Search

Background: Critically ill patients are at increased risk of health care-associated infections due to various devices (central line-associated bloodstream infection, catheter-associated urinary tract infection, and ventilator-associated pneumonia), which pose a significant threat to this population. Among several strategies, daily bathing with chlorhexidine digluconate, a water-soluble antiseptic, has been studied as an intervention to decrease the incidence of health care-associated infections in the intensive care unit; however, its ability to reduce all health care-associated infections due to various devices is unclear. We designed the Daily Chlorhexidine Bath for Health Care Associated Infection Prevention (CLEAN-IT) trial to assess whether daily chlorhexidine digluconate bathing reduces the incidence of health care-associated infections in critically ill patients compared with soap and water bathing., Methods: The CLEAN-IT trial is a multicenter, open-label, cluster randomized crossover clinical trial. All adult patients admitted to the participating intensive care units will be included in the trial. Each cluster (intensive care unit) will be randomized to perform either initial chlorhexidine digluconate bathing or soap and water bathing with crossover for a period of 3 to 6 months, depending on the time of each center's entrance to the study, with a 1-month washout period between chlorhexidine digluconate bathing and soap and water bathing transitions. The primary outcome is the incidence of health care-associated infections due to devices. The secondary outcomes are the incidence of each specific health care-associated infection, rates of microbiological cultures positive for multidrug-resistant pathogens, antibiotic use, intensive care unit and hospital length of stay, and intensive care unit and hospital mortality., Conclusion: The CLEAN-IT trial will be used to study feasible and affordable interventions that might reduce the health care-associated infection burden in critically ill patients.

Background: Ventilator-associated tracheobronchitis is a common condition among invasively ventilated patients in intensive care units, for which the best treatment strategy is currently unknown. We designed the VATICAN (Ventilator-Associated Tracheobronchitis Initiative to Conduct Antibiotic Evaluation) trial to assess whether a watchful waiting antibiotic treatment strategy is noninferior to routine antibiotic treatment for ventilator-associated tracheobronchitis regarding days free of mechanical ventilation., Methods: VATICAN is a randomized, controlled, open-label, multicenter noninferiority trial. Patients with suspected ventilator-associated tracheobronchitis without evidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia or hemodynamic instability due to probable infection will be assigned to either a watchful waiting strategy, without antimicrobial administration for ventilator-associated tracheobronchitis and prescription of antimicrobials only in cases of ventilator-associated pneumonia, sepsis or septic shock, or another infectious diagnosis, or to a routine antimicrobial treatment strategy for seven days. The primary outcome will be mechanical ventilation-free days at 28 days, and a key secondary outcome will be ventilator-associated pneumonia-free survival. Through an intention-to-treat framework with a per-protocol sensitivity analysis, the primary outcome analysis will address noninferiority with a 20% margin, which translates to a 1.5 difference in ventilator-free days. Other analyses will follow a superiority analysis framework., Conclusion: The VATICAN trial will follow all national and international ethical standards. We aim to publish the trial in a high-visibility general journal and present it at critical care and infectious disease conferences for dissemination. These results will likely be immediately applicable to the bedside upon trial completion and will provide information with a low risk of bias for guideline development.

Objective: To investigate the factors influencing carbon dioxide transfer in a system that integrates an oxygenation membrane in series with high-bicarbonate continuous veno-venous hemodialysis in hypercapnic animals., Methods: In an experimental setting, we induced severe acute kidney injury and hypercapnia in five female Landrace pigs. Subsequently, we initiated high (40mEq/L) bicarbonate continuous veno-venous hemodialysis with an oxygenation membrane in series to maintain a pH above 7.25. At intervals of 1 hour, 6 hours, and 12 hours following the initiation of continuous veno-venous hemodialysis, we performed standardized sweep gas flow titration to quantify carbon dioxide transfer. We evaluated factors associated with carbon dioxide transfer through the membrane lung with a mixed linear model., Results: A total of 20 sweep gas flow titration procedures were conducted, yielding 84 measurements of carbon dioxide transfer. Multivariate analysis revealed associations among the following (coefficients ± standard errors): core temperature (+7.8 ± 1.6 °C, p < 0.001), premembrane partial pressure of carbon dioxide (+0.2 ± 0.1/mmHg, p < 0.001), hemoglobin level (+3.5 ± 0.6/g/dL, p < 0.001), sweep gas flow (+6.2 ± 0.2/L/minute, p < 0.001), and arterial oxygen saturation (-0.5 ± 0.2%, p = 0.019). Among these variables, and within the physiological ranges evaluated, sweep gas flow was the primary modifiable factor influencing the efficacy of low-blood-flow carbon dioxide removal., Conclusion: Sweep gas flow is the main carbon dioxide removal-related variable during continuous veno-venous hemodialysis with a high bicarbonate level coupled with an oxygenator. Other carbon dioxide transfer modulating variables included the hemoglobin level, arterial oxygen saturation, partial pressure of carbon dioxide and core temperature. These results should be interpreted as exploratory to inform other well-designed experimental or clinical studies.

Objective: To describe, with a larger number of patients in a real-world scenario following routine implementation, intensivist-led ultrasound-guided percutaneous dilational tracheostomy and the possible risks and complications of the procedure not identified in clinical trials., Methods: This was a phase IV cohort study of patients admitted to three intensive care units of a quaternary academic hospital who underwent intensivist-led ultrasound-guided percutaneous tracheostomy in Brazil from September 2017 to December 2021., Results: There were 4,810 intensive care unit admissions during the study period; 2,084 patients received mechanical ventilation, and 287 underwent tracheostomy, 227 of which were performed at bedside by the intensive care team. The main reason for intensive care unit admission was trauma, and for perform a tracheostomy it was a neurological impairment or an inability to protect the airways. The median time from intubation to tracheostomy was 14 days. Intensive care residents performed 76% of the procedures. At least one complication occurred in 29.5% of the procedures, the most common being hemodynamic instability and extubation during the procedure, with only 3 serious complications. The intensive care unit mortality was 29.1%, and the hospital mortality was 43.6%., Conclusion: Intensivist-led ultrasound-guided percutaneous tracheostomy is feasible out of a clinical trial context with outcomes and complications comparable to those in the literature. Intensivists can acquire this competence during their training but should be aware of potential complications to enhance procedural safety.