. Results: Of the 407 screened ICU patients, 233 patients were enrolled and 45.9% were diagnosed with delirium. The prevalence was higher in mechanically ventilated patients compared to patients not mechanically ventilated (57.5% vs. 33.6%; P < 0.001). In a multivariate model, risk factors independently associated with delirium included age (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.021; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01-1.04; P = 0.008), mechanical ventilation (AOR, 2.39; 95% CI, 1.34-4.28; P = 0.003), and higher severity of illness (AOR, 1.01; 95% CI, 1.001-1.021; P = 0.026). Conclusion: In our study, delirium remains a prevalent complication, with distinct risk factors. Further studies are necessary to investigate long-term outcomes of delirium in critically ill patients in Saudi Arabia.

Report of Low Incidence of Thrombosis with Early Prophylaxis in Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19 from Two Saudi Tertiary Centers.

BACKGROUND: Thrombotic events can increase the COVID-19 associated disease mortality. The administration of prophylactic anticoagulants had been shown to decrease the incidence of thrombosis, mortality, and ICU admission rates in COVID-19 patients. AIMS: The present study investigates the rate of thrombosis with early anticoagulation prophylaxis, the various risk factors for thrombotic events, and the overall survival rate in hospitalized COVID-19 cases. METHODS: In this prospective observational study, 425 patients aged ≥14 years were included in the study who were hospitalized with COVID-19 related symptoms from March to October 2020 at two tertiary care hospitals in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Venous thromboembolism (VTE) score was evaluated, and VTE prophylaxis was administered according to the hospital guidelines. Patients' demographics, comorbidities, disease presentation, and sequential hematological profiles were also recorded. Samples were collected at different time points to determine the hematological profiles. RESULTS: Out of 425 with positive COVID-19 subjects, eight (1.9%) patients developed thrombosis during admission, with pulmonary embolism being the most common type. VTE prophylaxis was administered to 394 (92.7%) patients. These anticoagulants included enoxaparin (86.3%), heparin (12.7%), warfarin (0.8%) and apixaban (0.3%). Comorbid conditions were recorded in 253 (59.5%) patients. ICU admission rate was 28% (n = 119), with a median time to transfer to ICU of 1 day (r: 0-33 days). A trend of high VTE score (5.0) with ICU admission and mortality (P = <.001) was observed. The observed mortality rate for our cohort was 5.9% (25 events out of 425); however, for patients admitted in ICU, it was 16% (19 events out of 119 admissions). CONCLUSION: We are reporting a low incidence of thrombosis in COVID-19 patients. We have demonstrated that the early administration of prophylactic anticoagulants might reduce the risk of thrombotic events and the associated mortality. We observed a higher VTE score and thrombosis in patients admitted to the ICU.

Clinical characteristics and outcomes of critically ill mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients receiving interleukin-6 receptor antagonists and corticosteroid therapy: a preliminary report from a multinational registry.

BACKGROUND: Interleukin-6 receptor antagonists (IL-6RAs) and steroids are emerging immunomodulatory therapies for severe and critical coronavirus disease (COVID-19). In this preliminary report, we aim to describe the epidemiology, clinical characteristics, and outcomes of adult critically ill COVID-19 patients, requiring invasive mechanical ventilation (iMV), and receiving IL-6RA and steroids therapy over the last 11 months. MATERIALS AND METHODS: International, multicenter, cohort study derived from Viral Infection and Respiratory Illness University Study registry and conducted through Discovery Network, Society of Critical Care Medicine. Data were collected between March 01, 2020, and January 10, 2021. RESULTS: Of 860 patients who met eligibility criteria, 589 received steroids, 170 IL-6RAs, and 101 combinations. Patients who received IL-6RAs were younger (median age of 57.5 years vs. 61.1 and 61.8 years in the steroids and combination groups, respectively). The median C-reactive protein level was > 75 mg/L, indicating a hyperinflammatory phenotype. The median daily steroid dose was 7.5 mg dexamethasone or equivalent (interquartile range: 6-14 mg); 80.8% and 19.2% received low-dose and high-dose steroids, respectively. Of the patients who received IL-6RAs, the majority received one dose of tocilizumab and sarilumab (dose range of 600-800 mg for tocilizumab and 200-400 mg for sarilumab). Regarding the timing of administration, we observed that steroid and IL-6RA administration on day 0 of ICU admission was only 55.6% and 39.5%, respectively. By day 28, when compared with steroid use alone, IL-6RA use was associated with an adjusted incidence rate ratio (aIRR) of 1.12 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.88, 1.4) for ventilator-free days, while combination therapy was associated with an aIRR of 0.83 (95% CI 0.6, 1.14). IL-6RA use was associated with an adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of 0.68 (95% CI 0.44, 1.07) for the 28-day mortality rate, while combination therapy was associated with an aOR of 1.07 (95% CI 0.67, 1.70). Liver dysfunction was higher in IL-6RA group (p = 0.04), while the bacteremia rate did not differ among groups. CONCLUSIONS: Discordance was observed between the registry utilization patterns (i.e., timing of steroids and IL-6RA administration) and new evidence from the recent randomized controlled trials and guideline recommendations. These data will help us to identify areas of improvement in prescribing patterns and enhance our understanding of IL-6RA safety with different steroid regimens. Further studies are needed to evaluate the drivers of hospital-level variation and their impact on clinical outcomes. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04486521. Registered on July 2020.

Adjunctive ketamine for sedation in critically ill mechanically ventilated patients: an active-controlled, pilot, feasibility clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: Ketamine has been shown to decrease sedative requirements in intensive care unit (ICU). Randomized trials are limited on patient-centered outcomes. We designed this pilot trial to evaluate the feasibility of a large randomized controlled trial (RCT) testing the effect of ketamine as an adjunct analgosedative compared with standard of care alone as a control group (CG) in critically ill patients with mechanical ventilation (MV). We also provided preliminary evidence on clinically relevant outcomes to plan a larger trial. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Pilot, active-controlled, open-label RCT was conducted at medical, surgical, and transplant ICUs at a large tertiary and quaternary care medical institution (King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Saudi Arabia). The study included adult patients who were intubated within 24 h, expected to require MV for the next calendar day, and had institutional pain and sedation protocol initiated. Patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to adjunct ketamine infusion 1-2 µg/kg/min for 48 h or CG alone. RESULTS: Of 437 patients screened from September 2019 through November 2020, 83 (18.9%) patients were included (43 in CG and 40 in ketamine) and 352 (80.5%) were excluded. Average enrollment rate was 3-4 patients/month. Consent and protocol adherence rates were adequate (89.24% and 76%, respectively). Demographics were balanced between groups. Median MV duration was 7 (interquartile range [IQR] 3-9.25 days) in ketamine and 5 (IQR 2-8 days) in CG. Median VFDs was 19 (IQR 0-24.75 days) in ketamine and 19 (IQR 0-24 days) in the CG (p = 0.70). More patients attained goal Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale at 24 and 48 h in ketamine (67.5% and 73.5%, respectively) compared with CG (52.4% and 66.7%, respectively). Sedatives and vasopressors cumulative use, and hemodynamic changes were similar. ICU length-of-stay was 12.5 (IQR 6-21.2 days) in ketamine, compared with 12 (IQR 5.5-23 days) in CG. No serious adverse events were observed in either group. CONCLUSIONS: Ketamine as an adjunct analgosedative agent appeared to be feasible and safe with no negative impact on outcomes, including hemodynamics. This pilot RCT identified areas of improvement in study protocol before conducting a large, adequately powered, multicenter RCT which is likely justified to investigate ketamine association with patient-centered outcomes further. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04075006. Registered on 30 August 2019. Current controlled trials: ISRCTN14730035. Registered on 3 February 2020.

Incidence of lupus anticoagulant in hospitalized covid-19 patients.

BACKGROUND: Procoagulant profile of 2019-nCoV/SARS-CoV-2 has been well documented over the last year. Perturbance in coagulating factors has also been reported in Covid-19 patients, including increased d-dimers and reports of lupus anticoagulant (LA). METHODS: The current study aimed to identify the incidence of positivity of lupus anticoagulant in Covid-19 patients and analyze the association between LA and D-dimer in predicting thrombosis and mortality in one-hundred and five hospitalized adult (age >14 years) patients and forty-three hospitalized pediatric (age <14 years) patients with a confirmed diagnosis of Covid-19 between June 2020 and September 2020. RESULTS: Twenty-one (20%) adult patients were tested positive for PTT LA, of which nine (8.6%) turned out to be confirmed positive for LA through StaClot and DRVVT Ratio tests. Six (14%) pediatric patients were positive for PTT LA, and only one (2.3%) had positive StaClot. Median D-dimer at admission was positively correlated with age and CRP among adult patients and was significantly higher in expired cases (P=0.001). No association between any of the coagulation tests and thrombosis or mortality was observed in the pediatric cohort. CONCLUSION: We report an increased incidence of LA in Covid-19 patients, yet we didn't find any association between thrombotic events or mortality, probably due to the small sample size.

The Saudi Critical Care Society extracorporeal life support chapter guidance on utilization of veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in adults with acute respiratory distress syndrome and special considerations in the era of coronavirus disease 2019.

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is considered as a supportive treatment that provides circulatory and ventilatory support and can be thought off as a bridge to organ recovery. Since 2009, it has been applied as a rescue treatment for patients with severe adult respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) mainly due to viral causes. In December 2019, several patients presented with a constellation of symptoms of viral pneumonia in China. A new strain of the corona virus family, called COVID-19, has been discovered to be the cause of this severe mysterious illness that was named severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS­CoV­2). This new virus continued to spread across the globe leading to the World Health Organization announcing it as a pandemic in the early 2020. By the end of March 2021, the number of COVID-19 cases worldwide exceeded 126 million cases. In Saudi Arabia, the first confirmed case of COVID-19 was reported in the 2nd March 2020. By the end of March 2021, the total number of confirmed COVID-19 cases in Saudi Arabia is just above 360,000. In anticipation of the need of ECMO for the treatment of patients with SARS­CoV­2 based on the previous Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus pandemic experience, the Saudi Extra-Corporeal Life Support (ECLS) chapter that is under the umbrella of the Saudi Critical Care Society (SCCS) convened a working group of ECMO experts. The mission of this group was to formulate a guidance for the use of ECMO as a last resort for patients with severe ARDS, especially with COVID-19 based on available evidence. The ECLS-SCCS chapter wanted to generate a document that can be used to simple guide, with a focus on safety, to provide ECMO service for patients with severe ARDS with a special focus on SARS­CoV­2.

Critically ill patients with diabetes and Middle East respiratory syndrome: a multi-center observational study.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes is a risk factor for infection with coronaviruses. This study describes the demographic, clinical data, and outcomes of critically ill patients with diabetes and Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS). METHODS: This retrospective cohort study was conducted at 14 hospitals in Saudi Arabia (September 2012-January 2018). We compared the demographic characteristics, underlying medical conditions, presenting symptoms and signs, management and clinical course, and outcomes of critically ill patients with MERS who had diabetes compared to those with no diabetes. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to determine if diabetes was an independent predictor of 90-day mortality. RESULTS: Of the 350 critically ill patients with MERS, 171 (48.9%) had diabetes. Patients with diabetes were more likely to be older, and have comorbid conditions, compared to patients with no diabetes. They were more likely to present with respiratory failure requiring intubation, vasopressors, and corticosteroids. The median time to clearance of MERS-CoV RNA was similar (23 days (Q1, Q3: 17, 36) in patients with diabetes and 21.0 days (Q1, Q3: 10, 33) in patients with no diabetes). Mortality at 90 days was higher in patients with diabetes (78.9% versus 54.7%, p < 0.0001). Multivariable regression analysis showed that diabetes was an independent risk factor for 90-day mortality (odds ratio, 2.09; 95% confidence interval, 1.18-3.72). CONCLUSIONS: Half of the critically ill patients with MERS have diabetes; which is associated with more severe disease. Diabetes is an independent predictor of mortality among critically patients with MERS.

Adjunct low-dose ketamine infusion vs standard of care in mechanically ventilated critically ill patients at a Tertiary Saudi Hospital (ATTAINMENT Trial): study protocol for a randomized, prospective, pilot, feasibility trial.

BACKGROUND: A noticeable interest in ketamine infusion for sedation management has developed among critical care physicians for critically ill patients. The 2018 Pain, Agitation/sedation, Delirium, Immobility, and Sleep disruption guideline suggested low-dose ketamine infusion as an adjunct to opioid therapy to reduce opioid requirements in post-surgical patients in the intensive care unit (ICU). This was, however, rated as conditional due to the very low quality of evidence. Ketamine has favorable characteristics, making it an especially viable alternative for patients with respiratory and hemodynamic instability. The Analgo-sedative adjuncT keTAmine Infusion iN Mechanically vENTilated ICU patients (ATTAINMENT) trial aims to assess the effect and safety of adjunct low-dose continuous infusion of ketamine as an analgo-sedative compared to standard of care in critically ill patients on mechanical ventilation (MV) for ≥ 24 h. METHODS/DESIGN: This trial is a prospective, randomized, active controlled, open-label, pilot, feasibility study of adult ICU patients (> 14 years old) on MV. The study will take place in the adult ICUs in the King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center (KFSH&RC), Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, and will enroll 80 patients. Patients will be randomized post-intubation into two groups: the intervention group will receive an adjunct low-dose continuous infusion of ketamine plus standard of care. Ketamine will be administered over a period of 48 h at a fixed infusion rate of 2 µg/kg/min (0.12 mg/kg/h) in the first 24 h followed by 1 µg/kg/min (0.06 mg/kg/h) in the second 24 h. The control group will receive standard of care in the ICU (propofol and/or fentanyl and/or midazolam) according to the KFSH&RC sedation and analgesia protocol as clinically appropriate. The primary outcome is MV duration until ICU discharge, death, extubation, or 28 days post-randomization, whichever comes first. DISCUSSION: The first patient was enrolled on 1 September 2019. As of 10 October 2019, a total of 16 patients had been enrolled. We expect to complete the recruitment by 31 December 2020. The findings of this pilot trial will likely justify further investigation for the role of adjunct low-dose ketamine infusion as an analgo-sedative agent in a larger, multicenter, randomized controlled trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04075006. Registered on 30 August 2019. Current controlled trials: ISRCTN14730035. Registered on 3 February 2020.

Ribavirin and Interferon Therapy for Critically Ill Patients With Middle East Respiratory Syndrome: A Multicenter Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of ribavirin and recombinant interferon (RBV/rIFN) therapy on the outcomes of critically ill patients with Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), accounting for time-varying confounders. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of critically ill patients with laboratory-confirmed MERS from 14 hospitals in Saudi Arabia diagnosed between September 2012 and January 2018. We evaluated the association of RBV/rIFN with 90-day mortality and MERS coronavirus (MERS-CoV) RNA clearance using marginal structural modeling to account for baseline and time-varying confounders. RESULTS: Of 349 MERS patients, 144 (41.3%) patients received RBV/rIFN (RBV and/or rIFN-α2a, rIFN-α2b, or rIFN-ß1a; none received rIFN-ß1b). RBV/rIFN was initiated at a median of 2 days (Q1, Q3: 1, 3 days) from intensive care unit admission. Crude 90-day mortality was higher in patients with RBV/rIFN compared to no RBV/rIFN (106/144 [73.6%] vs 126/205 [61.5%]; P = .02]. After adjusting for baseline and time-varying confounders using a marginal structural model, RBV/rIFN was not associated with changes in 90-day mortality (adjusted odds ratio, 1.03 [95% confidence interval {CI}, .73-1.44]; P = .87) or with more rapid MERS-CoV RNA clearance (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.65 [95% CI, .30-1.44]; P = .29). CONCLUSIONS: In this observational study, RBV/rIFN (RBV and/or rIFN-α2a, rIFN-α2b, or rIFN-ß1a) therapy was commonly used in critically ill MERS patients but was not associated with reduction in 90-day mortality or in faster MERS-CoV RNA clearance.

Arabic intensive care delirium screening checklist's validity and reliability: A multicenter study.

PURPOSE: To develop an Arabic version of Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist (ICDSC) and assess its validity and reliability among critically ill patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Multicentered study of convenience sample of adult ICU patients. Arabic translation was performed with rigorous back-to-back translation methods. Concurrent validity was established by calculating the sensitivity and specificity of two examiner assessments compared to a psychiatric evaluation. Kappa coefficients describe interrater reliability, whereas Cronbach α and composite reliability depict internal consistency. RESULTS: Three hundred critically ill patients were enrolled. Of these, validity testing was assessed in 180 patients. ICDSC screening was positive for delirium in 11% of enrolled patients. The area under the receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve is 0.9413, with predicted sensitivity 70% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 60-81%) and specificity 99% (95% CI: 98-100%). The Arabic ICDSC showed acceptable internal consistency (Cronbach α = 0.63 and composite reliability = 0.64). Interrater agreement was excellent (Kappa coefficient [Ò¡] = 0.85). CONCLUSIONS: Arabic ICDSC is a valid and reliable delirium-screening tool among Arabic-speaking ICU population. Future studies could address whether these findings are generalizable to a higher proportion of mechanically ventilated patients, and address acceptability and reliability in other Arabic language critical care settings.

National Approach to Standardize and Improve Mechanical Ventilation.

NASAM (National Approach to Standardize and Improve Mechanical Ventilation) is a national collaborative quality improvement project in Saudi Arabia. It aims to improve the care of mechanically ventilated patients by implementing evidence-based practices with the goal of reducing the rate of ventilator-associated events and therefore reducing mortality, mechanical ventilation duration and intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay. The project plans to extend the implementation to a total of 100 ICUs in collaboration with multiple health systems across the country. As of March 22, 2019, a total of 78 ICUs have registered from 6 different health sectors, 48 hospitals, and 27 cities. The leadership support in all health sectors for NASAM speaks of the commitment to improve the care of mechanically ventilated patients across the kingdom.

Treatment of Middle East Respiratory Syndrome with a combination of lopinavir-ritonavir and interferon-ß1b (MIRACLE trial): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: It had been more than 5 years since the first case of Middle East Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus infection (MERS-CoV) was recorded, but no specific treatment has been investigated in randomized clinical trials. Results from in vitro and animal studies suggest that a combination of lopinavir/ritonavir and interferon-ß1b (IFN-ß1b) may be effective against MERS-CoV. The aim of this study is to investigate the efficacy of treatment with a combination of lopinavir/ritonavir and recombinant IFN-ß1b provided with standard supportive care, compared to treatment with placebo provided with standard supportive care in patients with laboratory-confirmed MERS requiring hospital admission. METHODS: The protocol is prepared in accordance with the SPIRIT (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials) guidelines. Hospitalized adult patients with laboratory-confirmed MERS will be enrolled in this recursive, two-stage, group sequential, multicenter, placebo-controlled, double-blind randomized controlled trial. The trial is initially designed to include 2 two-stage components. The first two-stage component is designed to adjust sample size and determine futility stopping, but not efficacy stopping. The second two-stage component is designed to determine efficacy stopping and possibly readjustment of sample size. The primary outcome is 90-day mortality. DISCUSSION: This will be the first randomized controlled trial of a potential treatment for MERS. The study is sponsored by King Abdullah International Medical Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Enrollment for this study began in November 2016, and has enrolled thirteen patients as of Jan 24-2018. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT02845843 . Registered on 27 July 2016.