Comparing BIS Monitoring vs. Clinical Assessment for Deep Sedation in the ICU: Effects on Delirium Reduction and Sedative Drug Doses - A randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Sedative overdoses pose a delirium risk among Intensive Care Unit (ICU) patients, with potential mitigation through the use of a processed EEG monitor (BIS) to guide depth of sedation. RESEARCH QUESTION: Can BIS-guided deep sedation (RASS -4, -5) reduce sedative dosage and increase delirium-free and coma-free (DFCF) days? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A randomized controlled trial was conducted in a tertiary mixed ICU, enrolling patients requiring deep sedation for >8 hours. Patients were randomly assigned to either the Clinical Assessment (CA) or BIS groups (BIS range of 40-60). Both groups utilized a BIS sensor, while the CA group's screen remained covered. After deep sedation, BIS sensors were removed, and delirium was assessed twice daily by researchers blinded to the randomization. The primary outcome was the number of DFCF days within 14 days after deep sedation. Additionally, we compared doses of sedative drugs and BIS values during deep sedation. RESULTS: Ninety-nine patients were included in the study. We found no significant difference in DFCF (p=0.1) between CA and BIS arms, but propofol doses were significantly lower in the BIS group (CA group 1.77 mg/kg/hr [95% CI 1.60, 1.93] vs. BIS group 1.44 mg/kg/hr [95% CI 1.04, 1.83]; p=0.03). During deep sedation, the CA group spent 46% of the total hours (95% CI 35, 57%) with BIS values below 40, whereas the BIS group spent 32% (95% CI 25, 40%), (p=0.03). Subgroup analysis focusing on patients sedated for more than 24 hours revealed an increase in DFCF in the BIS group (CA group median of 1 day [IQR 0, 9] vs. BIS group 8 days [IQR 0, 13]; p=0.04). INTERPRETATION: BIS-guided deep sedation did not improve DFCF days but reduced sedative drug use. In patients requiring sedation for more than 24 hours, it showed an improvement in DFCF days.

Incidence of venous thromboembolic disease and risk of bleeding in critically ill patients with hematologic malignancies: A retrospective study.

OBJECTIVE: Our objectives were to describe the use of thromboprophylaxis and the incidence of VTE/bleeding in critically ill patients with hematologic malignancies (HM). DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study (2014-2022). SETTING: Medic-Surgical Intensive Care Unit (ICU) in a tertiary care academic center. PATIENTS: Adult patients admitted to ICU with a concomitant diagnosis of a hematological malignancy. INTERVENTIONS: None. MAIN VARIABLES OF INTEREST: We analyzed demographic data, use of thromboprophylaxis and secondary outcomes that included incidence of VTE (venous thromboembolism), bleeding, mortality, severity scores and organ support. We applied a multivariable logistic regression model to examine the risk of thrombosis in the ICU. RESULTS: We included 862 ICU admissions (813 unique patients). Thromboprophylaxis was given during 65% of admissions (LMWH 14%, UFH 8%, and SCDs 43%); in 21% it was contraindicated due to thrombocytopenia; 14% of cases lacked documentation on prophylaxis. There were 38 unique incident cases of VTE (27 DVT, 11 PE), constituting 4.4% of ICU episodes. Most of VTE cases happened in patients with various degrees of thrombocytopenia. In the multivariable analysis, SOFA score on the first ICU day was independently associated (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.76-0.96) with the risk of VTE. Bleeding occurred in 7.2% (minor) and 14.4% (major) of episodes; most frequent sites being CNS, abdomen/GI and pulmonary. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of critically ill patients with HM, there was considerable variability in the utilization of DVT prophylaxis, with predominant use of SCDs. The incidence of VTE was 4.4% and major bleeding 14%. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT05396157. Venous Thromboembolism in Hematologic Malignancy and Hematopoietic Cell Transplant Patients: a Retrospective Study (https://clinicaltrials.gov/).

Venous thromboembolism in critically ill adult patients with hematologic malignancy: a population-based cohort study.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to describe the incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and major bleeding among hospitalized patients with hematologic malignancy, assessing its association with critical illness and other baseline characteristics. METHODS: We conducted a population-based cohort study of hospitalized adults with a new diagnosis of hematologic malignancy in Ontario, Canada, between 2006 and 2017. The primary outcome was VTE (pulmonary embolism or deep venous thrombosis). Secondary outcomes were major bleeding and in-hospital mortality. We compared the incidence of VTE between intensive care unit (ICU) and non-ICU patients and described the association of other baseline characteristics and VTE. RESULTS: Among 76,803 eligible patients (mean age 67 years [standard deviation, SD, 15]), 20,524 had at least one ICU admission. The incidence of VTE was 3.7% in ICU patients compared to 1.2% in non-ICU patients (odds ratio [OR] 3.08; 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.77-3.42). The incidence of major bleeding was 7.6% and 2.4% (OR 3.33; 95% CI 3.09-3.58), respectively. The association of critical illness and VTE remained significant after adjusting for potential confounders (OR 2.92; 95% CI 2.62-3.25). We observed a higher incidence of VTE among specific subtypes of hematologic malignancy and patients with prior VTE (OR 6.64; 95% CI 5.42-8.14). Admission more than 1 year after diagnosis of hematologic malignancy (OR 0.64; 95% CI 0.56-0.74) and platelet count ≤ 50 × 109/L at the time of hospitalization (OR 0.63; 95% CI 0.48-0.84) were associated with a lower incidence of VTE. CONCLUSION: Among patients with hematologic malignancy, critical illness and certain baseline characteristics were associated with a higher incidence of VTE.

International Analgesia and Sedation Weaning and Withdrawal Practices in Critically Ill Adults: The Adult Iatrogenic Withdrawal Study in the ICU.

OBJECTIVES: Iatrogenic withdrawal syndrome (IWS) associated with opioid and sedative use for medical purposes has a reported high prevalence and associated morbidity. This study aimed to determine the prevalence, utilization, and characteristics of opioid and sedative weaning and IWS policies/protocols in the adult ICU population. DESIGN: International, multicenter, observational, point prevalence study. SETTING: Adult ICUs. PATIENTS: All patients aged 18 years and older in the ICU on the date of data collection who received parenteral opioids or sedatives in the previous 24 hours. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: ICUs selected 1 day for data collection between June 1 and September 30, 2021. Patient demographic data, opioid and sedative medication use, and weaning and IWS assessment data were collected for the previous 24 hours. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients weaned from opioids and sedatives using an institutional policy/protocol on the data collection day. There were 2,402 patients in 229 ICUs from 11 countries screened for opioid and sedative use; 1,506 (63%) patients received parenteral opioids, and/or sedatives in the previous 24 hours. There were 90 (39%) ICUs with a weaning policy/protocol which was used in 176 (12%) patients, and 23 (10%) ICUs with an IWS policy/protocol which was used in 9 (0.6%) patients. The weaning policy/protocol for 47 (52%) ICUs did not define when to initiate weaning, and the policy/protocol for 24 (27%) ICUs did not specify the degree of weaning. A weaning policy/protocol was used in 34% (176/521) and IWS policy/protocol in 9% (9/97) of patients admitted to an ICU with such a policy/protocol. Among 485 patients eligible for weaning policy/protocol utilization based on duration of opioid/sedative use initiation criterion within individual ICU policies/protocols 176 (36%) had it used, and among 54 patients on opioids and/or sedatives ≥ 72 hours, 9 (17%) had an IWS policy/protocol used by the data collection day. CONCLUSIONS: This international observational study found that a small proportion of ICUs use policies/protocols for opioid and sedative weaning or IWS, and even when these policies/protocols are in place, they are implemented in a small percentage of patients.

Practices in sedation, analgesia, mobilization, delirium, and sleep deprivation in adult intensive care units (SAMDS-ICU): an international survey before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Since the publication of the 2018 Clinical Guidelines about sedation, analgesia, delirium, mobilization, and sleep deprivation in critically ill patients, no evaluation and adequacy assessment of these recommendations were studied in an international context. This survey aimed to investigate these current practices and if the COVID-19 pandemic has changed them. METHODS: This study was an open multinational electronic survey directed to physicians working in adult intensive care units (ICUs), which was performed in two steps: before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: We analyzed 1768 questionnaires and 1539 (87%) were complete. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, we received 1476 questionnaires and 292 were submitted later. The following practices were observed before the pandemic: the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) (61.5%), the Behavioral Pain Scale (BPS) (48.2%), the Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale (RASS) (76.6%), and the Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit (CAM-ICU) (66.6%) were the most frequently tools used to assess pain, sedation level, and delirium, respectively; midazolam and fentanyl were the most frequently used drugs for inducing sedation and analgesia (84.8% and 78.3%, respectively), whereas haloperidol (68.8%) and atypical antipsychotics (69.4%) were the most prescribed drugs for delirium treatment; some physicians regularly prescribed drugs to induce sleep (19.1%) or ordered mechanical restraints as part of their routine (6.2%) for patients on mechanical ventilation; non-pharmacological strategies were frequently applied for pain, delirium, and sleep deprivation management. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the intensive care specialty was independently associated with best practices. Moreover, the mechanical ventilation rate was higher, patients received sedation more often (94% versus 86.1%, p < 0.001) and sedation goals were discussed more frequently in daily rounds. Morphine was the main drug used for analgesia (77.2%), and some sedative drugs, such as midazolam, propofol, ketamine and quetiapine, were used more frequently. CONCLUSIONS: Most sedation, analgesia and delirium practices were comparable before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. During the pandemic, the intensive care specialty was a variable that was independently associated with the best practices. Although many findings are in accordance with evidence-based recommendations, some practices still need improvement.

Consensus for the management of analgesia, sedation and delirium in adults with COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome. / Consenso para el manejo de la analgesia, sedación y delirium en adultos con síndrome de distrés respiratorio agudo por COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: To propose agile strategies for a comprehensive approach to analgesia, sedation, delirium, early mobility and family engagement for patients with COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome, considering the high risk of infection among health workers, the humanitarian treatment that we must provide to patients and the inclusion of patients' families, in a context lacking specific therapeutic strategies against the virus globally available to date and a potential lack of health resources. METHODS: A nonsystematic review of the scientific evidence in the main bibliographic databases was carried out, together with national and international clinical experience and judgment. Finally, a consensus of recommendations was made among the members of the Committee for Analgesia, Sedation and Delirium of the Sociedad Argentina de Terapia Intensiva. RESULTS: Recommendations were agreed upon, and tools were developed to ensure a comprehensive approach to analgesia, sedation, delirium, early mobility and family engagement for adult patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome due to COVID-19. DISCUSSION: Given the new order generated in intensive therapies due to the advancing COVID-19 pandemic, we propose to not leave aside the usual good practices but to adapt them to the particular context generated. Our consensus is supported by scientific evidence and national and international experience and will be an attractive consultation tool in intensive therapies.

OBJETIVO: Proponer estrategias agile para este abordaje integral de la analgesia, sedación, delirium, implementación de movilidad temprana e inclusión familiar del paciente con síndrome de dificultad respiratoria aguda por COVID-19, considerando el alto riesgo de infección que existe entre los trabajadores de salud, el tratamiento humanitario que debemos brindar al paciente y su familia, en un contexto de falta estrategias terapéuticas específicas contra el virus globalmente disponibles a la fecha y una potencial falta de recursos sanitarios. METODOS: Se llevó a cabo una revision no sistemática de la evidencia científica en las principales bases de datos bibliográficos, sumada a la experiencia y juicio clínico nacional e internacional. Finalmente, se realizó un consenso de recomendaciones entre los integrantes del Comité de Analgesia, Sedación y Delirium de la Sociedad Argentina de Terapia Intensiva. RESULTADOS: Se acordaron recomendaciones y se desarrollaron herramientas para asegurar un abordaje integral de analgesia, sedación, delirium, implementación de movilidad temprana e inclusión familiar del paciente adulto con síndrome de dificultad respiratoria aguda por COVID-19. DISCUSIÓN: Ante el nuevo orden generado en las terapias intensivas por la progresión de la pandemia de COVID-19, proponemos no dejar atrás las buenas prácticas habituales, sino adaptarlas al contexto particular generado. Nuestro consenso está respaldado en la evidencia científica, la experiencia nacional e internacional, y será una herramienta de consulta atractiva en las terapias intensivas.

Consenso para el manejo de la analgesia, sedación y delirium en adultos con síndrome de distrés respiratorio agudo por COVID-19 / Consensus for the management of analgesia, sedation and delirium in adults with COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome

RESUMEN Objetivo: Proponer estrategias agile para este abordaje integral de la analgesia, sedación, delirium, implementación de movilidad temprana e inclusión familiar del paciente con síndrome de dificultad respiratoria aguda por COVID-19, considerando el alto riesgo de infección que existe entre los trabajadores de salud, el tratamiento humanitario que debemos brindar al paciente y su familia, en un contexto de falta estrategias terapéuticas específicas contra el virus globalmente disponibles a la fecha y una potencial falta de recursos sanitarios. Metodos: Se llevó a cabo una revision no sistemática de la evidencia científica en las principales bases de datos bibliográficos, sumada a la experiencia y juicio clínico nacional e internacional. Finalmente, se realizó un consenso de recomendaciones entre los integrantes del Comité de Analgesia, Sedación y Delirium de la Sociedad Argentina de Terapia Intensiva. Resultados: Se acordaron recomendaciones y se desarrollaron herramientas para asegurar un abordaje integral de analgesia, sedación, delirium, implementación de movilidad temprana e inclusión familiar del paciente adulto con síndrome de dificultad respiratoria aguda por COVID-19. Discusión: Ante el nuevo orden generado en las terapias intensivas por la progresión de la pandemia de COVID-19, proponemos no dejar atrás las buenas prácticas habituales, sino adaptarlas al contexto particular generado. Nuestro consenso está respaldado en la evidencia científica, la experiencia nacional e internacional, y será una herramienta de consulta atractiva en las terapias intensivas.

ABSTRACT Objective: To propose agile strategies for a comprehensive approach to analgesia, sedation, delirium, early mobility and family engagement for patients with COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome, considering the high risk of infection among health workers, the humanitarian treatment that we must provide to patients and the inclusion of patients' families, in a context lacking specific therapeutic strategies against the virus globally available to date and a potential lack of health resources. Methods: A nonsystematic review of the scientific evidence in the main bibliographic databases was carried out, together with national and international clinical experience and judgment. Finally, a consensus of recommendations was made among the members of the Committee for Analgesia, Sedation and Delirium of the Sociedad Argentina de Terapia Intensiva. Results: Recommendations were agreed upon, and tools were developed to ensure a comprehensive approach to analgesia, sedation, delirium, early mobility and family engagement for adult patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome due to COVID-19. Discussion: Given the new order generated in intensive therapies due to the advancing COVID-19 pandemic, we propose to not leave aside the usual good practices but to adapt them to the particular context generated. Our consensus is supported by scientific evidence and national and international experience and will be an attractive consultation tool in intensive therapies.

Implementation and results of a new ECMO program for lung transplantation and acute respiratory distress.

OBJECTIVE: The development of the extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in Latin America represents a challenge in this specialty field. The objective of this article was to describe the results of a new extracorporeal membrane oxygenation program in an intensive care unit. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included 22 patients who required extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and were treated from January 2011 to June 2014. The baseline characteristics, indications, duration of the condition, days on mechanical ventilation, days in the intensive care unit, complications, and hospital mortality were evaluated. RESULTS: Fifteen patients required extracorporeal membrane oxygenation after lung transplantation, and seven patients required oxygenation due to acute respiratory distress. All transplanted patients were weaned from extracorporeal membrane oxygenation with a median duration of 3 days (Interquartile range - IQR: 2 - 5), were on mechanical ventilation for a median of 15.5 days (IQR: 3 - 25), and had an intensive care unit stay of 31.5 days (IQR: 19 - 53) and a median hospital stay of 60 days (IQR: 36 - 89) with 20% mortality. Patients with acute respiratory distress had a median oxygenation membrane duration of 9 days (IQR: 3 - 14), median mechanical ventilation time of 25 days (IQR: 13 - 37), a 31 day stay in therapy (IQR: 11 - 38), a 32 day stay in the hospital (IQR: 11 - 41), and 57% mortality. The main complications were infections (80%), acute kidney failure (43%), bleeding at the surgical site and at the site of cannula placement (22%), plateletopenia (60%), and coagulopathy (30%). CONCLUSION: In spite of the steep learning curve, we considered this experience to be satisfactory, with results and complications comparable to those reported in the literature.

Implementación y resultados de un nuevo programa de ECMO para trasplante de pulmón y distrés respiratorio agudo / Implementation and results of a new ECMO program for lung transplantation and acute respiratory distress

RESUMEN Objetivo: El desarrollo de la membrana de oxigenación extracorpórea en América Latina representa un desafío para la especialidad. El objetivo de este artículo fue describir los resultados de un nuevo programa de membrana de oxigenación extracorpórea en una unidad de cuidados intensivos. Métodos: Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo. Incluye 22 pacientes que requirieron membrana de oxigenación extracorpórea desde Enero de 2011 hasta Junio de 2014. Se evaluaron características basales, indicaciones, duración de la corrida, días de ventilación mecánica, días de unidad de cuidados intensivos, complicaciones y mortalidad hospitalaria. Resultados: Quince pacientes requirieron membrana de oxigenación extracorpórea post-trasplante pulmonar y 7 pacientes por distrés respiratorio agudo. Todos los pacientes trasplantados fueron destetados de membrana de oxigenación extracorpórea, con una duración mediana de 3 días (Rango intercuantil - IQR: 2 - 5), de ventilación mecánica 15,5 días (IQR: 3 - 35), de estadía unidad de cuidados intensivos 31,5 días (IQR: 19 - 53) y de estadía hospitalaria 60 días (IQR: 36 - 89), con una mortalidad de 20%. Los pacientes con distrés respiratorio agudo tuvieron una mediana de duración de membrana de oxigenación extracorpórea de 9 días (IQR: 3 - 14), mediana de ventilación mecánica 25 días (IQR: 13 - 37), de estadía en terapia 31 días (IQR: 11 - 38), y hospitalaria 32 días (IQR: 11 - 41), y 57% de mortalidad. Las principales complicaciones fueron infecciones (80%), insuficiencia renal aguda (43%), sangrados en sitio quirúrgico y de inserción de cánulas (22%), plaquetopenia (60%) y coagulopatía (30%). Conclusión: A pesar de encontrarnos transitando una curva de aprendizaje, consideramos la experiencia satisfactoria, con resultados y complicaciones comparables a las reportadas en la literatura. .

ABSTRACT Objective: The development of the extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in Latin America represents a challenge in this specialty field. The objective of this article was to describe the results of a new extracorporeal membrane oxygenation program in an intensive care unit. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included 22 patients who required extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and were treated from January 2011 to June 2014. The baseline characteristics, indications, duration of the condition, days on mechanical ventilation, days in the intensive care unit, complications, and hospital mortality were evaluated. Results: Fifteen patients required extracorporeal membrane oxygenation after lung transplantation, and seven patients required oxygenation due to acute respiratory distress. All transplanted patients were weaned from extracorporeal membrane oxygenation with a median duration of 3 days (Interquartile range - IQR: 2 - 5), were on mechanical ventilation for a median of 15.5 days (IQR: 3 - 25), and had an intensive care unit stay of 31.5 days (IQR: 19 - 53) and a median hospital stay of 60 days (IQR: 36 - 89) with 20% mortality. Patients with acute respiratory distress had a median oxygenation membrane duration of 9 days (IQR: 3 - 14), median mechanical ventilation time of 25 days (IQR: 13 - 37), a 31 day stay in therapy (IQR: 11 - 38), a 32 day stay in the hospital (IQR: 11 - 41), and 57% mortality. The main complications were infections (80%), acute kidney failure (43%), bleeding at the surgical site and at the site of cannula placement (22%), plateletopenia (60%), and coagulopathy (30%). Conclusion: In spite of the steep learning curve, we considered this experience to be satisfactory, with results and complications comparable to those reported in the literature. .