Prediction of time of death after withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment in potential donors after cardiac death*.

OBJECTIVE: Organ donation after cardiac death increases the number of donor organs. In controlled donation after cardiac death donors, the period between withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment and cardiac arrest is one of the parameters used to assess whether organs are suitable for transplantation. The objective of this study was to identify donation after cardiac death donor characteristics that affect the interval between withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment and cardiac death. DESIGN: Prospective multicenter study of observational data. PATIENTS: All potential donation after cardiac death donors in The Netherlands between May 2007 and June 2009 were identified. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Of the 242 potential donation after cardiac death donors, 211 entered analysis, 76% of them died within 60 mins, and 83% died within 120 mins after withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment. The median time to death was 20 mins (range 1 min to 3.8 days). Controlled mechanical ventilation, use of norepinephrine, absence of reflexes, neurologic deficit as cause of death, and absence of cardiovascular comorbidity were associated with death within 60 and 120 mins. The use of analgesics, sedatives, or extubation did not significantly influence the moment of death. In the multivariable logistic regression analysis, controlled mechanical ventilation remained a risk factor for death within 60 mins, and norepinephrine administration and absence of cardiovascular comorbidity remained risk factors for death within 120 mins. The clinical judgment of the intensivist predicted death within 60 and 120 mins with a sensitivity of 73% and 89%, respectively, and a specificity of 56% and 25%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Despite the identification of risk factors for early death and the additional value of the clinical judgment by the intensivist, it is not possible to reliably identify potential donation after cardiac death donors who will die within 1 or 2 hrs after life-sustaining treatment has been withdrawn. Consequently, a donation procedure should be initiated in every potential donor.

Probiotics versus antibiotic decontamination of the digestive tract: infection and mortality.

PURPOSE: Selective decontamination of the digestive tract (SDD) has been shown to decrease the infection rate and mortality in intensive care units (ICUs); Lactobacillus plantarum 299/299v plus fibre (LAB) has been used for infection prevention and does not harbour the potential disadvantages of antibiotics. The objective was to assess whether LAB is not inferior to SDD in infection prevention. METHODS: Two hundred fifty-four consecutive ICU patients with expected mechanical ventilation ≥ 48 h and/or expected ICU stay ≥ 72 h were assigned to receive SDD: four times daily an oral paste (polymyxin E, gentamicin, amphotericin B), enteral solution (same antibiotics), intravenous cefotaxime (first 4 days) or LAB: two times daily L. plantarum 299/299v with rose-hip. RESULTS: The primary endpoint was infection rate. A difference <12% between both groups indicated non-inferiority of LAB. The trial was prematurely stopped after a study reporting increased mortality in critically ill pancreatitis patients receiving probiotics. No significant difference in infection rate [31% in the LAB group, 24% in the SDD group (OR 1.68, 95% CI 0.91-3.08; p = 0.10)] was found. ICU mortality was 26% and not significantly different between the LAB and SDD groups. Gram-positive cocci and Pseudomonas aeruginosa were significantly more frequently isolated from surveillance cultures in the SDD group compared to the LAB group (for sputum: 18 vs. 10% and 33 vs. 14%). Significantly more Enterobacteriaceae were found in the LAB group (23 vs. 50%). No increase in antibiotic resistance was found during and after SDD or LAB use. CONCLUSIONS: The trial could not demonstrate the non-inferiority of LAB compared with SDD in infection prevention. Results suggest no increased ICU mortality risk in the LAB group.