RESUMO
Purpose: The clinical profile and factors affecting outcomes in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) from adequately sample-sized Indian studies are still lacking. We aimed to investigate the clinical profile, treatment pattern, outcomes; and to assess factors affecting non-recovery in ARDS patients. Patients and methods: A retrospective observational study was conducted among adult ARDS patients admitted during five year period (January 2014-December 2018) in a South Indian tertiary care setting. The relevant data were collected from the medical records to the data collection form. The univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted to identify the predictors of outcomes using SPSS v20. Results: A total of 857 participants including 496 males and 361 females with a mean age of 46.86 ± 15.81 years were included in this study. Fever (70.9%), crepitation (58.3%), breathlessness (56.9%), and cough (45%) were the major clinical presentation. Hypertension (25.2%), kidney disease (23.8%), and diabetes (22.3%) were the major comorbidities; and sepsis (37.6%), pneumonia (33.3%), and septic shock (27.5%) were the major etiological factors observed. Antibiotics and steroids were administered to 97.9% and 52.3% of the population, respectively. The recovery rate was 47.49%. The patients with scrub typhus, dengue, pancreatitis, and oxygen supplementation had significantly lower mortality. The factors such as advanced age, sepsis, septic shock, liver diseases, and ventilation requirements were observed to be the independent predictors of non-recovery in ARDS patients. Conclusion: A comparable recovery rate was observed in our population. Advanced age, sepsis, septic shock, liver diseases, and ventilation requirements were the independent predictors of non-recovery.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Treatment with N-Acetyl Cysteine (NAC) in rodenticide poisoning has not been well established due to mixed study results and insufficient evidence. This review aimed to summarize the clinical benefits of NAC in the management of rodenticide poisoning. METHODS: This review follows the PICOS framework and the PRISMA guidelines. Pub- Med/MEDLINE, Scopus, and the Cochrane library were searched to identify the published literature from inception to September 2020, and a reference search was performed for additional relevant studies. The English language studies addressing the use of NAC in rodenticide poisoning were considered for the review. We considered all experimental and observational studies due to the insufficient number of interventional studies. RESULTS: Ten studies (two RCTs, four observational, and four descriptive) out of 2,178 studies with 492 participants were considered for the review. Only six studies (two RCTs, one prospective, and three retrospective studies) reported recovery and mortality. Pooled results of RCTs (n=2) showed a significant recovery rate (Odds Ratio [OR]: 3.97; 95% Confidence Interval [CI]:1.69-9.30), whereas summary estimates of prospective and retrospective studies recorded a non-significant effect. Metaanalysis of RCTs (OR: 0.25; 95% CI: 0.11-0.59; n=2) and retrospective studies (OR: 0.34; 95% CI: 0.15-0.78; n=3) showed a significant reduction in mortality, whereas pooled analysis of prospective studies recorded a non-significant effect. A significant reduction in intubation or ventilation (OR: 0.25; 95% CI: 0.11-0.60; 2 RCTs) and a non-significant (P=0.41) difference in duration of hospitalization was observed with NAC when compared to the non-NAC treated group. The quality of the included studies appeared to be moderate to high. CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate that NAC showed better survival and lower mortality rate when compared to non-NAC treated group; hence NAC can be considered for the management of rodenticide poisoning.
