Search

Abstract Background Acute mesenteric ischaemia (AMI) is a life-threatening disease where early diagnosis is critical to avoid morbidity and mortality from extensive irreversible bowel necrosis. Appropriate prediction of presence of bowel necrosis is currently not available but would help to choose the optimal method of treatment. The study aims to identify combinations of biomarkers that can reliably identify AMI and distinguish between potentially reversible and irreversible bowel ischaemia. Methods This is a prospective multicentre study. Adult patients with clinical suspicion of AMI (n = 250) will be included. Blood will be sampled on admission, at and after interventions, or during the first 48 h of suspicion of AMI if no intervention undertaken. Samples will be collected and the following serum or plasma biomarkers measured at Tartu University Hospital laboratory: intestinal fatty acid-binding protein (I-FABP), alpha-glutathione S-transferase (Alpha- GST), interleukin 6 (IL-6), procalcitonin (PCT), ischaemia-modified albumin (IMA), D-lactate, D-dimer, signal peptide-CUB-EGF domain-containing protein 1 (SCUBE-1) and lipopolysaccharide-binding protein (LBP). Additionally, more common laboratory markers will be measured in routine clinical practice at study sites. Diagnosis of AMI will be confirmed by computed tomography angiography, surgery, endoscopy or autopsy. Student’s t or Wilcoxon rank tests will be used for comparisons between transmural vs. suspected (but not confirmed) AMI (comparison A), confirmed AMI of any stage vs suspected AMI (comparison B) and non-transmural AMI vs transmural AMI (comparison C). Optimal cut-off values for each comparison will be identified based on the AUROC analysis and likelihood ratios calculated. Positive likelihood ratio > 10 (> 5) and negative likelihood ratio

Abstract Background Acute mesenteric ischaemia (AMI) is a disease with different pathophysiological mechanisms, leading to a life-threatening condition that is difficult to diagnose based solely on clinical signs. Despite widely acknowledged need for biomarkers in diagnosis of AMI, a broad systematic review on all studied biomarkers in different types of AMI is currently lacking. The aim of this study was to estimate the diagnostic accuracy of all potential biomarkers of AMI studied in humans. Methods A systematic literature search in PubMed, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science and Scopus was conducted in December 2022. Studies assessing potential biomarkers of AMI in (at least 10) adult patients and reporting their diagnostic accuracy were included. Meta-analyses of biomarkers’ sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative likelihood ratios were conducted. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed, and the study quality was assessed with the QUADAS-2 tool. Results Seventy-five studies including a total of 9914 patients assessed 18 different biomarkers in serum/plasma and one in urine (each reported in at least two studies), which were included in meta-analyses. None of the biomarkers reached a conclusive level for accurate prediction. The best predictive value overall (all studies with any type and stage of AMI pooled) was observed for Ischaemia-modified albumin (2 studies, sensitivity 94.7 and specificity 90.5), interleukin-6 (n = 4, 96.3 and 82.6), procalcitonin (n = 6, 80.1 and 86.7), and intestinal fatty acid-binding protein (I-FABP) measured in serum (n = 16, 73.9 and 90.5) or in urine (n = 4, 87.9 and 78.9). In assessment of transmural mesenteric ischaemia, urinary I-FABP (n = 2, 92.3 and 85.2) and D-dimer (n = 3, 87.6 and 83.6) showed moderate predictive value. Overall risk of bias was high, mainly because of selected study populations and unclear timings of the biomarker measurements after onset of symptoms. Combinations of biomarkers were rarely studied, not allowing meta-analyses. Conclusions None of the studied biomarkers had sufficient sensitivity and specificity to diagnose AMI, although some biomarkers showed moderate predictive accuracy. Future studies should focus on timing of measurements of biomarkers, distinguishing between early stage and transmural necrosis, and between different types of AMI. Additionally, studies on combinations of biomarkers are warranted. PROSPERO registration: CRD42022379341.

Abstract The optimal feeding strategy in critically ill patients is a matter of debate, with current guidelines recommending different strategies regarding energy and protein targets. Several recent trials have added to the debate and question our previous understanding of the provision of nutrition during critical illness. This narrative review aims to provide a summary of interpretation of recent evidence from the view of basic scientist, critical care dietitian and intensivist, resulting in joined suggestions for both clinical practice and future research. In the most recent randomised controlled trial (RCT), patients receiving 6 versus 25 kcal/kg/day by any route achieved readiness for ICU discharge earlier and had fewer GI complications. A second showed that high protein dosage may be harmful in patients with baseline acute kidney injury and more severe illness. Lastly, a prospective observational study using propensity score matched analysis suggested that early full feeding, especially enteral, compared to delayed feeding is associated with a higher 28-day mortality. Viewpoints from all three professionals point to the agreement that early full feeding is likely harmful, whereas important questions regarding the mechanisms of harm as well as on timing and optimal dose of nutrition for individual patients remain unanswered and warrant future studies. For now, we suggest giving low dose of energy and protein during the first few days in the ICU and apply individualised approach based on assumed metabolic state according to the trajectory of illness thereafter. At the same time, we encourage research to develop better tools to monitor metabolism and the nutritional needs for the individual patient accurately and continuously.

Abstract Background While gastrointestinal problems are common in ICU patients with multiple organ failure, gastrointestinal failure has not been given the consideration other organ systems receive. The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence of gastrointestinal failure (GIF), to identify its risk factors, and to determine its association with ICU mortality. Methods A retrospective analysis of adult patients (n = 2588) admitted to three different ICUs (two ICUs at the university hospital Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Germany and one at Tartu University Clinics, Estonia) during the year 2002 was performed. Data recorded in a computerized database were used in Berlin. In Tartu, the data documented in the patients' charts was retrospectively transferred into a similar database. GIF was defined as documented gastrointestinal problems (food intolerance, gastrointestinal haemorrhage, and/or ileus) in the patient data at any period of their ICU stay. ICU mortality, length of stay, and duration of mechanical ventilation were assessed as outcome parameters. Results GIF was identified in 252 patients (9.7% of all patients). Only 20% of GIF patients were identifiable at admission. GIF was related to significantly higher mortality (43.7% vs. 5.3% in patients without GIF), as well as prolonged length of ICU stay (10 vs. 2 days) and mechanical ventilation (8 vs. 1 day), p < 0.001, respectively. Patients' profile (emergency surgical or medical), APACHE II and SOFA scores and the use of catecholamines at admission were identified as independent risk factors for the development of GIF. Development of GIF during ICU stay was an independent predictor for death. Conclusion Gastrointestinal failure represents a relevant clinical problem accompanied by an increased mortality, longer ICU stay and mechanical ventilation.

Abstract Background Clinical research on nutritional and metabolic interventions in critically ill patients is heterogenous regarding time points, outcomes and measurement instruments used, impeding intervention development and data syntheses, and ultimately worsening clinical outcomes. We aimed to identify and develop a set of core outcome domains and associated measurement instruments to include in all research in critically ill patients. Methods An updated systematic review informed a two-stage modified Delphi consensus process (domains followed by instruments). Measurement instruments for domains considered ‘essential’ were taken through the second stage of the Delphi and a subsequent consensus meeting. Results In total, 213 participants (41 patients/caregivers, 50 clinical researchers and 122 healthcare professionals) from 24 countries contributed. Consensus was reached on time points (30 and 90 days post-randomisation). Three domains were considered ‘essential’ at 30 days (survival, physical function and Infection) and five at 90 days (survival, physical function, activities of daily living, nutritional status and muscle/nerve function). Core ‘essential’ measurement instruments reached consensus for survival and activities of daily living, and ‘recommended’ measurement instruments for physical function, nutritional status and muscle/nerve function. No consensus was reached for a measurement instrument for Infection. Four further domains met criteria for ‘recommended,’ but not ‘essential,’ to measure at 30 days post-randomisation (organ dysfunction, muscle/nerve function, nutritional status and wound healing) and three at 90 days (frailty, body composition and organ dysfunction). Conclusion The CONCISE core outcome set is an internationally agreed minimum set of outcomes for use at 30 and 90 days post-randomisation, in nutritional and metabolic clinical research in critically ill adults.

Critically ill patients are at risk of presenting with gastrointestinal dysfunction at intensive care unit admission or during their stay. However, identifying gastrointestinal dysfunction is difficult because clinical evaluation is frequently nonspecific and validated biomarkers are lacking. In this context, ultrasound of the digestive tract may help to identify gastrointestinal dysfunction. In this narrative review, we summarize available evidence and propose a protocol for assessment of the gastrointestinal tract with ultrasound. First, we report available evidence from use of four available protocols: the gastrointestinal and urinary tract sonography protocol, the acute gastrointestinal injury ultrasound score, the transabdominal gastrointestinal ultrasound protocol, and the Lai protocol, each addressing somewhat different aspects. Outputs from these protocols have been associated with clinical scores of gastrointestinal failure, feeding intolerance, and 28‐day mortality. Second, we describe the potential pitfalls of using ultrasound in the critically ill, such as obesity, abdominal dressings, or the presence of intraluminal gas. Third, we suggest perspectives of ultrasound in monitoring the response to enteral nutrition and for early identification of nonocclusive mesenteric ischemia. Fourth, we propose a structured protocol for gastrointestinal ultrasound describing all the different structures that should be evaluated and provide detailed guidance for a clockwise abdominal examination. In conclusion, the use of a specific and structured protocol might help to identify patients presenting with gastrointestinal dysfunction, guide nutrition, and allow the proposal of pathophysiological hypotheses (complications of enteral nutrition, intra‐abdominal infection, bowel ischemia, etc.). The benefit of using a structured protocol requires further investigation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Feeding intolerance is common in critically ill patients and can lead to malnutrition. Prokinetic agents may be used to enhance the uptake of nutrition. However, the evidence on the effectiveness and safety of prokinetic agents is sparse, and there is a lack of data on their use in intensive care units (ICU). Methods: We will conduct an international 14‐day inception cohort study of 1000 acutely admitted adult ICU patients. Data will be collected from ICU admission and daily during ICU stay for up to 90 days. The primary outcome will be the proportion of ICU patients who receive prokinetic agents. Secondary outcomes include mortality, days alive without life support, days alive out of ICU, days alive out of hospital (all within 90 days) and the number of patients with one or more serious adverse events. Results: We will present data on the use of prokinetic agents descriptively and use Cox regressions with death and ICU discharge as competing events to evaluate the association between patient characteristics and the use of prokinetic agents. We will use extended Cox models with time‐varying covariates and linear regression models to assess the associations between the use of prokinetic agents and the secondary outcomes. Conclusion: The outlined international cohort study will provide valuable epidemiological data on the use of prokinetic agents in adult, acutely admitted ICU patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The vasopressor dose needed is a common measure to assess the severity of cardiovascular failure, but there is no consensus on the ranges of vasopressor doses determining different levels of cardiovascular support. We aimed to identify cutoffs for determining low, intermediate and high doses of noradrenaline (norepinephrine), the primary vasopressor used in intensive care, based on association with hospital mortality. Methods: We conducted a binational registry study to determine cutoffs between low, intermediate and high noradrenaline doses. We required the cutoffs to be statistically rational and practical (rounded to the first decimal and easy to remember), and to result in increasing mortality with increasing doses. The highest noradrenaline dose in the first 24 h after intensive care unit (ICU) admission was used. The cutoffs were developed using data from 8079 ICU patients treated in the ICU at Kuopio University Hospital, Finland, between 2013 and 2019. Subsequently, the cutoffs were validated in the eICU database, including 39,007 ICU admissions to 29 ICUs in the United States of America in 2014–2015. The log‐rank statistic, with the Contal and O'Quigley method, was used to determine the cutoffs resulting in the most significant split between the noradrenaline dose groups with regard to hospital mortality. Results: The two most prominent peaks in the log‐rank statistic corresponded to noradrenaline doses 0.20 and 0.44 μg/kg/min. Accordingly, we determined three dose ranges: low (<0.2 μg/kg/min), intermediate (0.2–0.4 μg/kg/min) and high (>0.4 μg/kg/min). Mortality increased, whereas the number of patients decreased consistently with increasing noradrenaline doses in both cohorts. In the development cohort, hospital mortality was 6.5% in the group without noradrenaline administered and 14.0%, 26.4% and 40.2%, respectively, in the low‐dose, intermediate‐dose and high‐dose groups. Compared to patients who received no noradrenaline, the hazard ratio for in‐hospital death was 1.4 for the low‐dose group, 4.0 for the intermediate‐dose group and 7.5 for the high‐dose group in the validation cohort (p <.001). Conclusions: The highest noradrenaline dose is a useful measure for quantifying circulatory failure. Cutoffs 0.2 and 0.4 μg/kg/min seem to be suitable for defining low, intermediate and high doses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Use of albumin is suggested for some patients with shock, but preferences for its use may vary among intensive care unit (ICU) physicians. Methods: We conducted an international online survey of ICU physicians with 20 questions about their use of albumin and their opinion towards a randomised trial among adults with shock comparing the use versus no use of albumin. Results: A total of 1248 respondents participated, with a mean response rate of 37%, ranging from 18% to 75% across 21 countries. Respondents mainly worked in mixed ICUs and 92% were specialists in intensive care medicine. The reported use of albumin in general shock varied as 18% reported 'almost never', 22% 'rarely', 34% 'occasionally', 22% 'frequently' and 4% 'almost always' using albumin. In septic shock, 19% reported 'almost never', 22% 'rarely', 29% 'occasionally', 22% 'frequently' and 7% 'almost always' using albumin. Physicians' preferences were more consistent for haemorrhagic‐ and cardiogenic shock, with more than 45% reporting 'almost never' using albumin. While the reported use of albumin for other purposes than resuscitation was infrequent (40%–85% reported 'almost never' for five other indications), the most frequent other indications were low serum albumin levels and improvement of the efficacy of diuretics. Most respondents (93%) would randomise adult ICU patients with shock to a trial of albumin versus no albumin. Conclusions: In this international survey, the reported preferences for the use of albumin in adult ICU patients with shock varied considerably among surveyed ICU physicians. The support for a future randomised trial was high. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract The preferential use of the oral/enteral route in critically ill patients over gut rest is uniformly recommended and applied. This article provides practical guidance on enteral nutrition in compliance with recent American and European guidelines. Low-dose enteral nutrition can be safely started within 48 h after admission, even during treatment with small or moderate doses of vasopressor agents. A percutaneous access should be used when enteral nutrition is anticipated for ≥ 4 weeks. Energy delivery should not be calculated to match energy expenditure before day 4–7, and the use of energy-dense formulas can be restricted to cases of inability to tolerate full-volume isocaloric enteral nutrition or to patients who require fluid restriction. Low-dose protein (max 0.8 g/kg/day) can be provided during the early phase of critical illness, while a protein target of > 1.2 g/kg/day could be considered during the rehabilitation phase. The occurrence of refeeding syndrome should be assessed by daily measurement of plasma phosphate, and a phosphate drop of 30% should be managed by reduction of enteral feeding rate and high-dose thiamine. Vomiting and increased gastric residual volume may indicate gastric intolerance, while sudden abdominal pain, distension, gastrointestinal paralysis, or rising abdominal pressure may indicate lower gastrointestinal intolerance.

Author(s): Annika Reintam Blaser [sup.1] [sup.2], Jan Gunst [sup.3], Yaseen M. Arabi [sup.4] [sup.5] Author Affiliations: (1) grid.10939.32, 0000 0001 0943 7661, Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, University of [...]

Objective To estimate the incidence of acute mesenteric ischaemia (AMI), proportions of its different forms and short-term and long-term mortality.Design Systematic review and meta-analysis.Data sources MEDLINE (Ovid), Web of Science, Scopus and Cochrane Library were searched until 26 July 2022.Eligibility criteria Studies reporting data on the incidence and outcomes of AMI in adult populations.Data extraction and synthesis Data extraction and quality assessment with modified Newcastle-Ottawa scale were performed using predeveloped standard forms. The outcomes were the incidence of AMI and its different forms in the general population and in patients admitted to hospital, and the mortality of AMI in its different forms.Results From 3064 records, 335 full texts were reviewed and 163 included in the quantitative analysis. The mean incidence of AMI was 6.2 (95% CI 1.9 to 12.9) per 100 000 person years. On average 5.0 (95% CI 3.3 to 7.1) of 10 000 hospital admissions were due to AMI. Occlusive arterial AMI was the most common form constituting 68.6% (95% CI 63.7 to 73.2) of all AMI cases, with similar proportions of embolism and thrombosis.Overall short-term mortality (in-hospital or within 30 days) of AMI was 59.6% (95% CI 55.5 to 63.6), being 68.7% (95% CI 60.8 to 74.9) in patients treated before the year 2000 and 55.0% (95% CI 45.5 to 64.1) in patients treated from 2000 onwards (p

Good soil aggregate stability and soil enzyme activity are strictly necessary for the proliferation of plants growth and soil resistance against erosion. In this study, the goal was to investigate the effect of different cover crops on the soil aggregate stability and soil phosphatase and their relationship. A laboratory pot experiment was established in which four cover crops were grown (Secale cereale L., Fagopyrum esculentum L., Brassica napus L. and Hordeum vulgare L.) for 33 days in sandy loam soil. Afterwards, the above-ground biomass was cut and incorporated in equal quantities (0.2 g C kg–1 of soil or 176 kg C ha–1) in the same soil and incubated for 30 days. The soil aggregate stability increased significantly with barley before harvesting and rye at day 30 after cover crop residues incorporation. The cover crop plant growth did not influence the soil acid phosphatase activity (APA) before biomass harvesting. Instead, the cover crop residues increased the soil APA only for a short period. The negative correlation between soil aggregate stability and APA can be explained by the variability in soil moisture. While the low cover crop residue quantity might have not been sufficient to increase and maintain the microbial activity.

Abstract Background Gastrointestinal (GI) dysfunction is frequent in the critically ill but can be overlooked as a result of the lack of standardization of the diagnostic and therapeutic approaches. We aimed to develop a research agenda for GI dysfunction for future research. We systematically reviewed the current knowledge on a broad range of subtopics from a specific viewpoint of GI dysfunction, highlighting the remaining areas of uncertainty and suggesting future studies. Methods This systematic scoping review and research agenda was conducted following successive steps: (1) identify clinically important subtopics within the field of GI function which warrant further research; (2) systematically review the literature for each subtopic using PubMed, CENTRAL and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews; (3) summarize evidence for each subtopic; (4) identify areas of uncertainty; (5) formulate and refine study proposals that address these subtopics; and (6) prioritize study proposals via sequential voting rounds. Results Five major themes were identified: (1) monitoring, (2) associations between GI function and outcome, (3) GI function and nutrition, (4) management of GI dysfunction and (5) pathophysiological mechanisms. Searches on 17 subtopics were performed and evidence summarized. Several areas of uncertainty were identified, six of them needing consensus process. Study proposals ranked among the first ten included: prevention and management of diarrhoea; management of upper and lower feeding intolerance, including indications for post-pyloric feeding and opioid antagonists; acute gastrointestinal injury grading as a bedside tool; the role of intra-abdominal hypertension in the development and monitoring of GI dysfunction and in the development of non-occlusive mesenteric ischaemia; and the effect of proton pump inhibitors on the microbiome in critical illness. Conclusions Current evidence on GI dysfunction is scarce, partially due to the lack of precise definitions. The use of core sets of monitoring and outcomes are required to improve the consistency of future studies. We propose several areas for consensus process and outline future study projects.

Martin Padar,1,2 Annika Reintam Blaser,2,3 Peep Talving,4,5 Edgar Lipping,6 Joel Starkopf1,2 1Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, Tartu University Hospital, Tartu, Estonia; 2Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia; 3Department of Intensive Care, Lucerne Cantonal Hospital, Lucerne, Switzerland; 4Department of Surgery, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia; 5Management Board, North Estonia Medical Centre, Tallinn, Estonia; 6Department of Surgery, Division of Acute Care Surgery, North Estonia Medical Centre, Tallinn, EstoniaCorrespondence: Annika Reintam BlaserDepartment Of Intensive Care, Lucerne Cantonal Hospital, Spitalstrasse, Lucerne 6000, SwitzerlandTel +41 79 514 21 21Email Annika.Reintam.Blaser@ut.eeAbstract: Abdominal compartment syndrome (ACS) refers to a severe increase in intra-abdominal pressure associated with single or multiorgan failure. ACS with specific pathophysiological processes and detrimental outcomes may occur in a variety of clinical conditions. Patients with ACS are predominantly managed in critical care settings, however, a wide range of multidisciplinary interventions are frequently required from medical, surgical, radiological and nursing specialties. The medical management, aiming to prevent the progression of intra-abdominal hypertension to ACS, is extensively reviewed. Timing and techniques of surgical decompression techniques, as well as management of open abdomen, are outlined. In summary, the current narrative review provides data on history, definitions, epidemiology and pathophysiology of the syndrome and highlights the importance of multidisciplinary approach in the management of ACS in adults.Keywords: intra-abdominal hypertension, abdominal compartment syndrome, abdominal decompression, decompressive laparotomy, damage control surgery, open abdomen

Soil quality indicates the soil’s ability to provide ecosystem services. Reducing the tillage intensity has been suggested as an alternative to conventional tillage for sustaining soil quality. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of soil tillage systems on individual soil quality indicators in comparison to those on grassland with Stagnic Luvisol soil in Estonia. Four soil management systems were compared: no-tillage (NT), minimum tillage (MT), conventional tillage (CT) and grassland (G) as a reference. Soil quality indicators included physical (bulk density, water-stable aggregates, porosity, air-filled pores, moisture content, water-holding capacity, penetration resistance and water permeability), chemical (total N, total soil organic C, permanganate oxidisable C, pH, P, K, Ca and Mg) and biological (earthworm abundance) parameters. CT soils had a significantly lower aggregate stability compared to MT and G soils. The higher penetration resistance of CT under an arable layer suggested the presence of a plough pan. NT improved the soil’s physical quality at 5–10 cm, which was indicated by higher moisture content, water-holding capacity and porosity and a lower bulk density, whereas penetration resistance exceeded 2 MPa in the lower part of the topsoil. NT also had significantly lower total soil organic C and total N compared to MT and G. The absence of tillage in the NT and G systems may have improved the soil’s resistance to moisture loss under dry conditions, which, in turn, improved the soil habitability for earthworms a despite higher density. In general, NT or MT stabilised or increased the soil quality compared to CT.

Purpose Motivated by a new randomized trial (the PEPTIC trial) that raised the issue of an increase in mortality with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) relative to histamine-2 receptor antagonists (H2RAs), we updated our prior systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) addressing the impact of pharmacological gastrointestinal bleeding prophylaxis in critically ill patients. Methods We searched for randomized controlled trials that examined the efficacy and safety of gastrointestinal bleeding prophylaxis with PPIs, H2RAs, or sucralfate versus one another or placebo or no prophylaxis in adult critically ill patients. We performed Bayesian random-effects NMA and conducted analyses using all PEPTIC data as well as a restricted analysis using only PEPTIC data from high compliance centers. We used the GRADE approach to quantify absolute effects and assess the certainty of evidence. Results Seventy-four trials enrolling 39 569 patients proved eligible. Both PPIs (risk ratio (RR) 1.03, 95% credible interval 0.93 to 1.14, moderate certainty) and H2RAs (RR 0.98, 0.89 to 1.08, moderate certainty) probably have little or no impact on mortality compared with no prophylaxis. There may be no important difference between PPIs and H2RAs on mortality (RR 1.05, 0.97 to 1.14, low certainty), the 95% credible interval of the complete analysis has not excluded an important increase in mortality with PPIs. Both PPIs (RR 0.46, 0.29 to 0.66) and H2RAs (RR 0.67, 0.48 to 0.94) probably reduce clinically important gastrointestinal bleeding; the magnitude of reduction is probably greater in PPIs than H2RAs (RR 0.69, 0.45 to 0.93), and the difference may be important in higher, but not lower bleeding risk patients. PPIs (RR 1.08, 0.88 to 1.45, low certainty) and H2RAs (RR 1.07, 0.85 to 1.37, low certainty) may have no important impact on pneumonia compared with no prophylaxis. Conclusion This updated NMA confirmed that PPIs and H2RAs are most likely to have a similar effect on mortality compared to each other and compared to no prophylaxis; however, the possibility that PPIs may slightly increase mortality cannot be excluded (low certainty evidence). PPIs and H2RAs probably achieve important reductions in clinically important gastrointestinal bleeding; for higher bleeding risk patients, the greater benefit of PPIs over H2RAs may be important. PPIs or H2RAs may not result in important increases in pneumonia but the certainty of evidence is low., Author(s): Ying Wang [sup.1], Long Ge [sup.2], Zhikang Ye [sup.1], Reed A. Siemieniuk [sup.1] [sup.3], Annika Reintam Blaser [sup.4] [sup.5], Xin Wang [sup.6], Anders Perner [sup.7], Morten H. Møller [sup.7], [...]

Background: General pathophysiological mechanisms regarding associations between fluid administration and intra-abdominal hypertension (IAH) are evident, but specific effects of type, amount, and timing of fluids are less clear. Objectives: This review aims to summarize current knowledge on associations between fluid administration and intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) and fluid management in patients at risk of intra-abdominal hypertension and abdominal compartment syndrome (ACS). Methods: We performed a structured literature search from 1950 until May 2021 to identify evidence of associations between fluid management and intra-abdominal pressure not limited to any specific study or patient population. Findings were summarized based on the following information: general concepts of fluid management, physiology of fluid movement in patients with intra-abdominal hypertension, and data on associations between fluid administration and IAH. Results: We identified three randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 38 prospective observational studies, 29 retrospective studies, 18 case reports in adults, two observational studies and 10 case reports in children, and three animal studies that addressed associations between fluid administration and IAH. Associations between fluid resuscitation and IAH were confirmed in most studies. Fluid resuscitation contributes to the development of IAH. However, patients with IAH receive more fluids to manage the effect of IAH on other organ systems, thereby causing a vicious cycle. Timing and approach to de-resuscitation are of utmost importance, but clear indicators to guide this decision-making process are lacking. In selected cases, only surgical decompression of the abdomen can stop deterioration and prevent further morbidity and mortality. Conclusions: Current evidence confirms an association between fluid resuscitation and secondary IAH, but optimal fluid management strategies for patients with IAH remain controversial.