Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis during Invasive Mechanical Ventilation.

BACKGROUND: Whether proton-pump inhibitors are beneficial or harmful for stress ulcer prophylaxis in critically ill patients undergoing invasive ventilation is unclear. METHODS: In this international, randomized trial, we assigned critically ill adults who were undergoing invasive ventilation to receive intravenous pantoprazole (at a dose of 40 mg daily) or matching placebo. The primary efficacy outcome was clinically important upper gastrointestinal bleeding in the intensive care unit (ICU) at 90 days, and the primary safety outcome was death from any cause at 90 days. Multiplicity-adjusted secondary outcomes included ventilator-associated pneumonia, Clostridioides difficile infection, and patient-important bleeding. RESULTS: A total of 4821 patients underwent randomization in 68 ICUs. Clinically important upper gastrointestinal bleeding occurred in 25 of 2385 patients (1.0%) receiving pantoprazole and in 84 of 2377 patients (3.5%) receiving placebo (hazard ratio, 0.30; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.19 to 0.47; P<0.001). At 90 days, death was reported in 696 of 2390 patients (29.1%) in the pantoprazole group and in 734 of 2379 patients (30.9%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.04; P = 0.25). Patient-important bleeding was reduced with pantoprazole; all other secondary outcomes were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients undergoing invasive ventilation, pantoprazole resulted in a significantly lower risk of clinically important upper gastrointestinal bleeding than placebo, with no significant effect on mortality. (Funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and others; REVISE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03374800.).

Prolonged vs Intermittent Infusions of ß-Lactam Antibiotics in Adults With Sepsis or Septic Shock: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Importance: There is uncertainty about whether prolonged infusions of ß-lactam antibiotics improve clinically important outcomes in critically ill adults with sepsis or septic shock. Objective: To determine whether prolonged ß-lactam antibiotic infusions are associated with a reduced risk of death in critically ill adults with sepsis or septic shock compared with intermittent infusions. Data Sources: The primary search was conducted with MEDLINE (via PubMed), CINAHL, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception to May 2, 2024. Study Selection: Randomized clinical trials comparing prolonged (continuous or extended) and intermittent infusions of ß-lactam antibiotics in critically ill adults with sepsis or septic shock. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Data extraction and risk of bias were assessed independently by 2 reviewers. Certainty of evidence was evaluated with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. A bayesian framework was used as the primary analysis approach and a frequentist framework as the secondary approach. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was all-cause 90-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included intensive care unit (ICU) mortality and clinical cure. Results: From 18 eligible randomized clinical trials that included 9108 critically ill adults with sepsis or septic shock (median age, 54 years; IQR, 48-57; 5961 men [65%]), 17 trials (9014 participants) contributed data to the primary outcome. The pooled estimated risk ratio for all-cause 90-day mortality for prolonged infusions of ß-lactam antibiotics compared with intermittent infusions was 0.86 (95% credible interval, 0.72-0.98; I2 = 21.5%; high certainty), with a 99.1% posterior probability that prolonged infusions were associated with lower 90-day mortality. Prolonged infusion of ß-lactam antibiotics was associated with a reduced risk of intensive care unit mortality (risk ratio, 0.84; 95% credible interval, 0.70-0.97; high certainty) and an increase in clinical cure (risk ratio, 1.16; 95% credible interval, 1.07-1.31; moderate certainty). Conclusions and Relevance: Among adults in the intensive care unit who had sepsis or septic shock, the use of prolonged ß-lactam antibiotic infusions was associated with a reduced risk of 90-day mortality compared with intermittent infusions. The current evidence presents a high degree of certainty for clinicians to consider prolonged infusions as a standard of care in the management of sepsis and septic shock. Trial Registration: PROSPERO Identifier: CRD42023399434.

Continuous vs Intermittent ß-Lactam Antibiotic Infusions in Critically Ill Patients With Sepsis: The BLING III Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Whether ß-lactam antibiotics administered by continuous compared with intermittent infusion reduces the risk of death in patients with sepsis is uncertain. Objective: To evaluate whether continuous vs intermittent infusion of a ß-lactam antibiotic (piperacillin-tazobactam or meropenem) results in decreased all-cause mortality at 90 days in critically ill patients with sepsis. Design, Setting, and Participants: An international, open-label, randomized clinical trial conducted in 104 intensive care units (ICUs) in Australia, Belgium, France, Malaysia, New Zealand, Sweden, and the United Kingdom. Recruitment occurred from March 26, 2018, to January 11, 2023, with follow-up completed on April 12, 2023. Participants were critically ill adults (≥18 years) treated with piperacillin-tazobactam or meropenem for sepsis. Intervention: Eligible patients were randomized to receive an equivalent 24-hour dose of a ß-lactam antibiotic by either continuous (n = 3498) or intermittent (n = 3533) infusion for a clinician-determined duration of treatment or until ICU discharge, whichever occurred first. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was all-cause mortality within 90 days after randomization. Secondary outcomes were clinical cure up to 14 days after randomization; new acquisition, colonization, or infection with a multiresistant organism or Clostridioides difficile infection up to 14 days after randomization; ICU mortality; and in-hospital mortality. Results: Among 7202 randomized participants, 7031 (mean [SD] age, 59 [16] years; 2423 women [35%]) met consent requirements for inclusion in the primary analysis (97.6%). Within 90 days, 864 of 3474 patients (24.9%) assigned to receive continuous infusion had died compared with 939 of 3507 (26.8%) assigned intermittent infusion (absolute difference, -1.9% [95% CI, -4.9% to 1.1%]; odds ratio, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.81 to 1.01]; P = .08). Clinical cure was higher in the continuous vs intermittent infusion group (1930/3467 [55.7%] and 1744/3491 [50.0%], respectively; absolute difference, 5.7% [95% CI, 2.4% to 9.1%]). Other secondary outcomes were not statistically different. Conclusions and Relevance: The observed difference in 90-day mortality between continuous vs intermittent infusions of ß-lactam antibiotics did not meet statistical significance in the primary analysis. However, the confidence interval around the effect estimate includes the possibility of both no important effect and a clinically important benefit in the use of continuous infusions in this group of patients. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03213990.

Proton-Pump Inhibitors to Prevent Gastrointestinal Bleeding - An Updated Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The goal of this systematic review was to examine the efficacy and safety of proton-pump inhibitors for stress ulcer prophylaxis in critically ill patients. METHODS: We included randomized trials comparing proton-pump inhibitors versus placebo or no prophylaxis in critically ill adults, performed meta-analyses, and assessed certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations approach. To explore the effect of proton-pump inhibitors on mortality based on disease severity, a subgroup analysis was conducted combining within-trial subgroup data from the two largest trials and assessed credibility using the Instrument for Assessing the Credibility of Effect Modification Analyses. RESULTS: Twelve trials that enrolled 9533 patients were included. Proton-pump inhibitors were associated with a reduced incidence of clinically important upper gastrointestinal bleeding (relative risk [RR], 0.51 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.34 to 0.76]; high certainty evidence). Proton-pump inhibitors may have little or no effect on mortality (RR, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.93 to 1.05]; low certainty). Within-trial subgroup analysis with intermediate credibility suggested that the effect of proton-pump inhibitors on mortality may differ based on disease severity. Subgroup results raise the possibility that proton-pump inhibitors may decrease 90-day mortality in less severely ill patients (RR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.80 to 0.98) and may increase mortality in more severely ill patients (RR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.96 to 1.20]. Proton-pump inhibitors may have no effect on pneumonia and little or no effect on Clostridioides difficile infection (low certainty). CONCLUSIONS: High certainty evidence supports the association of proton-pump inhibitors with decreased upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Proton-pump inhibitors may have little or no effect on mortality, although a decrease in mortality in less severely ill patients and an increase in mortality in more severely ill patients remain possible. (PROSPERO number CRD42023461695.).

A Patient-Level Meta-Analysis of Intensive Glucose Control in Critically Ill Adults.

BACKGROUND: Whether intensive glucose control reduces mortality in critically ill patients remains uncertain. Patient-level meta-analyses can provide more precise estimates of treatment effects than are currently available. METHODS: We pooled individual patient data from randomized trials investigating intensive glucose control in critically ill adults. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included survival to 90 days and time to live cessation of treatment with vasopressors or inotropes, mechanical ventilation, and newly commenced renal replacement. Severe hypoglycemia was a safety outcome. RESULTS: Of 38 eligible trials (n=29,537 participants), 20 (n=14,171 participants) provided individual patient data including in-hospital mortality status for 7059 and 7049 participants allocated to intensive and conventional glucose control, respectively. Of these 1930 (27.3%) and 1891 (26.8%) individuals assigned to intensive and conventional control, respectively, died (risk ratio, 1.02; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.96 to 1.07; P=0.52; moderate certainty). There was no apparent heterogeneity of treatment effect on in-hospital mortality in any examined subgroups. Intensive glucose control increased the risk of severe hypoglycemia (risk ratio, 3.38; 95% CI, 2.99 to 3.83; P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Intensive glucose control was not associated with reduced mortality risk but increased the risk of severe hypoglycemia. We did not identify a subgroup of patients in whom intensive glucose control was beneficial. (Funded by the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council and others; PROSPERO number CRD42021278869.).

The incidence of ventriculostomy-related infections as diagnosed by 16S rRNA polymerase chain reaction: A prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: Ventriculostomy-related infections (VRIs) are reported in about 10 % of patients with external ventricular drains (EVDs). VRIs are difficult to diagnose due to clinical and laboratory abnormalities caused by the primary neurological injury which led to insertion of the EVD. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) of the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) may enable more accurate diagnosis of VRI. We performed a prospective cohort study to measure the incidence of VRI as diagnosed by 16S rRNA PCR. METHODS: Patients admitted to intensive care with a primary diagnosis of subarachnoid haemorrhage (SAH), traumatic brain injury (TBI), or intracerebral haemorrhage (ICH), who required an EVD, were assessed for inclusion in this study. Data were extracted from the electronic medical record, bedside charts, or from a prospectively collected database, the Neuroscience Outcomes in Intensive CarE database (NOICE). 16S rRNA PCR was performed on routinely collected CSF as per laboratory protocol. VRI was also diagnosed based on pre-existing definitions. RESULTS: 237 CSF samples from 39 patients were enrolled in the study. The mean patient age was 55.7 years, and 56.4 % were female. The most common primary neurological diagnosis was SAH (61.5 %). The incidence of a positive PCR was 2.6 % of patients (1 in 39) and 0.8 % of CSF samples (2 in 237). The incidence of VRI according to pre-published diagnostic criteria was 2.6 % - 41 % of patients and 0.4 % - 17.6 % of CSF samples. 28.2 % of patients were treated for VRI. Pre-published definitions which relied on CSF culture results had higher specificity and lower false positive rates for predicting a PCR result when compared to definitions incorporating non-microbiological markers of VRI. In CSF samples with a negative 16S rRNA PCR, there was a high proportion of non-microbiological markers of infection, and a high incidence of fever on the day the CSF sample was taken. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of VRI as defined as a positive PCR was lower than the incidence of VRI according to several published definitions, and lower than the incidence of VRI as defined as treatment by the clinical team. Non-microbiological markers of VRI may be less reliable than a positive CSF culture in diagnosing VRI.

Protocol implementation during the COVID-19 pandemic: experiences from a randomized trial of stress ulcer prophylaxis.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, many intensive care units (ICUs) halted research to focus on COVID-19-specific studies. OBJECTIVE: To describe the conduct of an international randomized trial of stress ulcer prophylaxis (Re-Evaluating the Inhibition of Stress Erosions in the ICU [REVISE]) during the pandemic, addressing enrolment patterns, center engagement, informed consent processes, data collection, a COVID-specific substudy, patient transfers, and data monitoring. METHODS: REVISE is a randomized trial among mechanically ventilated patients, comparing pantoprazole 40 mg IV to placebo on the primary efficacy outcome of clinically important upper gastrointestinal bleeding and the primary safety outcome of 90-day mortality. We documented protocol implementation status from March 11th 2020-August 30th 2022. RESULTS: The Steering Committee did not change the scientific protocol. From the first enrolment on July 9th 2019 to March 10th 2020 (8 months preceding the pandemic), 267 patients were enrolled in 18 centers. From March 11th 2020-August 30th 2022 (30 months thereafter), 41 new centers joined; 59 were participating by August 30th 2022 which enrolled 2961 patients. During a total of 1235 enrolment-months in the pandemic phase, enrolment paused for 106 (8.6%) months in aggregate (median 3 months, interquartile range 2;6). Protocol implementation involved a shift from the a priori consent model pre-pandemic (188, 58.8%) to the consent to continue model (1615, 54.1%, p < 0.01). In one new center, an opt-out model was approved. The informed consent rate increased slightly (80.7% to 85.0%, p = 0.05). Telephone consent encounters increased (16.6% to 68.2%, p < 0.001). Surge capacity necessitated intra-institutional transfers; receiving centers continued protocol implementation whenever possible. We developed a nested COVID-19 substudy. The Methods Centers continued central statistical monitoring of trial metrics. Site monitoring was initially remote, then in-person when restrictions lifted. CONCLUSION: Protocol implementation adaptations during the pandemic included a shift in the consent model, a sustained high consent rate, and launch of a COVID-19 substudy. Recruitment increased as new centers joined, patient transfers were optimized, and monitoring methods were adapted.

European Society of Intensive Care Medicine clinical practice guideline on fluid therapy in adult critically ill patients. Part 1: the choice of resuscitation fluids.

PURPOSE: This is the first of three parts of the clinical practice guideline from the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM) on resuscitation fluids in adult critically ill patients. This part addresses fluid choice and the other two will separately address fluid amount and fluid removal. METHODS: This guideline was formulated by an international panel of clinical experts and methodologists. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology was applied to evaluate the certainty of evidence and to move from evidence to decision. RESULTS: For volume expansion, the guideline provides conditional recommendations for using crystalloids rather than albumin in critically ill patients in general (moderate certainty of evidence), in patients with sepsis (moderate certainty of evidence), in patients with acute respiratory failure (very low certainty of evidence) and in patients in the perioperative period and patients at risk for bleeding (very low certainty of evidence). There is a conditional recommendation for using isotonic saline rather than albumin in patients with traumatic brain injury (very low certainty of evidence). There is a conditional recommendation for using albumin rather than crystalloids in patients with cirrhosis (very low certainty of evidence). The guideline provides conditional recommendations for using balanced crystalloids rather than isotonic saline in critically ill patients in general (low certainty of evidence), in patients with sepsis (low certainty of evidence) and in patients with kidney injury (very low certainty of evidence). There is a conditional recommendation for using isotonic saline rather than balanced crystalloids in patients with traumatic brain injury (very low certainty of evidence). There is a conditional recommendation for using isotonic crystalloids rather than small-volume hypertonic crystalloids in critically ill patients in general (very low certainty of evidence). CONCLUSIONS: This guideline provides eleven recommendations to inform clinicians on resuscitation fluid choice in critically ill patients.

A survey of Australian public opinion on using comorbidity to triage intensive care patients in a pandemic.

ObjectivesThis study aimed to determine which method to triage intensive care patients using chronic comorbidity in a pandemic was perceived to be the fairest by the general public. Secondary objectives were to determine whether the public perceived it fair to provide preferential intensive care triage to vulnerable or disadvantaged people, and frontline healthcare workers.MethodsA postal survey of 2000 registered voters randomly selected from the Australian Electoral Commission electoral roll was performed. The main outcome measures were respondents' fairness rating of four hypothetical intensive care triage methods that assess comorbidity (chronic medical conditions, long-term survival, function and frailty); and respondents' fairness rating of providing preferential triage to vulnerable or disadvantaged people, and frontline healthcare workers.ResultsThe proportion of respondents who considered it fair to triage based on chronic medical conditions, long-term survival, function and frailty, was 52.1, 56.1, 65.0 and 62.4%, respectively. The proportion of respondents who considered it unfair to triage based on these four comorbidities was 31.9, 30.9, 23.8 and 23.2%, respectively. More respondents considered it unfair to preferentially triage vulnerable or disadvantaged people, than fair (41.8% versus 21.2%). More respondents considered it fair to preferentially triage frontline healthcare workers, than unfair (44.2% versus 30.0%).ConclusionRespondents in this survey perceived all four hypothetical methods to triage intensive care patients based on comorbidity in a pandemic disaster to be fair. However, the sizable minority who consider this to be unfair indicates that these triage methods could encounter significant opposition if they were to be enacted in health policy.

Intensive care utilisation after elective surgery in Australia and New Zealand: A point prevalence study.

Objective: We aimed to describe the characteristics, outcomes and resource utilisation of patients being cared for in an ICU after undergoing elective surgery in Australia and New Zealand (ANZ). Methods: This was a point prevalence study involving 51 adult ICUs in ANZ in June 2021. Patients met inclusion criteria if they were being treated in a participating ICU on he study dates. Patients were categorised according to whether they had undergone elective surgery, admitted directly from theatre or unplanned from the ward. Descriptive and comparative analysis was performed according to the source of ICU admission. Resource utilisation was measured by Length of stay, organ support and occupied bed days. Results: 712 patients met inclusion criteria, with 172 (24%) have undergone elective surgery. Of these, 136 (19%) were admitted directly to the ICU and 36 (5.1%) were an unplanned admission from the ward. Elective surgical patients occupied 15.8% of the total ICU patient bed days, of which 44.3% were following unplanned admissions. Elective surgical patients who were an unplanned admission from the ward, compared to those admitted directly from theatre, had a higher severity of illness (AP2 17 vs 13, p<0.01), require respiratory or vasopressor support (75% vs 44%, p<0.01) and hospital mortality (16.7% vs 2.2%, p < 0.01). Conclusions: ICU resource utilisation of patients who have undergone elective surgery is substantial. Those patients admitted directly from theatre have good outcomes and low resource utilisation. Patient admitted unplanned from the ward, although fewer, were sicker, more resource intensive and had significantly worse outcomes.

Quantifying the Impact of Alternative Definitions of Sepsis-Associated Acute Kidney Injury on its Incidence and Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To derive a pooled estimate of the incidence and outcomes of sepsis-associated acute kidney injury (SA-AKI) in ICU patients and to explore the impact of differing definitions of SA-AKI on these estimates. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Medline Epub, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL between 1990 and 2023. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized clinical trials and prospective cohort studies of adults admitted to the ICU with either sepsis and/or SA-AKI. DATA EXTRACTION: Data were extracted in duplicate. Risk of bias was assessed using adapted standard tools. Data were pooled using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed by using a single covariate logistic regression model. The primary outcome was the proportion of participants in ICU with sepsis who developed AKI. DATA SYNTHESIS: A total of 189 studies met inclusion criteria. One hundred fifty-four reported an incidence of SA-AKI, including 150,978 participants. The pooled proportion of patients who developed SA-AKI across all definitions was 0.40 (95% CI, 0.37-0.42) and 0.52 (95% CI, 0.48-0.56) when only the Risk Injury Failure Loss End-Stage, Acute Kidney Injury Network, and Improving Global Outcomes definitions were used to define SA-AKI. There was significant variation in the incidence of SA-AKI depending on the definition of AKI used and whether AKI defined by urine output criteria was included; the incidence was lowest when receipt of renal replacement therapy was used to define AKI (0.26; 95% CI, 0.24-0.28), and highest when the Acute Kidney Injury Network score was used (0.57; 95% CI, 0.45-0.69; p < 0.01). Sixty-seven studies including 29,455 participants reported at least one SA-AKI outcome. At final follow-up, the proportion of patients with SA-AKI who had died was 0.48 (95% CI, 0.43-0.53), and the proportion of surviving patients who remained on dialysis was 0.10 (95% CI, 0.04-0.17). CONCLUSIONS: SA-AKI is common in ICU patients with sepsis and carries a high risk of death and persisting kidney impairment. The incidence and outcomes of SA-AKI vary significantly depending on the definition of AKI used.

Proton pump inhibitors for gastrointestinal bleeding prophylaxis in critically ill patients: A systematic review protocol.

BACKGROUND: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are the most commonly prescribed drugs for preventing upper gastrointestinal bleeding in critically ill patients. However, concerns have arisen about the possible harms of using PPIs, including potentially increased risk of pneumonia, Clostridioides difficile infection, and more seriously, an increased risk of death in the most severely ill patients. Triggered by the REVISE trial, which is a forthcoming large randomized trial comparing pantoprazole to placebo in invasively mechanically ventilated patients, we will conduct this systematic review to evaluate the efficacy and safety of PPIs versus no prophylaxis for critically ill patients. METHODS: We will systematically search randomized trials that compared gastrointestinal bleeding prophylaxis with PPIs versus placebo or no prophylaxis in adults in the intensive care unit (ICU). Pairs of reviewers will independently screen the literature, and for those eligible trials, extract data and assess risk of bias. We will perform meta-analyses using a random-effects model, and calculate relative risks for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences for continuous outcomes, and the associated 95% confidence intervals. We will conduct subgroup analysis to explore whether the impact of PPIs on mortality differs in more and less severely ill patients. We will assess certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach. DISCUSSION: This systematic review will provide the most up-to-date evidence regarding the merits and limitations of stress ulcer prophylaxis with PPIs in critically ill patients in contemporary practice.

Empirical carbapenems or piperacillin/tazobactam for infections in intensive care: An international retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Critically ill patients in intensive care units (ICU) are frequently administered broad-spectrum antibiotics (e.g., carbapenems or piperacillin/tazobactam) for suspected or confirmed infections. This retrospective cohort study aimed to describe the use of carbapenems and piperacillin/tazobactam in two international, prospectively collected datasets. METHODS: We conducted a post hoc analysis of data from the "Adjunctive Glucocorticoid Therapy in Patients with Septic Shock" (ADRENAL) trial (n = 3713) and the "Antimicrobial de-escalation in the critically ill patient and assessment of clinical cure" (DIANA) study (n = 1488). The primary outcome was the proportion of patients receiving initial antibiotic treatment with carbapenems and piperacillin/tazobactam. Secondary outcomes included mortality, days alive and out of ICU and ICU length of stay at 28 days. RESULTS: In the ADRENAL trial, carbapenems were used in 648 out of 3713 (17%), whereas piperacillin/tazobactam was used in 1804 out of 3713 (49%) participants. In the DIANA study, carbapenems were used in 380 out of 1480 (26%), while piperacillin/tazobactam was used in 433 out of 1488 (29%) participants. Mortality at 28 days was 23% for patients receiving carbapenems and 24% for those receiving piperacillin/tazobactam in ADRENAL and 23% and 19%, respectively, in DIANA. We noted variations in secondary outcomes; in DIANA, patients receiving carbapenems had a median of 13 days alive and out of ICU compared with 18 days among those receiving piperacillin/tazobactam. In ADRENAL, the median hospital length of stay was 27 days for patients receiving carbapenems and 21 days for those receiving piperacillin/tazobactam. CONCLUSIONS: In this post hoc analysis of ICU patients with infections, we found widespread initial use of carbapenems and piperacillin/tazobactam in international ICUs, with the latter being more frequently used. Randomized clinical trials are needed to assess if the observed variations in outcomes may be drug-related effects or due to confounders.

Heterogeneity of treatment effect of higher dose dexamethasone by geographic region (Europe vs. India) in patients with COVID-19 and severe hypoxemia - a post hoc evaluation of the COVID STEROID 2 trial.

Background: In the COVID-STEROID 2 trial there was suggestion of heterogeneity of treatment effects (HTE) between patients enrolled from Europe vs. India on the primary outcome. Whether there was HTE for the remaining patient-centred outcomes is unclear. Methods: In this post hoc analysis of the COVID-STEROID 2 trial, which compared 12 mg vs. 6 mg dexamethasone in adults with COVID-19 and severe hypoxemia, we evaluated HTE by geographical region (Europe vs. India) for secondary outcomes with analyses adjusted for stratification variables. Results are presented as risk differences (RDs) or mean differences (MDs) with 99% confidence intervals (CIs) and P-values from interaction tests. Findings: There were differences in mortality at day 28 (RD for Europe -8.3% (99% CI: -17.7 to 1.0) vs. India 0.1% (99% CI: -10.0 to 10.0)), mortality at day 90 (RD for Europe -7.4% (99% CI: -17.1 to 2.0) vs. India -1.4% (99% CI: -12.8 to 9.8)), mortality at day 180 (RD for Europe -6.7% (99% CI: -16.4 to 2.9) vs. India -1.0% (99% CI: -12.3 to 10.3)), and number of days alive without life support at day 90 (MD for Europe 6.1 days (99% CI: -1.3 to 13.4) vs. India 1.7 days (99% CI: -8.4 to 11.8)). For serious adverse reactions, the direction was reversed (RD for Europe -1.0% (99% CI: -7.1 to 5.2) vs. India -5.3% (99% CI: -16.2 to 5.0). Interpretation: Our analysis suggests higher dose dexamethasone may have less beneficial effects for patients in India as compared with those in Europe; however, the evidence is weak, and this could represent a chance finding. Funding: None for this analysis. The COVID STEROID 2 trial was funded by The Novo Nordisk Foundation and supported by Rigshospitalet's Research Council.

2024 Focused Update: Guidelines on Use of Corticosteroids in Sepsis, Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome, and Community-Acquired Pneumonia.

RATIONALE: New evidence is available examining the use of corticosteroids in sepsis, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), warranting a focused update of the 2017 guideline on critical illness-related corticosteroid insufficiency. OBJECTIVES: To develop evidence-based recommendations for use of corticosteroids in hospitalized adults and children with sepsis, ARDS, and CAP. PANEL DESIGN: The 22-member panel included diverse representation from medicine, including adult and pediatric intensivists, pulmonologists, endocrinologists, nurses, pharmacists, and clinician-methodologists with expertise in developing evidence-based Clinical Practice Guidelines. We followed Society of Critical Care Medicine conflict of interest policies in all phases of the guideline development, including task force selection and voting. METHODS: After development of five focused Population, Intervention, Control, and Outcomes (PICO) questions, we conducted systematic reviews to identify the best available evidence addressing each question. We evaluated the certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach and formulated recommendations using the evidence-to-decision framework. RESULTS: In response to the five PICOs, the panel issued four recommendations addressing the use of corticosteroids in patients with sepsis, ARDS, and CAP. These included a conditional recommendation to administer corticosteroids for patients with septic shock and critically ill patients with ARDS and a strong recommendation for use in hospitalized patients with severe CAP. The panel also recommended against high dose/short duration administration of corticosteroids for septic shock. In response to the final PICO regarding type of corticosteroid molecule in ARDS, the panel was unable to provide specific recommendations addressing corticosteroid molecule, dose, and duration of therapy, based on currently available evidence. CONCLUSIONS: The panel provided updated recommendations based on current evidence to inform clinicians, patients, and other stakeholders on the use of corticosteroids for sepsis, ARDS, and CAP.

How often are infusion sets for central venous catheters changed in Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Units? A point prevalence survey.

BACKGROUND: Infusion sets (comprising the tubing, measuring burettes, fluid containers, transducers) that are connected to invasive vascular devices are changed on a regular basis in an effort to reduce bacterial colonisation and bloodstream infection. There is a balance between reducing infection and creating unnecessary waste. Current evidence suggests that for central venous catheters (CVCs), changing infusion sets at 7 days does not increase infection risks. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to describe the current unit guidelines in Australian and New Zealand intensive care units (ICUs) for changing infusion sets for CVCs. METHODS: prospective cross-sectional point prevalence study, as a part of the 2021 Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Point Prevalence Program. PARTICIPANTS: Australia and New Zealand (ANZ) adult ICUs and their patients on the day of the study. RESULTS: Data were collected from 51 ICUs across ANZ. One-third of these (16/49) ICUs had a guideline that specified a 7-day replacement period, with the rest having a more frequent replacement period. CONCLUSION: Most ICUs participating in this survey had policies to change their CVC infusion tubing in 3-4 days, and recent high-level evidence supports an update to extend this to 7 days. There remains work to be done to spread this evidence to ANZ ICUs and improve environmental sustainability initiatives.

The feasibility and acceptability of a physician-led ICU follow-up service: A prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Increased recognition of post-intensive care syndrome has led to widespread development of intensive care follow-up services internationally. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine the feasibility and acceptability of an intensive care unit (ICU) follow-up clinic in Australia for patients and their caregivers and to describe satisfaction with this service. METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study in a mixed tertiary ICU in Australia. Eligible patients were adults admitted to the ICU for 7 days or more and/or ventilated for 48 h or more, as well as their primary caregiver. Patients and their primary caregivers were invited to attend a follow-up clinic 4-8 weeks after hospital discharge. The clinic appointment was attended by an ICU physician and nurse, with multidisciplinary support. Feasibility and acceptability were defined as the proportion of clinic attendance and frequency of interventions initiated at the clinic. Satisfaction was measured by a 5-point satisfaction survey (very dissatisfied to very satisfied). The burden of ongoing disease was reported via multiple validated instruments. RESULTS: From April 2020-July 2021, 386 patients met the inclusion criteria. Only 146 patients were approached for consent due to site staffing limitations. Eighty-three patients and 32 caregivers consented to attend the clinic. Seventy percent (54/77) of patients attended scheduled appointments and 50% (16/32) of caregivers. For patients, 23 medical referrals were made, 8 patients had medication changes, and 10 patients were offered social work support. Satisfaction surveys were completed by 65% (35/54) of attending patients; 97% (34) patients reported either being 'very satisfied' or 'satisfied' with the service. All responding caregivers (10) were either 'very satisfied' or 'satisfied' with the clinic. CONCLUSION: There were a large number of patients meeting the inclusion criteria to the ICU follow-up clinic, and clinic attendance was moderate for patients but lower for caregivers. Reported satisfaction with the service was high for both patients and their caregiver.