Optimal Sedation in Patients Who Receive Neuromuscular Blocking Agent Infusions for Treatment of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome-A Retrospective Cohort Study From a New England Health Care Network.

OBJECTIVES: Two previously published trials (ARDS et Curarisation Systematique [ACURASYS] and Reevaluation of Systemic Early Neuromuscular Blockade [ROSE]) presented equivocal evidence on the effect of neuromuscular blocking agent infusions in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (acute respiratory distress syndrome). The sedation regimen differed between these trials and also within the ROSE trial between treatment and control groups. We hypothesized that the proportion of deeper sedation is a mediator of the effect of neuromuscular blocking agent infusions on mortality. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Seven ICUs in an academic hospital network, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (Boston, MA). PATIENTS: Intubated and mechanically ventilated ICU patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (Berlin definition) admitted between January 2008 until June 2019. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The proportion of deeper sedation was defined as days with nonlight sedation as a fraction of mechanical ventilation days in the ICU after acute respiratory distress syndrome diagnosis. Using clinical data obtained from a hospital network registry, 3,419 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome were included, of whom 577 (16.9%) were treated with neuromuscular blocking agent infusions, for a mean (sd) duration of 1.8 (±1.9) days. The duration of deeper sedation was prolonged in patients receiving neuromuscular blocking agent infusions (4.6 ± 2.2 d) compared with patients without neuromuscular blocking agent infusions (2.4 ± 2.2 d; p < 0.001). The proportion of deeper sedation completely mediated the negative effect of neuromuscular blocking agent infusions on in-hospital mortality (p < 0.001). Exploratory analysis in patients who received deeper sedation revealed a beneficial effect of neuromuscular blocking agent infusions on mortality (49% vs 51%; adjusted odds ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.63-0.99, adjusted absolute risk difference, -0.05; p = 0.048). CONCLUSIONS: In acute respiratory distress syndrome patients who receive neuromuscular blocking agent infusions, a prolonged, high proportion of deeper sedation is associated with increased mortality. Our data support the view that clinicians should minimize the duration of deeper sedation after recovery from neuromuscular blocking agent infusion.

Association between sedation level and mortality of intensive care patients on mechanical ventilation. / Associação entre nível de sedação e mortalidade de pacientes em ventilação mecânica em terapia intensiva.

OBJECTIVE: To associate the sedation level, criteria for daily interruption of sedation and mortality of patients on mechanical ventilation in an Intensive Care Unit. METHOD: Prospective, longitudinal and quantitative study conducted with patients by using the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS) and the Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score, through a care protocol managed by a nurse at the unit for the daily interruption of sedation once a day. The Chi Square test was used to check the association between variables and the T test for independent analyzes. RESULTS: Participation of 204 patients. Most were male, surgical, aged between 40 and 60 years, in sedoanalgesia with fentanyl, midazolam and propofol, with sedation time of one to five days and average stay of 10.7 days. They were in moderate sedation and at high risk for mortality. There was a statistical correlation between death in patients in deep sedation, and sensitivity in relation to discharge from the Intensive Care Unit of those who underwent daily interruption of sedation and were reassessed daily. CONCLUSION: Daily interruption of sedation guided by the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale assists in the control of sedation, which favors the treatment and recovery of patients and guides nurses' decision making. However, in this study, it was not configured as an independent factor for predicting mortality in intensive care.

The ED-SED Study: A Multicenter, Prospective Cohort Study of Practice Patterns and Clinical Outcomes Associated With Emergency Department SEDation for Mechanically Ventilated Patients.

OBJECTIVES: To characterize emergency department sedation practices in mechanically ventilated patients, and test the hypothesis that deep sedation in the emergency department is associated with worse outcomes. DESIGN: Multicenter, prospective cohort study. SETTING: The emergency department and ICUs of 15 medical centers. PATIENTS: Mechanically ventilated adult emergency department patients. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: All data involving sedation (medications, monitoring) were recorded. Deep sedation was defined as Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale of -3 to -5 or Sedation-Agitation Scale of 2 or 1. A total of 324 patients were studied. Emergency department deep sedation was observed in 171 patients (52.8%), and was associated with a higher frequency of deep sedation in the ICU on day 1 (53.8% vs 20.3%; p < 0.001) and day 2 (33.3% vs 16.9%; p = 0.001), when compared to light sedation. Mean (SD) ventilator-free days were 18.1 (10.8) in the emergency department deep sedation group compared to 20.0 (9.8) in the light sedation group (mean difference, 1.9; 95% CI, -0.40 to 4.13). Similar results according to emergency department sedation depth existed for ICU-free days (mean difference, 1.6; 95% CI, -0.54 to 3.83) and hospital-free days (mean difference, 2.3; 95% CI, 0.26-4.32). Mortality was 21.1% in the deep sedation group and 17.0% in the light sedation group (between-group difference, 4.1%; odds ratio, 1.30; 0.74-2.28). The occurrence rate of acute brain dysfunction (delirium and coma) was 68.4% in the deep sedation group and 55.6% in the light sedation group (between-group difference, 12.8%; odds ratio, 1.73; 1.10-2.73). CONCLUSIONS: Early deep sedation in the emergency department is common, carries over into the ICU, and may be associated with worse outcomes. Sedation practice in the emergency department and its association with clinical outcomes is in need of further investigation.

Peri-anaesthetic mortality and nonfatal gastrointestinal complications in pet rabbits: a retrospective study on 210 cases.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the incidence and the associated risk factors of peri-anaesthetic mortality and gastrointestinal complications in pet rabbits. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. ANIMALS: A total of 185 pet rabbits admitted to the Exotic Referal Service of Beaumont Sainsbury's Animal Hospital over the period 2009-2016. METHODS: The clinical records of the rabbits were obtained from the database. To evaluate the incidence of peri-anaesthetic mortality, three possible outcomes were considered: alive, dead or euthanized within the 72 hours following the anaesthetic event. Food intake and stool production during the first 72 hours following the anaesthetic event were evaluated to investigate the occurrence of gastrointestinal complications. Thereafter, various hypothesized risk factors, including administration of alpha-2 agonists, body weight, American Society of Anaesthesiologists classification and endotracheal intubation were tested against peri-anaesthetic mortality and gastrointestinal complications, with both univariate and multivariate binary logistic regression. RESULTS: Twenty-five out of 185 rabbits underwent two anaesthetic events; therefore, data from 210 cases were used. Of these 210 cases, six died during sedation or general anaesthesia and four (one of which euthanized) died during the first 72 postoperative hours, accounting for an actual mortality rate equal to 4.8% (95% confidence interval, 0.025-0.086). Peri-anaesthetic gastrointestinal complications developed in 77 (38%) out of the 204 anaesthetic events whose outcome was not intraoperative death (95% confidence interval, 0.314-0.446). Species-specific risk factors could not be identified for peri-anaesthetic mortality; however, the odds for post-anaesthetic gastrointestinal complications increased significantly with body weight (p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Our findings confirm that rabbits continue to have a higher incidence of peri-anaesthetic mortality than dogs and cats, and highlight a high risk for nonfatal peri-anaesthetic gastrointestinal complications in this species.

Sedation Intensity in the First 48 Hours of Mechanical Ventilation and 180-Day Mortality: A Multinational Prospective Longitudinal Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVES: In the absence of a universal definition of light or deep sedation, the level of sedation that conveys favorable outcomes is unknown. We quantified the relationship between escalating intensity of sedation in the first 48 hours of mechanical ventilation and 180-day survival, time to extubation, and delirium. DESIGN: Harmonized data from prospective multicenter international longitudinal cohort studies SETTING:: Diverse mix of ICUs. PATIENTS: Critically ill patients expected to be ventilated for longer than 24 hours. INTERVENTIONS: Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale and pain were assessed every 4 hours. Delirium and mobilization were assessed daily using the Confusion Assessment Method of ICU and a standardized mobility assessment, respectively. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Sedation intensity was assessed using a Sedation Index, calculated as the sum of negative Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale measurements divided by the total number of assessments. We used multivariable Cox proportional hazard models to adjust for relevant covariates. We performed subgroup and sensitivity analysis accounting for immortal time bias using the same variables within 120 and 168 hours. The main outcome was 180-day survival. We assessed 703 patients in 42 ICUs with a mean (SD) Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score of 22.2 (8.5) with 180-day mortality of 32.3% (227). The median (interquartile range) ventilation time was 4.54 days (2.47-8.43 d). Delirium occurred in 273 (38.8%) of patients. Sedation intensity, in an escalating dose-dependent relationship, independently predicted increased risk of death (hazard ratio [95% CI], 1.29 [1.15-1.46]; p < 0.001, delirium hazard ratio [95% CI], 1.25 [1.10-1.43]), p value equals to 0.001 and reduced chance of early extubation hazard ratio (95% CI) 0.80 (0.73-0.87), p value of less than 0.001. Agitation level independently predicted subsequent delirium hazard ratio [95% CI], of 1.25 (1.04-1.49), p value equals to 0.02. Delirium or mobilization episodes within 168 hours, adjusted for sedation intensity, were not associated with survival. CONCLUSIONS: Sedation intensity independently, in an ascending relationship, predicted increased risk of death, delirium, and delayed time to extubation. These observations suggest that keeping sedation level equivalent to a Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale 0 is a clinically desirable goal.

Chemical capture of impala (Aepyceros melampus): A review of factors contributing to morbidity and mortality.

OBJECTIVE: To review the factors that contribute to morbidity and mortality of impala undergoing chemical capture, and discuss how they are potentially mitigated. DATABASES USED: PubMed, Science Direct, Google Scholar and Onderstepoort Veterinary Academic Hospital records. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Impala are an important species of antelope in Africa and are often captured during management procedures, veterinary interventions and research projects. Chemical capture is a preferred technique over physical capture and restraint for veterinary interventions as it allows for easier handling and better clinical assessment and treatment. However, this capture technique results in high mortality (4%) and morbidity rates (23%), which translates into animal welfare and economic concerns. Investigation of environmental, drug and drug delivery, and animal factors to elucidate the origin of these high rates was reviewed. The greatest risks emanate from the drug and drug delivery factors where potent opioids (etorphine and thiafentanil) cause profound respiratory compromise, that if left untreated often translates into fatalities. Furthermore, the procedure of darting, an essential tool in game capture, can cause irreparable fractures and other fatal injuries mainly through accidental misplacement of the dart into a long bone, thoracic or peritoneal cavity. Impala are anxious and flighty, and this demeanour (animal related factor) can contribute towards mortality and morbidity rates. Impala that mount an inappropriate stress response to capture tend to die; therefore, procedures that induce an intense stress response (awake clinical examinations) should be avoided. Sequela of a heightened stress response include capture-induced hyperthermia, myopathies, fractures, maladaptation to confinement or new environments and death. Impala serve as a useful model for improving immobilizing and anaesthetic drug protocols, darting techniques or new methods of remote injection in wildlife. However, the risks associated with chemical capture in this species should be understood, and all efforts to mitigate these should be employed.

Implementación de la sedación con propofol: utilidad del análisis modal de fallos y efectos. Calidad y seguridad centrada en el paciente / Propofol sedation Quality and safety. Failure mode and effects analysis

No disponible

Patient safety under deep sedation for digestive endoscopic procedures.

Deep sedation with Propofol has become popular in recent years. The safety of this technique when administered by non-anaesthesiologists has created much controversy which at times is masked in a contentious debate on the economic sustainability of the health system. In 2011, the Spanish Society of Anaesthesiology, Resuscitation and Pain Therapy, along with 20 other organisations from European countries, revoked the recommendations of the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy on the administration of Propofol by non-anaesthesiologists, citing that it is "extremely dangerous for the safety and quality of endoscopic procedures". The FDA in 2005 had already rejected the use of Propofol by non-anaesthesiologists in the United States, a prohibition which was reiterated in 2010 and is still in force, basing its evidence, among others, on the recommendations and guidelines of the Joint Commission and the Declaration of Helsinki. In Spain, the data sheet of Propofol restricts the use of the drug to anaesthesiologists and intensivists in intensive care units. In our opinion, the key elements to discuss (which we develop in our paper) are those related to: a) the morbidity and mortality of sedation (which is the same as speaking about the factors that influence its safety); b) the appropriate professionals to use this technique; and c) economic aspects related to the use of said technique. Our conclusion is that a technique cannot be declared safe when a high percentage of patients present with varying respiratory depression (and therefore hypoxaemia) and hypotension. We are confident that the collaboration of the Spanish Society of Digestive Pathology and the Spanish Society of Digestive Endoscopy with the Spanish Society of Anaesthesiology, Resuscitation and Pain Therapy is the first step towards finding a satisfactory solution for everyone, and especially for our patients.

Early deep sedation is associated with decreased in-hospital and two-year follow-up survival.

INTRODUCTION: There is increasing evidence that deep sedation is detrimental to critically ill patients. The aim of this study was to examine effects of deep sedation during the early period after ICU admission on short- and long-term survival. METHODS: In this observational, matched-pair analysis, patients receiving mechanical ventilation that were admitted to ICUs of a tertiary university hospital in six consecutive years were grouped as either lightly or deeply sedated within the first 48 hours after ICU admission. The Richmond Agitation-Sedation Score (RASS) was used to assess sedation depth (light sedation: -2 to 0; deep: -3 or below). Multivariate Cox regression was conducted to investigate the impact of early deep sedation within the first 48 hours of admission on in-hospital and two-year follow-up survival. RESULTS: In total, 1,884 patients met inclusion criteria out of which 27.2% (n = 513) were deeply sedated. Deeply sedated patients had longer ventilation times, increased length of stay and higher rates of mortality. Early deep sedation was associated with a hazard ratio of 1.661 (95% CI: 1.074 to 2.567; P = 0.022) for in-hospital survival and 1.866 (95% CI: 1.351 to 2.576; P < 0.001) for two-year follow-up survival. CONCLUSIONS: Early deep sedation during the first 48 hours of intensive care treatment was associated with decreased in-hospital and two-year follow-up survival. Since early deep sedation is a modifiable risk factor, this data shows an urgent need for prospective clinical trials focusing on light sedation in the early phase of ICU treatment.

Palliative pharmacological sedation for terminally ill adults.

BACKGROUND: Terminally ill people experience a variety of symptoms in the last hours and days of life, including delirium, agitation, anxiety, terminal restlessness, dyspnoea, pain, vomiting, and psychological and physical distress. In the terminal phase of life, these symptoms may become refractory, and unable to be controlled by supportive and palliative therapies specifically targeted to these symptoms. Palliative sedation therapy is one potential solution to providing relief from these refractory symptoms. Sedation in terminally ill people is intended to provide relief from refractory symptoms that are not controlled by other methods. Sedative drugs such as benzodiazepines are titrated to achieve the desired level of sedation; the level of sedation can be easily maintained and the effect is reversible. OBJECTIVES: To assess the evidence for the benefit of palliative pharmacological sedation on quality of life, survival, and specific refractory symptoms in terminally ill adults during their last few days of life. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2014, Issue 11), MEDLINE (1946 to November 2014), and EMBASE (1974 to December 2014), using search terms representing the sedative drug names and classes, disease stage, and study designs. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, non-RCTs, and observational studies (e.g. before-and-after, interrupted-time-series) with quantitative outcomes. We excluded studies with only qualitative outcomes or that had no comparison (i.e. no control group or no within-group comparison) (e.g. single arm case series). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened titles and abstracts of citations, and full text of potentially eligible studies. Two review authors independently carried out data extraction using standard data extraction forms. A third review author acted as arbiter for both stages. We carried out no meta-analyses due to insufficient data for pooling on any outcome; therefore, we reported outcomes narratively. MAIN RESULTS: The searches resulted in 14 included studies, involving 4167 adults, of whom 1137 received palliative sedation. More than 95% of people had cancer. No studies were randomised or quasi-randomised. All were consecutive case series, with only three having prospective data collection. Risk of bias was high, due to lack of randomisation. No studies measured quality of life or participant well-being, which was the primary outcome of the review. Five studies measured symptom control, using four different methods, so pooling was not possible. The results demonstrated that despite sedation, delirium and dyspnoea were still troublesome symptoms in these people in the last few days of life. Control of other symptoms appeared to be similar in sedated and non-sedated people. Only one study measured unintended adverse effects of sedative drugs and found no major events; however, four of 70 participants appeared to have drug-induced delirium. The study noticed no respiratory suppression. Thirteen of the 14 studies measured survival time from admission or referral to death, and all demonstrated no statistically significant difference between sedated and non-sedated groups. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There was insufficient evidence about the efficacy of palliative sedation in terms of a person's quality of life or symptom control. There was evidence that palliative sedation did not hasten death, which has been a concern of physicians and families in prescribing this treatment. However, this evidence comes from low quality studies, so should be interpreted with caution. Further studies that specifically measure the efficacy and quality of life in sedated people, compared with non-sedated people, and quantify adverse effects are required.

Early sedation and clinical outcomes of mechanically ventilated patients: a prospective multicenter cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Sedation overuse is frequent and possibly associated with poor outcomes in the intensive care unit (ICU) patients. However, the association of early oversedation with clinical outcomes has not been thoroughly evaluated. The aim of this study was to assess the association of early sedation strategies with outcomes of critically ill adult patients under mechanical ventilation (MV). METHODS: A secondary analysis of a multicenter prospective cohort conducted in 45 Brazilian ICUs, including adult patients requiring ventilatory support and sedation in the first 48 hours of ICU admissions, was performed. Sedation depth was evaluated after 48 hours of MV. Multivariate analysis was used to identify variables associated with hospital mortality. RESULTS: A total of 322 patients were evaluated. Overall, ICU and hospital mortality rates were 30.4% and 38.8%, respectively. Deep sedation was observed in 113 patients (35.1%). Longer duration of ventilatory support was observed (7 (4 to 10) versus 5 (3 to 9) days, P = 0.041) and more tracheostomies were performed in the deep sedation group (38.9% versus 22%, P = 0.001) despite similar PaO2/FiO2 ratios and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) severity. In a multivariate analysis, age (Odds Ratio (OR) 1.02; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.00 to 1.03), Charlson Comorbidity Index >2 (OR 2.06; 95% CI, 1.44 to 2.94), Simplified Acute Physiology Score 3 (SAPS 3) score (OR 1.02; CI 95%, 1.00 to 1.04), severe ARDS (OR 1.44; CI 95%, 1.09 to 1.91) and deep sedation (OR 2.36; CI 95%, 1.31 to 4.25) were independently associated with increased hospital mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Early deep sedation is associated with adverse outcomes and constitutes an independent predictor of hospital mortality in mechanically ventilated patients.

The safety of nurse-administered procedural sedation compared to anesthesia care in a historical cohort of advanced endoscopy patients.

BACKGROUND: In April 2010, in response to a change in Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services regulation placing deep sedation under hospital anesthesia services, our institution began providing anesthesia care for all advanced endoscopic procedures. Because it remains unknown whether anesthesia care reduces sedation-related complications or improves quality of care versus nurse-administered sedation for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and endoscopic ultrasound patients, we retrospectively compared complications in a 5-year historical cohort before and after the policy change. METHODS: We reviewed a historical cohort of 9598 consecutive endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and endoscopic ultrasound examinations for adult patients at a single institution during a 5-year period (October 2007-October 2012). We compared procedures performed before and after the policy change for the incidence of sedation, endoscopic, and total complications, and for major morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: The incidence of reported sedation-related complications was 0.38% (17 of 4514) before the policy change and 0.08% (4 of 5084) after the policy change, which was statistically significant (P = 0.002, diff = 0.3, 95% confidence interval, 0.11%-0.53%). Endoscopic complications were not significantly different before versus after: 0.66% vs 0.87% (P = 0.293, diff = 0.2, 95% confidence interval, -0.16% to 0.56%). Total complications (1.11% vs 1.00%, P = 0.618) and major morbidity and mortality (0.27% vs 0.33%, P = 0.581) did not differ between the 2 time periods. CONCLUSIONS: Anesthesia care for advanced endoscopy in a high-risk population significantly reduced sedation complications compared with nurse-administered sedation. Endoscopic complications were unchanged. The sedation risk reduction did not reduce major morbidity, mortality, or total complications.

Sedation-associated complications in endoscopy are not reduced significantly by implementation of the German S-3-guideline and occur in a severe manner only in patients with ASA class III and higher.

INTRODUCTION: The German guideline for sedation in gastrointestinal endoscopy was published in 2008. Several recommendations in this guideline, especially concerning staffing and structural requirements for sedation, have low evidence and therefore are subject to discussion in the field. AIM: Comparison of endoscopic complications in a department specialized for gastrointestinal and pulmological diseases before and after implementation of the German guideline grouped in sedation-associated and non-sedation-associated complications. METHODS: Prospective documentation of complications with retrospective analysis of two patient groups (before guideline: 1.5.2008-30.4.2010; after guideline: 1.5.2010-30.4.2012) at which the sedation technique remained the same (balanced propofol sedation, BPS). RESULTS: Both investigation periods covered almost 7000 procedures. Interventional and general complications were nonsignificantly elevated in the latter group (1.27% before vs. 1.55% after guideline, p = 0.08). Saturation decline (in both groups 0.26%) was unchanged, and circulation-associated complications (0.27% vs. 0.13%, p = 0.07) were reduced nonsignificantly. Necessity for the administration of flumazenil and for intensive care monitoring was reduced in a nonsignificant manner after the implementation of the guideline. Severe complications (reanimation, apnea, and death) were unchanged, and no patient with ASA I-II suffered from a severe complication. Propofol consumption was higher after guideline implementation. CONCLUSIONS: The recommendations of the new German sedation guideline do not significantly reduce complications in endoscopic procedures. Especially, procedures involving patients with ASA classes I and II do not require an additional staff member solely for sedation. Prospective randomized studies might be necessary to optimize the utilization of resources.

Dexamethasone, light anaesthesia, and tight glucose control (DeLiT) randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The inflammatory response to surgical tissue injury is associated with perioperative morbidity and mortality. We tested the primary hypotheses that major perioperative morbidity is reduced by three potential anti-inflammatory interventions: (i) low-dose dexamethasone, (ii) intensive intraoperative glucose control, and (iii) lighter anaesthesia. METHODS: We enrolled patients having major non-cardiac surgery who were ≥40 yr old and had an ASA physical status ≤IV. In a three-way factorial design, patients were randomized to perioperative i.v. dexamethasone (a total of 14 mg tapered over 3 days) vs placebo, intensive vs conventional glucose control 80-110 vs 180-200 mg dl(-1), and lighter vs deeper anaesthesia (bispectral index target of 55 vs 35). The primary outcome was a collapsed composite of 15 major complications and 30 day mortality. Plasma high-sensitivity (hs) C-reactive protein (CRP) concentration was measured before operation and on the first and second postoperative days. RESULTS: The overall incidence of the primary outcome was about 20%. The trial was stopped after the second interim analysis with 381 patients, at which all three interventions crossed the futility boundary for the primary outcome. No three-way (P=0.70) or two-way (all P>0.52) interactions among the interventions were found. There was a significantly smaller increase in hsCRP in patients given dexamethasone than placebo [maximum 108 (64) vs 155 (69) mg litre(-1), P<0.001], but none of the other two interventions differentially influenced the hsCRP response to surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Among our three interventions, dexamethasone alone reduced inflammation. However, no intervention reduced the risk of major morbidity or 1 yr mortality. TRIAL REGISTRATION IDENTIFIER: NCT00433251 at www.clinicaltrials.gov.

Sedation depth and long-term mortality in mechanically ventilated critically ill adults: a prospective longitudinal multicentre cohort study.

PURPOSE: To ascertain the relationship among early (first 48 h) deep sedation, time to extubation, delirium and long-term mortality. METHODS: We conducted a multicentre prospective longitudinal cohort study in 11 Malaysian hospitals including medical/surgical patients (n = 259) who were sedated and ventilated ≥24 h. Patients were followed from ICU admission up to 28 days in ICU with 4-hourly sedation and daily delirium assessments and 180-day mortality. Deep sedation was defined as Richmond Agitation Sedation Score (RASS) ≤-3. RESULTS: The cohort had a mean (SD) age of 53.1 (15.9) years and APACHE II score of 21.3 (8.2) with hospital and 180-day mortality of 82 (31.7%) and 110/237 (46.4%). Patients were followed for 2,657 ICU days and underwent 13,836 RASS assessments. Midazolam prescription was predominant compared to propofol, given to 241 (93%) versus 72 (28%) patients (P < 0.0001) for 966 (39.6%) versus 183 (7.5%) study days respectively. Deep sedation occurred in (182/257) 71% patients at first assessment and in 159 (61%) patients and 1,658 (59%) of all RASS assessments at 48 h. Multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression analysis adjusting for a priori assigned covariates including sedative agents, diagnosis, age, APACHE II score, operative, elective, vasopressors and dialysis showed that early deep sedation was independently associated with longer time to extubation [hazard ratio (HR) 0.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.89-0.97, P = 0.003], hospital death (HR 1.11, 95% CI 1.05-1.18, P < 0.001) and 180-day mortality (HR 1.09, 95% CI 1.04-1.15, P = 0.002), but not time to delirium (HR 0.98, P = 0.23). Delirium occurred in 114 (44%) of patients. CONCLUSION: Irrespective of sedative choice, early deep sedation was independently associated with delayed extubation and higher mortality, and thus was a potentially modifiable risk in interventional trials.

Palliative sedation, not slow euthanasia: a prospective, longitudinal study of sedation in Flemish palliative care units.

CONTEXT: Palliative sedation remains a much debated and controversial issue. The limited literature on the topic often fails to answer ethical questions concerning this practice. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to describe the characteristics of patients who are being sedated for refractory symptoms in palliative care units (PCUs) from the time of admission until the day of death. METHODS: A prospective, longitudinal, descriptive design was used to assess data in eight PCUs. The total sample consisted of 266 patients. Information on demographics, medication, food and fluid intake, decision making, level of consciousness, and symptom experience were gathered by nurses and researchers three times a week. If patients received palliative sedation, extra information was gathered. RESULTS: Of all included patients (n=266), 7.5% received palliative sedation. Sedation started, on average, 2.5 days before death and for half of these patients, the form of sedation changed over time. At the start of sedation, patients were in the end stage of their illness and needed total care. Patients were fully conscious and had very limited oral food or fluid intake. Only three patients received artificial fluids at the start of sedation. Patients reported, on average, two refractory symptoms, the most important ones being pain, fatigue, depression, drowsiness, and loss of feeling of well-being. In all cases, the patient gave consent to start palliative sedation because of increased suffering. CONCLUSION: This study revealed that palliative sedation is only administered in exceptional cases where refractory suffering is evident and for those patients who are close to the ends of their lives. Moreover, this study supports the argument that palliative sedation has no life-shortening effect.

Sedación en procedimientos y situaciones especiales / Sedation in special procedures and situations

Numerosas técnicas diagnósticas y terapéuticas precisan sedoanalgesia para poder ser realizadas de una forma segura y confortable para el paciente. Especial interés para el intensivista tienen la cardioversión eléctrica, la colocación de dispositivos implantables de estimulación cardiaca, las técnicas endoscópicas o la realización de procedimientos quirúrgicos a pie de cama. En la presente revisión el Grupo de Trabajo de Analgesia y Sedación de la SEMICYUC ofrece recomendaciones para administrar analgesia y sedación en esas situaciones (AU)

Numerous diagnostic techniques require sedation and analgesia in order to be performed in a safe and comfortable way for the patient. Several of the most notable points of interest for the critical care specialist are the electrical cardioversion, the placing of implantable cardiac stimulation devices, the endoscopic techniques and the performing of bedside surgical procedures. In this current revision, the SEMICYUC Task Force for Sedation and Analgesia describes recommendations and best practices for administering sedation and analgesia in these situations (AU)