Search

Background: The rational use of antibiotics is one of the main strategies to limit the development of bacterial resistance. We therefore sought to evaluate the effectiveness of a C-reactive protein-based protocol in reducing antibiotic treatment time in critically ill patients.Methods: A randomized, open-label, controlled clinical trial conducted in two intensive care units of a university hospital in Brazil. Critically ill infected adult patients were randomly allocated to (i) intervention to receive antibiotics guided by daily monitoring of CRP levels and (ii) control to receive antibiotics according to the best practices for rational use of antibiotics.Results: One hundred thirty patients were included in the CRP (n = 64) and control (n = 66) groups. In the intention-to-treat analysis, the median duration of antibiotic therapy for the index infectious episode was 7.0 (5.0-8.8) days in the CRP and 7.0 (7.0-11.3) days in the control (p = 0.011) groups. A significant difference in the treatment time between the two groups was identified in the curve of cumulative suspension of antibiotics, with less exposure in the CRP group only for the index infection episode (p = 0.007). In the per protocol analysis, involving 59 patients in each group, the median duration of antibiotic treatment was 6.0 (5.0-8.0) days for the CRP and 7.0 (7.0-10.0) days for the control (p = 0.011) groups. There was no between-group difference regarding the total days of antibiotic exposure and antibiotic-free days.Conclusions: Daily monitoring of CRP levels may allow early interruption of antibiotic therapy in a higher proportion of patients, without an effect on total antibiotic consumption. The clinical and microbiological relevance of this finding remains to be demonstrated.Trial Registry: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02987790. Registered 09 December 2016. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: A recent meta-analysis showed that weaning with SmartCare™ (Dräger, Lübeck, Germany) significantly decreased weaning time in critically ill patients. However, its utility compared with respiratory physiotherapist-protocolized weaning is still a matter of debate. We hypothesized that weaning with SmartCare™ would be as effective as respiratory physiotherapy-driven weaning in critically ill patients.Methods: Adult critically ill patients mechanically ventilated for more than 24 hours in the adult intensive care unit of the Albert Einstein Hospital, São Paulo, Brazil, were randomly assigned to be weaned either by progressive discontinuation of pressure support ventilation (PSV) with SmartCare™. Demographic data, respiratory function parameters, level of PSV, tidal volume (VT), positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP), inspired oxygen fraction (FIO2), peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2), end-tidal carbon dioxide concentration (EtCO2) and airway occlusion pressure at 0.1 second (P0.1) were recorded at the beginning of the weaning process and before extubation. Mechanical ventilation time, weaning duration and rate of extubation failure were compared.Results: Seventy patients were enrolled 35 in each group. There was no difference between the two groups concerning age, sex or diagnosis at study entry. There was no difference in maximal inspiratory pressure, maximal expiratory pressure, forced vital capacity or rapid shallow breathing index at the beginning of the weaning trial. PEEP, VT, FIO2, SpO2, respiratory rate, EtCO2 and P0.1 were similar between the two groups, but PSV was not (median: 8 vs. 10 cmH2O; p =0.007). When the patients were ready for extubation, PSV (8 vs. 5 cmH2O; p =0.015) and PEEP (8 vs. 5 cmH2O; p <0.001) were significantly higher in the respiratory physiotherapy-driven weaning group. Total duration of mechanical ventilation (3.5 [2.0-7.3] days vs. 4.1 [2.7-7.1] days; p =0.467) and extubation failure (2 vs. 2; p =1.00) were similar between the two groups. Weaning duration was shorter in the respiratory physiotherapy-driven weaning group (60 [50-80] minutes vs. 110 [80-130] minutes; p <0.001).Conclusion: A respiratory physiotherapy-driven weaning protocol can decrease weaning time compared with an automatic system, as it takes into account individual weaning difficulties.Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02122016 . Date of Registration: 27 August 2013. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]