Search

Patients who present in shock have high expected mortality and early resuscitation is crucial to improve their outcomes. The Critical Care Resuscitation Unit (CCRU) is a specialized unit at the University of Maryland Medical Center (UMMC) that prioritizes early resuscitation of critically ill patients. We hypothesized that lactate clearance and reduction of Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score during CCRU stay would be associated with lower in-hospital mortality.We performed a retrospective analysis of adult patients who were admitted to the CCRU between 01/01/2018-12/31/2018 and had a diagnosis of severe shock, determined by serum lactate ≥4 mmol/L. We excluded patients who died during CCRU stay. We used multivariable logistic regression to evaluate the association between lactate clearance and reduction in SOFA scores during CCRU stay and in-hospital mortality.Out of 1740 patients admitted to the CCRU in 2018, 172 (10%) had serum lactate ≥4 mmol/L. Twenty-two (13%) patients died during their CCRU stay. Our primary analysis included 129 patients with lactate clearance data and 136 patients with SOFA data. Average patients' age was 54 years, and median length of stay in the CCRU was 6 h 55 min. The average lactate and SOFA score on admission were 7.4 (3.8) mmol/L and 8.3 (4.7), respectively. Average lactate clearance was 1.9 (3.1) and average SOFA score reduction was 0.2 (2.9). In multivariable logistic regressions evaluating SOFA score and lactate separately, SOFA score reduction during CCRU stay was associated with lower in-hospital mortality (OR 0.83, 95% CI: 0.70-0.97) but lactate clearance was not (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.78-1.03). In forward stepwise multivariable analysis containing both SOFA score and lactate values, SOFA score clearance during CCRU stay was still associated with decreased in-hospital mortality (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.72-0.98).Care in the CCRU is more effective at reducing lactate than SOFA scores in patients with severe shock. However, SOFA score reduction in the resuscitation phase during the CCRU stay was associated with decreased odds of in-hospital mortality in this group of patients. Further studies are necessary to confirm our observations.

Blood pressure (BP) monitoring and management is essential in the treatment of acute aortic disease (AoD). Previous studies had shown differences between invasive arterial BP monitoring (ABPM) and non-invasive cuff BP monitoring (CBPM), but not whether ABPM would result in patients' change of clinical management. We hypothesized that ABPM would change BP management in AoD patients.This was a prospective observational study of adult patients with AoD admitted to the Critical Care Resuscitation Unit from January 2019 to February 2021. Patients with AoD and both ABPM and CBPM measurements were included. Clinician's BP management goals were assessed in real time before and after arterial catheter placement according to current guidelines. We defined change of management as change of current antihypertensive infusion rate or adding a new agent. We used multivariable logistic and ordinal regressions to determine relevant predictors.We analyzed 117 patients, and 56 (47%) had type A dissection. ABPM was frequently ≥10 mmHg higher than CBPM values. Among 40 (34%) patients with changes in management, 58% (23/40) had [ABPM-CBPM] differences ≥20 mmHg. ABPM prompted increasing current antihypertensive infusion in 68% (27/40) of patients. Peripheral artery disease (OR 13, 95% CI 1.18-50+) was associated with changes in clinical management, and ordinal regression showed hypertension and serum lactate to be associated with differences between ABPM and CBPM.ABPM was frequently higher than CBPM, resulting in 34% of changes of management, most commonly increasing anti-hypertensive infusion rates.

Venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) has been used to treat severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) acute respiratory distress syndrome; however, patient selection criteria have evolved throughout the pandemic. In this study, we sought to determine the association of patient mortality with time from positive COVID-19 test and infiltrate on chest radiograph (x-ray) to VV ECMO cannulation. We hypothesized that an increasing duration between a positive COVID-19 test or infiltrates on chest x-ray and cannulation would be associated with increased mortality. This is a single-center retrospective chart review of COVID-19 VV ECMO patients from March 1, 2020 to July 28, 2021. Unadjusted and adjusted multivariate analyses were performed to assess for mortality differences. A total of 93 patients were included in our study. Increased time, in days, from infiltrate on chest x-ray to cannulation was associated with increased mortality in both unadjusted (5-9, P = 0.002) and adjusted regression analyses (odds ratio [OR]: 1.49, 95% CI: 1.22-1.81, P0.01). Time from positive test to cannulation was not found to be significant between survivors and nonsurvivors (7.5-11, P = 0.06). Time from infiltrate on chest x-ray to cannulation for VV ECMO should be considered when assessing patient candidacy. Further larger cohort and prospective studies are required.

The COVID-19 pandemic was superimposed upon an ongoing epidemic of opioid use disorder and overdose deaths. Although the trend of opioid prescription patterns (OPP) had decreased in response to public health efforts before the pandemic, little is known about the OPP from emergency department (ED) clinicians during the COVID-19 pandemic.We conducted a pre-post study of adult patients who were discharged from 13 EDs and one urgent care within our academic medical system between 01/01/2019 and 09/30/2020 using an interrupted time series (ITS) approach. Patient characteristics and prescription data were extracted from the single unified electronic medical record across all study sites. Prescriptions of opioids were converted into morphine equivalent dose (MED). We compared the "Covid-19 Pandemic" period (C19, 03/29/2020-9/30/2020) and the "Pre-Pandemic" period (PP, 1/19/2020-03/28/2020). We used a multivariate logistic regression to assess clinical factors associated with opioid prescriptions.We analyzed 361,794 ED visits by adult patients, including 259,242 (72%) PP and 102,552 (28%) C19 visits. Demographic information and percentages of patients receiving opioid prescriptions were similar in both groups. The median [IQR] MED per prescription was higher for C19 patients (70 [56-90]) than for PP patients (60 [60-90], P0.001). ITS demonstrated a significant trend toward higher MED prescription per ED visit during the pandemic (coefficient 0.11, 95% CI 0.05-0.16, P = 0.002). A few factors, that were associated with lower likelihood of opioid prescriptions before the pandemic, became non-significant during the pandemic.Our study demonstrated that emergency clinicians increased the prescribed amount of opioids per prescription during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to the pre-pandemic period. Etiologies for this finding could include lack of access to primary care and other specialties during the pandemic, or lower volumes allowing for emergency clinicians to identify who is safe to be prescribed opioids.

Introduction Massive pulmonary embolism (MPE) is a rare but highly fatal condition. Our study’s objective was to evaluate the association between advanced interventions and survival among patients with MPE treated with venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO). Methods This is a retrospective review of the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization (ELSO) registry data. We included adult patients with MPE who were treated with VA-ECMO during 2010–2020. Our Primary outcome was survival to hospital discharge; secondary outcomes were ECMO duration among survivors and rates of ECMO-related complications. Clinical variables were compared using the Pearson chi-square and Kruskal-Wallis H tests. Results We included 802 patients; 80 (10%) received SPE and 18 (2%) received CDT. Overall, 426 (53%) survived to discharge; survival was not significantly different among those treated with SPE or CDT on VA-ECMO (70%) versus VA-ECMO alone (52%) or SPE or CDT before VA-ECMO (52%). Multivariable regression found a trend towards increased survival among those treated with SPE or CDT while on ECMO (AOR 1.8, 95% CI 0.9–3.6), but no significant correlation. There was no association between advanced interventions and ECMO duration among survivors, or rates of ECMO-related complications. Conclusion Our study found no difference in survival in patients with MPE who received advanced interventions prior to ECMO, and a slight non-significant benefit in those who received advanced interventions while on ECMO.

Background. The 6-bed critical care resuscitation unit (CCRU) is a unique and specialized intensive care unit (ICU) that streamlines the interhospital transfer (IHT—transfer between different hospitals) process for a wide range of patients with critical illness or time-sensitive disease. Previous studies showed the unit successfully increased the number of ICU admissions while reducing the time of transfer in the first year of its establishment. However, its sustainability is unknown. Methods. This was a descriptive retrospective analysis of adult, non-trauma patients who were transferred to an 800-bed quaternary medical center. Patients transferred to our medical center between January 1, 2014 and December 31, 2018 were eligible. We used interrupted time series (ITS) and descriptive analyses to describe the trend and compare the transfer process between patients who were transferred to the CCRU versus those transferred to other adult inpatient units. Results. From 2014 to 2018, 50,599 patients were transferred to our medical center; 31,582 (62%) were non-trauma adults. Compared with the year prior to the opening of the CCRU, ITS showed a significant increase in IHT after the establishment of the CCRU. The CCRU received a total of 7,788 (25%) IHTs during this period or approximately 20% of total transfers per year. Most transfers (41%) occurred via ground. Median and interquartile range [IQR] of transfer times to other ICUs (156 [65–1027] minutes) were longer than the CCRU (46 [22–139] minutes, P < 0.001 ). For the CCRU, the most common accepting services were cardiac surgery (16%), neurosurgery (11%), and emergency general surgery (10%). Conclusions. The CCRU increases the overall number of transfers to our institution, improves patient access to specialty care while decreasing transfer time, and continues to be a sustainable model over time. Additional research is needed to determine if transferring patients to the CCRU would continue to improve patients’ outcomes and hospital revenue.

Introduction The PREdiction of Survival on ECMO Therapy Score (PRESET-Score) predicts mortality while on veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) for acute respiratory distress syndrome. The aim of our study was to assess the association between PRESET-Score and survival in a large COVID-19 VV ECMO cohort. Methods This was a single-center retrospective study of COVID-19 VV ECMO patients from 15 March 2020, to 30 November 2021. Univariable and Multivariable analyses were performed to assess patient survival and score differences. Results A total of 105 patients were included in our analysis with a mean PRESET-Score of 6.74. Overall survival was 65.71%. The mean PRESET-Score was significantly lower in the survivor group (6.03 vs 8.11, p < 0.001). Patients with a PRESET-Score less than or equal to six had improved survival compared to those with a PRESET-Score greater than or equal to 8 (97.7% vs. 32.5%, p < 0.001). In a multivariable logistic regression, a lower PRESET-Score was also predictive of survival (OR 2.84, 95% CI 1.75, 4.63, p < 0.001). Conclusion We demonstrate that lower PRESET scores are associated with improved survival. The utilization of this validated, quantifiable, and objective scoring system to help identify COVID-19 patients with the greatest potential to benefit from VV-ECMO appears feasible. The incorporation of the PRESET-Score into institutional ECMO candidacy guidelines can help insure and improve access of this limited healthcare resource to all critically ill patients.

Introduction With the increased demand for veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) during the COVID-19 pandemic, guidelines for patient candidacy have often limited this modality for patients with a body mass index (BMI) less than 40 kg/m2. We hypothesize that COVID-19 VV ECMO patients with at least class III obesity (BMI ≥ 40) have decreased in-hospital mortality when compared to non-COVID-19 and non-class III obese COVID-19 VV ECMO populations. Methods This is a single-center retrospective study of COVID-19 VV ECMO patients from January 1, 2014, to November 30, 2021. Our institution used BMI ≥ 40 as part of a multi-disciplinary VV ECMO candidate screening process in COVID-19 patients. BMI criteria were not considered for exclusion criteria in non-COVID-19 patients. Univariate and multivariable analyses were performed to assess in-hospital mortality differences. Results A total of 380 patients were included in our analysis: The COVID-19 group had a lower survival rate that was not statistically significant (65.7% vs.74.9%, p = .07). The median BMI between BMI ≥ 40 COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients was not different (44.5 vs 45.5, p = .2). There was no difference in survival between the groups (73.3% vs. 78.5%, p = .58), nor was there a difference in survival between the COVID-19 BMI ≥ 40 and BMI < 40 patients (73.3, 62.7, p= .29). Multivariable logistic regression with the outcome of in-hospital mortality was performed and BMI was not found to be significant (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.89, 1.01; p = .92). Conclusion BMI ≥ 40 was not an independent risk factor for decreased in-hospital survival in this cohort of VV ECMO patients at a high-volume center. BMI should not be the sole factor when deciding VV ECMO candidacy in patients with COVID-19.