Acute colonic pseudo-obstruction in polytrauma patients.

BACKGROUND: Acute colonic pseudo-obstruction (ACPO) is characterized by severe colonic distension without mechanical obstruction. It has an uncertain pathogenesis and poses diagnostic challenges. This study aims to explore risk factors and clinical outcomes of ACPO in polytrauma patients, and contributing information to the limited literature on this condition. METHODS: This retrospective study, conducted at a Level 1 Trauma Centre, analysed data from trauma patients with ACPO admitted between July 2009 and June 2018. A control cohort of major trauma patients was utilized. Data review encompassed patient demographics, abdominal imaging, injury characteristics, analgesic usage, interventions, complications, and mortality. Statistical analyses, including logistic regression and correlation coefficients, were employed to identify risk factors. RESULTS: There were 57 cases of ACPO, with an incidence of 1.7 / 1000 patients, rising to 4.86 in major trauma. Predominantly affecting those over 50 years of age (75%) and males (75%), with motor vehicle accidents (50.8%) and falls from height (36.8%) being the commonest mechanisms. Noteworthy associated injuries included retroperitoneal bleeds (RPB) (37%), spinal fractures (37%), and pelvic fractures (37%). Analysis revealed significant associations between ACPO and Shock Index >0.9, Injury Severity Score > 18, opioid use, RPB, and pelvic fractures. A caecal diameter of ≥12 cm had a significant association with caecal ischemia or perforation. CONCLUSION: This study underscores the significance of ACPO in polytrauma patients, demonstrating associations with risk factors and clinical outcomes. Clinicians should maintain a high index of suspicion, particularly in older patients with RPB, pelvic fractures, and opioid use. Early supportive therapy, vigilant monitoring, and timely interventions are crucial for a favourable outcome. Further research and prospective trials are warranted to validate these findings and enhance understanding of ACPO in trauma patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and Epidemiological, Level IV.

Postoperative 20% albumin vs standard care and acute kidney injury after high-risk cardiac surgery (ALBICS): study protocol for a randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a common complication of cardiac surgery. Factors such as cardiopulmonary bypass, aortic cross-clamping and surgical stress may precipitate renal hypoperfusion and ischaemia, inflammation and oxidative stress are associated with development of AKI. Albumin's pharmacological properties and widespread availability have the potential to mitigate these factors. However, the effect of albumin on cardiac surgery-associated AKI is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of postoperative 20% albumin infusion on kidney function after high-risk cardiac surgery. METHODS: We designed an open-label, multicentre, randomised controlled trial-the ALBICS study (ALBumin Infusion and acute kidney injury following Cardiac Surgery). A total of 590 patients undergoing high-risk cardiac surgery (combined procedure or estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) < 60 mL/min/1.73 m2) will be enrolled into the study and randomly allocated to receive a postoperative 20% albumin infusion or standard care in a 1:1 ratio, stratified by centre and baseline renal function. The study fluid will be administered upon arrival in intensive care for 15 h. Patients will be followed up until 28 days after surgery or until discharge from the hospital. The primary outcome is the proportion of patients who develop AKI in both groups. Secondary outcomes to be measured are proportions of AKI stage II and III, 28-day mortality, mechanical ventilation time and length of stay in intensive care and hospital. CONCLUSION: This trial aims to determine if a postoperative infusion of concentrated albumin reduces the risk of AKI following high-risk cardiac surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12619001355167. Registered on 03 October 2019-retrospectively registered. https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=378383 .

Comparison of clinical outcomes between nurse practitioner and registrar-led medical emergency teams: a propensity-matched analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Medical emergency teams (MET) are mostly led by physicians. Some hospitals are currently using nurse practitioners (NP) to lead MET calls. These are no studies comparing clinical outcomes between these two care models. To determine whether NP-led MET calls are associated with lower risk of acute patient deterioration, when compared to intensive care (ICU) registrar (ICUR)-led MET calls. METHODS: The composite primary outcome included recurrence of MET call, occurrence of code blue or ICU admission within 24 h. Secondary outcomes were mortality within 24 h of MET call, length of hospital stay, hospital mortality and proportion of patients discharged home. Propensity score matching was used to reduce selection bias from confounding factors between the ICUR and NP group. RESULTS: A total of 1343 MET calls were included (1070 NP, 273 ICUR led). On Univariable analysis, the incidence of the primary outcome was higher in ICUR-led MET calls (26.7% vs. 20.6%, p = 0.03). Of the secondary outcome measures, mortality within 24 h (3.4% vs. 7.7%, p = 0.002) and hospital mortality (12.7% vs. 20.5%, p = 0.001) were higher in ICUR-led MET calls. Propensity score-matched analysis of 263 pairs revealed the composite primary outcome was comparable between both groups, but NP-led group was associated with reduced risk of hospital mortality (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.35-0.91, p = 0.02) and higher likelihood of discharge home (OR 1.55, 95% CI 1.09-2.2, p = 0.015). CONCLUSION: Acute patient deterioration was comparable between ICUR- and NP-led MET calls. NP-led MET calls were associated with lower hospital mortality and higher likelihood of discharge home.

The Effect of Early Sedation With Dexmedetomidine on Body Temperature in Critically Ill Patients.

OBJECTIVES: Previous case series reported an association between dexmedetomidine use and hyperthermia. Temperature data have not been systematically reported in previous randomized controlled trials evaluating dexmedetomidine. A causal link between dexmedetomidine administration and elevated temperature has not been demonstrated. DESIGN: Post hoc analysis. SETTING: Four ICUs in Australia and New Zealand. PATIENTS: About 703 mechanically ventilated ICU patients. INTERVENTIONS: Early sedation with dexmedetomidine versus usual care. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome was mean daily body temperature. Secondary outcomes included the proportions of patients with body temperatures greater than or equal to 38.3°C and greater than or equal to 39°C, respectively. Outcomes were recorded for 5 days postrandomization in the ICU. The mean daily temperature was not different between the dexmedetomidine (n = 351) and usual care (n = 352) groups (36.84°C ± sd vs 36.78°C ± sd; p = 0.16). Over the first 5 ICU days, more dexmedetomidine group (vs usual care) patients had a temperature greater than or equal to 38.3°C (43.3% vs 32.7%, p = 0.004; absolute difference 10.6 percentage points) and greater than or equal to 39.0°C (19.4% vs 12.5%, p = 0.013; absolute difference 6.9 percentage points). Results were similar after adjusting for diagnosis, admitting temperature, age, weight, study site, sepsis occurrence, and the time from dexmedetomidine initiation to first hyperthermia recorded. There was a significant dose response relationship with temperature increasing by 0.30°C ±0.08 for every additional 1 µg/kg/hr of dexmedetomidine received p < 0.0002. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests potentially important elevations in body temperature are associated with early dexmedetomidine sedation, in adults who are mechanically ventilated in the ICU.