Search

Background: Access to the neuraxial space, including lumbar punctures and neuraxial anaesthesia, is an everyday procedure in clinical practice. Traditionally these procedures rely on manual palpation technique, but ultrasound is a useful tool when patients prove challenging. Presently, there is a lack of evidence-based guidelines for technical skills acquisition, both with and without ultrasound, and likewise, competency assessment approaches vary globally. Accordingly, we aim to assess the current evidence regarding learning and assessment in neuraxial access ± ultrasound, for future educational recommendations., Methods: This scoping review will be conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement, together with the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews. A systematic search strategy will be based on a PICO approach, focusing on physicians, medical students, or nurses being exposed to education, training, or assessment in procedural neuraxial access ± ultrasound. No comparators are obligated, but outcomes should be assessable using the Kirkpatrick four levels of training evaluation. The search will be performed in Cochrane Library, Embase, Medline, Scopus, PubMed, and CINAHL. Independently, two authors will screen the studies and conflicts will be resolved by a third author. Relevant predefined data will be extracted and analysed using a descriptive approach. The quality of the studies will be assessed using the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument., Discussion: This scoping review will contribute by presenting gathered evidence of an overview of the different approaches to achieving education and training of technical skills in neuraxial access, and how skills are tested, which could guide research and future recommendations for skills development and assessment., (© 2024 The Author(s). Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Foundation.)

Background: Over the past decade, ultrasound utilization has increased within anesthesia and intensive care medicine, enhancing patient safety and diagnostic accuracy. However, the frequency of ultrasound usage and operator training in the Nordic countries remain unclear. This project aims to perform a survey on ultrasound availability, daily clinical use, and how ultrasound skills are trained and assessed, among anesthesiologists., Methods: This online cross-sectional survey will include anesthesiologists from the Nordic countries. The survey will adhere to the CROSS checklist. Survey items will be developed based on a formative model with a conceptual model, consisting of three main parts, including demographics, ultrasound machines and use, and skills development and assessment. The clinical relevance of items will be secured by including anesthesiologists of various levels of experience in the development of the survey. Furthermore, experienced researchers in medical education will participate in the development, contributing with relevant medical educational perspectives. Data will be summarized using a non-parametric descriptive approach. A chi-squared test will examine relevant relationships between certain answers., Results: Results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at relevant scientific conferences and meetings., Conclusion: This study may find a high availability of ultrasound machines and frequent use in the clinical departments. Despite this expected daily use of ultrasound, missing standardized structured skills acquisition and assessment could be uncovered. The results of this study may contribute to mapping various aspects of clinical ultrasound and skills development for further use in research., (© 2024 The Author(s). Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Foundation.)

Background: Postoperative pain following video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) remains a significant challenge. While epidural analgesia is still the gold standard, other types of regional analgesia are gaining popularity because of perceived less risk of complications. The efficacy of systemic opioids as an alternative to epidural analgesia has not been thoroughly explored. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate and compare the efficacy of systemic opioids versus epidural analgesia in managing postoperative pain after VATS., Methods: We will conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis in accordance with the Cochrane Handbook and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) checklist. A comprehensive search will be conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library supplemented with Scopus citation searches, search for gray literature using Google Scholar and a search for ongoing studies. We will include studies based on the PICO methodology without restrictions regarding study type. Two independent reviewers will screen studies, extract data, and assess study quality using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tools. The primary outcomes will be postoperative pain intensity at rest and during activity at 24, 48, and 72 h. Secondary outcomes will include use of "rescue" opioids, hospital length of stay, and adverse events. If feasible, a meta-analysis will be done, otherwise we will perform a descriptive analysis., Results: The results will provide a comparative analysis of the effectiveness of systemic opioids versus epidural analgesia in managing postoperative pain in VATS patients. Data synthesis will include pooled estimates for pain scores, opioid consumption, and adverse events, possibly with subgroup and sensitivity analyses conducted to explore heterogeneity across studies., Conclusions: This systematic review will offer valuable insights into the optimal pain management strategy for patients undergoing VATS. The findings may guide clinical practice in selecting the most effective and safe analgesic approach, improving postoperative recovery, and patient outcomes., (© 2024 The Author(s). Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Foundation.)

Background: The Handling Oxygenation Targets in the Intensive Care Unit (HOT-ICU) trial was a multicentre, randomised, parallel-group trial of a lower oxygenation target (arterial partial pressure of oxygen [PaO 2 ] = 8 kPa) versus a higher oxygenation target (PaO 2  = 12 kPa) in adult ICU patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure; the Handling Oxygenation Targets in coronavirus disease 2019 (HOT-COVID) tested the same oxygenation targets in patients with confirmed COVID-19. In this study, we aim to evaluate the long-term effects of these oxygenation targets on cognitive and pulmonary function. We hypothesise that a lower oxygenation target throughout the ICU stay may result in cognitive impairment, whereas a higher oxygenation target may result in impaired pulmonary function., Methods: This is the updated protocol and statistical analysis plan of two pre-planned secondary outcomes, the long-term cognitive function, and long-term pulmonary function, in the HOT-ICU and HOT-COVID trials. Patients enrolled in both trials at selected Danish sites and surviving to 1 year after randomisation are eligible to participate. A Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status score and a full-body plethysmography, including diffusion capacity for carbon monoxide, will be obtained. The last patient is expected to be included in the spring of 2024., Conclusion: This study will provide important information on the long-term effects of a lower versus a higher oxygenation target on long-term cognitive and pulmonary functions in adult ICU patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure., (© 2024 The Authors. Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Foundation.)

Background: Response time for emergency medical service units is a key performance indicator. Studies have shown reduced response time association with improved outcome for specific critical conditions. To achieve short response time, emergency vehicles utilize lights and sirens, and crews are allowed to be non-compliant with traffic rules, posing a risk for accident. The purpose of the systematic review and meta-analysis is to provide an overview of the current body of evidence regarding the association, if any, between ambulance and helicopter response time and major complications and mortality in patients conveyed by ambulance and/or helicopter. Our secondary aim will be to enhance knowledge in the field of criteria-based dispatch to provide decision makers with evidence to optimize dispatch of limited resources., Research Questions: What is the association between overall emergency medical services unit response time and patient outcomes, major complications, and time-critical conditions? What is the internal and external validity of the included literature?, Methods: We plan the systematic review and meta-analysis to be in accordance with the Cochrane Handbook and Joanna Briggs Institute Manual for Systematic Reviews. The methodology will include formulating the review questions using a Population, Exposure, and Outcome framework. Every study design is eligible, including qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-methods designs. We will include all articles in English, Scandinavian, German, French and Portuguese in this systematic review., Results: We will publish results from the systematic review and meta-analysis in a peer-reviewed journal and we will present the results at scientific conferences and meetings. Results will also be available at www.ahrtemis.dk., Conclusion: We will base our conclusions on the findings of the review and meta-analysis., (© 2023 The Authors. Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Foundation.)

Background: Fluid overload is associated with increased mortality in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. The GODIF trial aims to assess the benefits and harms of fluid removal with furosemide versus placebo in stable adult patients with moderate to severe fluid overload in the ICU. This article describes the detailed statistical analysis plan for the primary results of the second version of the GODIF trial., Methods: The GODIF trial is an international, multi-centre, randomised, stratified, blinded, parallel-group, pragmatic clinical trial, allocating 1000 adult ICU patients with moderate to severe fluid overload 1:1 to furosemide versus placebo. The primary outcome is days alive and out of hospital within 90 days post-randomisation. With a power of 90% and an alpha level of 5%, we may reject or detect an improvement of 8%. The primary analyses of all outcomes will be performed in the intention-to-treat population. For the primary outcome, the Kryger Jensen and Lange method will be used to compare the two treatment groups adjusted for stratification variables supplemented with sensitivity analyses in the per-protocol population and with further adjustments for prognostic variables. Secondary outcomes will be analysed with multiple linear regressions, logistic regressions or the Kryger Jensen and Lange method as suitable with adjustment for stratification variables., Conclusion: The GODIF trial data will increase the certainty about the effects of fluid removal using furosemide in adult ICU patients with fluid overload., Trial Registrations: EudraCT identifier: 2019-004292-40 and ClinicalTrials.org: NCT04180397., (© 2023 The Authors. Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Foundation.)

Background: In the Difficult Airway Society's 2015 "cannot intubate, cannot oxygenate" guideline, the emergency cricothyroidotomy is the final option when managing an unanticipated difficult airway. How often training for maintenance of this skill is required for anesthesiologists remains unknown. We aimed to assess if specialist-trained anesthesiologists' skills improved from a brush-up intervention and if skills were retained after 3 months., Methods: In this multicenter, randomized, controlled trial, participants were randomized to either a simulation-based brush-up or no brush-up. Both groups performed a mannequin-based technical skills emergency cricothyroidotomy test twice and were assessed by a blinded rater using a structured assessment tool that included time, positioning, palpation, appropriate employment of instruments, and stepwise progression. After 3 months of non-training, participants completed identical tests of retention., Results: A total of 54 anesthesiologists were included from three hospitals in the Region of Southern Denmark. Thirty-seven percent of the participants had received skills training in emergency cricothyroidotomy in the prior 12 months. The intervention group (N = 27) performed better in the initial tests, with a mean time of 51.5 s (SD = 10.82), a total score per minute of 15.9 points (SD = 4.91), and 93% passing both initial tests compared to the control group (N = 27) with a mean time of 76.8 s (SD = 35.82), a total score per minute of 6.6 (SD = 4.68) and only 15% passing both initial tests. The intervention group managed to retain overall performance in retention tests in terms of performance time (48.9 s, p = .26), total score per minute (13.6 points, p = .094), and passing the tests (75%, p = .059)., Conclusion: Exposure to simulation-based brush-up training in emergency cricothyroidotomy improved anesthesiologists' technical performance and was overall retained after 3 months. Some loss of skill concerning specific items was observed, highlighting the need for regular training in emergency cricothyroidotomy. Simulation-based training should be prioritized to improve and maintain technical skills in infrequent high-stakes procedures., (© 2023 The Authors. Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Foundation.)

Background: Among ICU patients with COVID-19, it is largely unknown how the overall outcome and resource use have changed with time, different genetic variants, and vaccination status., Methods: For all Danish ICU patients with COVID-19 from March 10, 2020 to March 31, 2022, we manually retrieved data on demographics, comorbidities, vaccination status, use of life support, length of stay, and vital status from medical records. We compared patients based on the period of admittance and vaccination status and described changes in epidemiology related to the Omicron variant., Results: Among all 2167 ICU patients with COVID-19, 327 were admitted during the first (March 10-19, 2020), 1053 during the second (May 20, 2020 to June 30, 2021) and 787 during the third wave (July 1, 2021 to March 31, 2022). We observed changes over the three waves in age (median 72 vs. 68 vs. 65 years), use of invasive mechanical ventilation (81% vs. 58% vs. 51%), renal replacement therapy (26% vs. 13% vs. 12%), extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (7% vs. 3% vs. 2%), duration of invasive mechanical ventilation (median 13 vs. 13 vs. 9 days) and ICU length of stay (median 13 vs. 10 vs. 7 days). Despite these changes, 90-day mortality remained constant (36% vs. 35% vs. 33%). Vaccination rates among ICU patients were 42% as compared to 80% in society. Unvaccinated versus vaccinated patients were younger (median 57 vs. 73 years), had less comorbidity (50% vs. 78%), and had lower 90-day mortality (29% vs. 51%). Patient characteristics changed significantly after the Omicron variant became dominant including a decrease in the use of COVID-specific pharmacological agents from 95% to 69%., Conclusions: In Danish ICUs, the use of life support declined, while mortality seemed unchanged throughout the three waves of COVID-19. Vaccination rates were lower among ICU patients than in society, but the selected group of vaccinated patients admitted to the ICU still had very severe disease courses. When the Omicron variant became dominant a lower fraction of SARS-CoV-2 positive patients received COVID treatment indicating other causes for ICU admission., (© 2023 The Authors. Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Foundation.)

Background: Salt and water accumulation leading to fluid overload is associated with increased mortality in intensive care unit (ICU) patients, but diuretics' effects on patient outcomes are uncertain. In this first version of the GODIF trial, we aimed to assess the effects of goal-directed fluid removal with furosemide versus placebo in adult ICU patients with fluid overload., Methods: We conducted a multicentre, randomised, stratified, parallel-group, blinded, placebo-controlled trial in clinically stable, adult ICU patients with at least 5% fluid overload. Participants were randomised to furosemide versus placebo infusion aiming at achieving neutral cumulative fluid balance as soon as possible. The primary outcome was the number of days alive and out of the hospital at 90 days., Results: The trial was terminated after the enrolment of 41 of 1000 participants because clinicians had difficulties using cumulative fluid balance as the only estimate of fluid status (32% of participants had their initially registered cumulative fluid balance adjusted and 29% experienced one or more protocol violations). The baseline cumulative fluid balance was 6956 ml in the furosemide group and 6036 ml in the placebo group; on day three, the cumulative fluid balances were 1927 ml and 5139 ml. The median number of days alive and out of hospital at day 90 was 50 days in the furosemide group versus 45 days in the placebo group (mean difference 1 day, 95% CI -19 to 21, p-value .94)., Conclusions: The use of cumulative fluid balance as the only estimate of fluid status appeared too difficult to use in clinical practice. We were unable to provide precise estimates for any outcomes as only 4.1% of the planned sample size was randomised., (© 2023 The Authors. Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Foundation.)

Background: Intensive care unit (ICU) patients with Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have an increased risk of thromboembolic complications. We describe the occurrence of thromboembolic and bleeding events in all ICU patients with COVID-19 in Denmark during the first and second waves of the pandemic., Methods: This was a sub-study of the Danish Intensive Care Covid database, in which all patients with SARS-CoV-2 admitted to Danish ICUs from 10th March 2020 to 30th June 2021 were included. We registered coagulation variables at admission, and all thromboembolic and bleeding events, and the use of heparins during ICU stay. Variables associated with thrombosis and bleeding and any association with 90-day mortality were estimated using Cox regression analyses., Results: We included 1369 patients in this sub-study; 158 (12%, 95% confidence interval 10-13) had a thromboembolic event in ICU and 309 (23%, 20-25) had a bleeding event, among whom 81 patients (6%, 4.8-7.3) had major bleeding. We found that mechanical ventilation and increased D-dimer were associated with thrombosis and mechanical ventilation, low platelet count and presence of haematological malignancy were associated with bleeding. Most patients (76%) received increased doses of thromboprophylaxis during their ICU stay. Thromboembolic events were not associated with mortality in adjusted analysis (hazard ratio 1.35 [0.91-2.01, p = .14], whereas bleeding events were 1.55 [1.18-2.05, p = .002])., Conclusions: Both thromboembolic and bleeding events frequently occurred in ICU patients with COVID-19. Based on these data, it is not apparent that increased doses of thromboprophylaxis were beneficial., (© 2022 The Authors. Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Foundation.)

Background: Fluid overload is a risk factor for mortality in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. Administration of loop diuretics is the predominant treatment of fluid overload, but evidence for its benefit is very uncertain when assessed in a systematic review of randomised clinical trials. The GODIF trial will assess the benefits and harms of goal directed fluid removal with furosemide versus placebo in ICU patients with fluid overload., Methods: An investigator-initiated, international, randomised, stratified, blinded, parallel-group trial allocating 1000 adult ICU patients with fluid overload to infusion of furosemide versus placebo. The goal is to achieve a neutral fluid balance. The primary outcome is days alive and out of hospital 90 days after randomisation. Secondary outcomes are all-cause mortality at day 90 and 1-year after randomisation; days alive at day 90 without life support; number of participants with one or more serious adverse events or reactions; health-related quality of life and cognitive function at 1-year follow-up. A sample size of 1000 participants is required to detect an improvement of 8% in days alive and out of hospital 90 days after randomisation with a power of 90% and a risk of type 1 error of 5%. The conclusion of the trial will be based on the point estimate and 95% confidence interval; dichotomisation will not be used., Clinicaltrials: gov identifier: NCT04180397., Perspective: The GODIF trial will provide important evidence of possible benefits and harms of fluid removal with furosemide in adult ICU patients with fluid overload., (© 2022 The Authors. Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Foundation.)

Background: Characteristics and care of intensive care unit (ICU) patients with COVID-19 may have changed during the pandemic, but longitudinal data assessing this are limited. We compared patients with COVID-19 admitted to Danish ICUs in the first wave with those admitted later., Methods: Among all Danish ICU patients with COVID-19, we compared demographics, chronic comorbidities, use of organ support, length of stay and vital status of those admitted 10 March to 19 May 2020 (first wave) versus 20 May 2020 to 30 June 2021. We analysed risk factors for death by adjusted logistic regression analysis., Results: Among all hospitalised patients with COVID-19, a lower proportion was admitted to ICU after the first wave (13% vs. 8%). Among all 1374 ICU patients with COVID-19, 326 were admitted during the first wave. There were no major differences in patient's characteristics or mortality between the two periods, but use of invasive mechanical ventilation (81% vs. 58% of patients), renal replacement therapy (26% vs. 13%) and ECMO (8% vs. 3%) and median length of stay in ICU (13 vs. 10 days) and in hospital (20 vs. 17 days) were all significantly lower after the first wave. Risk factors for death were higher age, larger burden of comorbidities (heart failure, pulmonary disease and kidney disease) and active cancer, but not admission during or after the first wave., Conclusions: After the first wave of COVID-19 in Denmark, a lower proportion of hospitalised patients with COVID-19 were admitted to ICU. Among ICU patients, use of organ support was lower and length of stay was reduced, but mortality rates remained at a relatively high level., (© 2022 The Authors. Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Foundation.)

Background: ICU admission due to COVID-19 may result in cognitive and physical impairment. We investigated the long-term cognitive and physical status of Danish ICU patients with COVID-19., Methods: We included all patients with COVID-19 admitted to Danish ICUs between March 10 and May 19, 2020. Patients were the contacted prospectively at 6 and 12 months for follow-up. Our primary outcomes were cognitive function and frailty at 6 and 12 months after ICU admission, estimated by the Mini Montreal Cognitive Assessment, and the Clinical Frailty Scale. Secondary outcomes were 6- and 12-month mortality, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) assessed by EQ-5D-5L, functional status (Barthel activities of daily living and Lawton-Brody instrumental activities of daily living), and fatigue (Fatigue Assessment Scale). The study had no information on pre-ICU admission status for the participants., Results: A total of 326 patients were included. The 6- and 12-month mortality was 37% and 38%, respectively. Among the 204 six-month survivors, 105 (51%) participated in the 6-month follow-up; among the 202 twelve-month survivors, 95 (47%) participated in the 12-month follow-up. At 6 months, cognitive scores indicated impairment for 26% (95% confidence interval [CI], 11.4-12.4) and at 12 months for 17% (95% CI, 12.0-12.8) of participants. Frailty was indicated in 20% (95% CI, 3.4-3.9) at 6 months, and for 18% (95% CI, 3.3-3.8) at 12 months. Fatigue was reported by 52% at 6 months, and by 47% at 12 months. For HRQoL, moderate, severe, or extreme health problems were reported by 28% at 6 months, and by 25% at 12 months., Conclusion: Long-term cognitive, functional impairment was found in up to one in four of patients surviving intensive care for COVID-19. Fatigue was present in nearly half the survivors at both 6 and 12 months. However, pre-ICU admission status of the patients was unknown., (© 2022 Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Foundation.)

Background: Substantial variation in survival following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is described both internationally and nationally. The Utstein factors account for half of the variation, but the remaining is not fully understood. Local regulations or guidelines concerning the withholding and termination of resuscitation may influence the reporting of cardiac arrests when comparing outcomes between different Emergency Medical Service systems., Method: We have developed an online cross-sectional mixed-methods explanatory design survey aimed at describing the international and national variations in the initiation, the termination of resuscitation, and the refraining from resuscitation of adult patients (>18 years of age) suffering from non-traumatic OHCA. The respondents will be national experts and the questionnaire will be distributed among members of European Prehospital Research Alliance, the International Liaison Committee of Resuscitation, the European Resuscitation Council, and the Resuscitation Academy. Each invited country will have to identify at least two national experts with special expertise in prehospital resuscitation practices. We exclude countries with less than two respondents., Results: The survey will provide both quantitative and qualitative data. Quantitative data will be presented as frequencies and proportions. Qualitative data will be analyzed using content analysis., Conclusion: This survey could be of importance in understanding the multiple factors leading to the substantial variation in survival found following OHCA. Furthermore, the interpretation of future studies on OHCA from different settings may be improved to further increase survival following OHCA., (© 2022 The Authors. Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Foundation.)

Introduction: Different outcomes are reported in randomised clinical trials (RCTs) in intensive care unit (ICU) patients, and no core outcome set (COS) is available for ICU patients in general. Accordingly, we aim to develop a COS for ICU patients in general., Methods: The COS will be developed in accordance with the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) Handbook, using a modified Delphi consensus process and semi-structured interviews involving adults who have survived acute admission to an ICU, family members, clinicians, researchers and other stakeholders. The modified Delphi process will include two steps. Step 1: conduction of a modified Delphi survey, developed and informed by combining the outputs of a literature search of outcomes in previous COSs and semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders. We plan at least two survey rounds to obtain consensus and refine the COS. Step 2: a consensus process regarding instruments or definitions to be recommended for the measurements of the outcomes selected in Step 1. A 'patient and public involvement panel' consisting of a smaller group of patients, family members, clinicians and researchers will be included in the development, analysis and interpretation of the COS., Discussion: The outlined multiple method studies will establish a COS for ICU patients in general, which may be used to increase the standardisation and comparability of results of RCTs conducted in patients in the ICU setting., (© 2021 The Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Foundation. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Although supplemental oxygen can be lifesaving, liberal oxygen administration causing hyperoxaemia may be harmful. The targets for oxygenation in patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure acutely admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) are strongly debated, and consensus on which targets to recommend has not been reached. The Handling Oxygenation Targets in the ICU (HOT-ICU) trial is a multicentre, randomised, parallel-group trial of a lower oxygenation target (arterial partial pressure of oxygen [PaO 2 ] = 8 kPa) versus a higher oxygenation target (PaO 2  = 12 kPa) in adult ICU patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure. In this study, we aim to evaluate the effects of these targets on long-term cognitive and pulmonary function in Danish patients, enrolled in the HOT-ICU trial and surviving to 1-year follow-up. We hypothesise that a lower oxygenation target throughout the ICU stay may result in cognitive impairment, whereas a higher oxygenation target may result in impaired pulmonary function., Methods: All patients enrolled in the HOT-ICU trial at Danish sites and surviving to 1 year after randomisation are eligible to participate. The last patient is expected to be included by November 2021. A Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status and a body plethysmography, including diffusion capacity for carbon monoxide, both pre-planned secondary long-term outcomes of the HOT-ICU trial, will be obtained., Conclusion: This study will provide important information on the long-term effects of a lower versus a higher oxygenation target on cognitive and pulmonary function in adult ICU patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure., (© 2021 The Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Foundation. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Supplemental oxygen is the key intervention for severe and critical COVID-19 patients. With the unstable supplies of oxygen in many countries, it is important to define the lowest safe dosage., Methods: In spring 2020, 110 COVID-19 patients were enrolled as part of the Handling Oxygenation Targets in the ICU trial (HOT-ICU). Patients were allocated within 12 h of ICU admission. Oxygen therapy was titrated to a partial pressure of arterial oxygen (PaO 2 ) of 8 kPa (lower oxygenation group) or a PaO 2 of 12 kPa (higher oxygenation group) during ICU stay up to 90 days. We report key outcomes at 90 days for the subgroup of COVID-19 patients., Results: At 90 days, 22 of 54 patients (40.7%) in the lower oxygenation group and 23 of 55 patients (41.8%) in the higher oxygenation group had died (adjusted risk ratio: 0.87; 95% confidence interval, 0.58-1.32). The percentage of days alive without life support was significantly higher in the lower oxygenation group (p = 0.03). The numbers of severe ischemic events were low with no difference between the two groups. Proning and inhaled vasodilators were used more frequently, and the positive end-expiratory pressure was higher in the higher oxygenation group. Tests for interactions with the results of the remaining HOT-ICU population were insignificant., Conclusions: Targeting a PaO 2 of 8 kPa may be beneficial in ICU patients with COVID-19. These results come with uncertainty due to the low number of patients in this unplanned subgroup analysis, and insignificant tests for interaction with the main HOT-ICU trial., Trial Registration Number: ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03174002. Date of registration: June 2, 2017., (© 2021 The Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Foundation. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: In the early phase of the pandemic, some guidelines recommended the use of corticosteroids for critically ill patients with COVID-19, whereas others recommended against the use despite lack of firm evidence of either benefit or harm. In the COVID STEROID trial, we aimed to assess the effects of low-dose hydrocortisone on patient-centred outcomes in adults with COVID-19 and severe hypoxia., Methods: In this multicentre, parallel-group, placebo-controlled, blinded, centrally randomised, stratified clinical trial, we randomly assigned adults with confirmed COVID-19 and severe hypoxia (use of mechanical ventilation or supplementary oxygen with a flow of at least 10 L/min) to either hydrocortisone (200 mg/d) vs a matching placebo for 7 days or until hospital discharge. The primary outcome was the number of days alive without life support at day 28 after randomisation., Results: The trial was terminated early when 30 out of 1000 participants had been enrolled because of external evidence indicating benefit from corticosteroids in severe COVID-19. At day 28, the median number of days alive without life support in the hydrocortisone vs placebo group were 7 vs 10 (adjusted mean difference: -1.1 days, 95% CI -9.5 to 7.3, P = .79); mortality was 6/16 vs 2/14; and the number of serious adverse reactions 1/16 vs 0/14., Conclusions: In this trial of adults with COVID-19 and severe hypoxia, we were unable to provide precise estimates of the benefits and harms of hydrocortisone as compared with placebo as only 3% of the planned sample size were enrolled., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04348305. European Union Drug Regulation Authorities Clinical Trials (EudraCT) Database: 2020-001395-15., (© 2021 The Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Foundation. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has resulted in millions of deaths and overburdened healthcare systems worldwide. Systemic low-dose corticosteroids have proven clinical benefit in patients with severe COVID-19. Higher doses of corticosteroids are used in other inflammatory lung diseases and may offer additional clinical benefits in COVID-19. At present, the balance between benefits and harms of higher vs. lower doses of corticosteroids for patients with COVID-19 is unclear., Methods: The COVID STEROID 2 trial is an investigator-initiated, international, parallel-grouped, blinded, centrally randomised and stratified clinical trial assessing higher (12 mg) vs. lower (6 mg) doses of dexamethasone for adults with COVID-19 and severe hypoxia. We plan to enrol 1,000 patients in Denmark, Sweden, Switzerland and India. The primary outcome is days alive without life support (invasive mechanical ventilation, circulatory support or renal replacement therapy) at day 28. Secondary outcomes include serious adverse reactions at day 28; all-cause mortality at day 28, 90 and 180; days alive without life support at day 90; days alive and out of hospital at day 90; and health-related quality of life at day 180. The primary outcome will be analysed using the Kryger Jensen and Lange test adjusted for stratification variables and reported as adjusted mean differences and median differences. The full statistical analysis plan is outlined in this protocol., Discussion: The COVID STEROID 2 trial will provide evidence on the optimal dosing of systemic corticosteroids for COVID-19 patients with severe hypoxia with important implications for patients, their relatives and society., (© 2021 The Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Foundation. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can lead to severe hypoxic respiratory failure and death. Corticosteroids decrease mortality in severely or critically ill patients with COVID-19. However, the optimal dose remains unresolved. The ongoing randomised COVID STEROID 2 trial investigates the effects of higher vs lower doses of dexamethasone (12 vs 6 mg intravenously daily for up to 10 days) in 1,000 adult patients with COVID-19 and severe hypoxia., Methods: This protocol outlines the rationale and statistical methods for a secondary, pre-planned Bayesian analysis of the primary outcome (days alive without life support at day 28) and all secondary outcomes registered up to day 90. We will use hurdle-negative binomial models to estimate the mean number of days alive without life support in each group and present results as mean differences and incidence rate ratios with 95% credibility intervals (CrIs). Additional count outcomes will be analysed similarly and binary outcomes will be analysed using logistic regression models with results presented as probabilities, relative risks and risk differences with 95% CrIs. We will present probabilities of any benefit/harm, clinically important benefit/harm and probabilities of effects smaller than pre-defined clinically minimally important differences for all outcomes analysed. Analyses will be adjusted for stratification variables and conducted using weakly informative priors supplemented by sensitivity analyses using sceptic priors., Discussion: This secondary, pre-planned Bayesian analysis will supplement the primary, conventional analysis and may help clinicians, researchers and policymakers interpret the results of the COVID STEROID 2 trial while avoiding arbitrarily dichotomised interpretations of the results., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04509973; EudraCT: 2020-003363-25., (© 2021 The Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Foundation. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Most data on intensive care unit (ICU) patients with COVID-19 originate in selected populations from stressed healthcare systems with shorter term follow-up. We present characteristics, interventions and longer term outcomes of the entire, unselected cohort of all ICU patients with COVID-19 in Denmark where the ICU capacity was not exceeded., Methods: We identified all patients with SARS-CoV-2 admitted to any Danish ICU from 10 March to 19 May 2020 and registered demographics, chronic comorbidities, use of organ support, length of stay, and vital status from patient files. Risk factors for death were analyzed using adjusted Cox regression analysis., Results: There were 323 ICU patients with confirmed COVID-19. Median age was 68 years, 74% were men, 50% had hypertension, 21% diabetes, and 20% chronic pulmonary disease; 29% had no chronic comorbidity. Invasive mechanical ventilation was used in 82%, vasopressors in 83%, renal replacement therapy in 26%, and extra corporeal membrane oxygenation in 8%. ICU stay was median 13 days (IQR 6-22) and hospital stay 19 days (11-30). Median follow-up was 79 days. At end of follow-up, 118 had died (37%), 15 (4%) were still in hospital hereof 4 in ICU as of 16 June 2020. Risk factors for mortality included male gender, age, chronic pulmonary disease, active cancer, and number of co-morbidities., Conclusions: In this nationwide, population-based cohort of ICU patients with COVID-19, longer term survival was high despite high age and substantial use of organ support. Male gender, age, and chronic co-morbidities, in particular chronic pulmonary disease, were associated with increased risk of death., (© 2020 The Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Foundation. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Introduction: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 has caused a pandemic of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) with many patients developing hypoxic respiratory failure. Corticosteroids reduce the time on mechanical ventilation, length of stay in the intensive care unit and potentially also mortality in similar patient populations. However, corticosteroids have undesirable effects, including longer time to viral clearance. Clinical equipoise on the use of corticosteroids for COVID-19 exists., Methods: The COVID STEROID trial is an international, randomised, stratified, blinded clinical trial. We will allocate 1000 adult patients with COVID-19 receiving ≥10 L/min of oxygen or on mechanical ventilation to intravenous hydrocortisone 200 mg daily vs placebo (0.9% saline) for 7 days. The primary outcome is days alive without life support (ie mechanical ventilation, circulatory support, and renal replacement therapy) at day 28. Secondary outcomes are serious adverse reactions at day 14; days alive without life support at day 90; days alive and out of hospital at day 90; all-cause mortality at day 28, day 90, and 1 year; and health-related quality of life at 1 year. We will conduct the statistical analyses according to this protocol, including interim analyses for every 250 patients followed for 28 days. The primary outcome will be compared using the Kryger Jensen and Lange test in the intention to treat population and reported as differences in means and medians with 95% confidence intervals., Discussion: The COVID STEROID trial will provide important evidence to guide the use of corticosteroids in COVID-19 and severe hypoxia., (© 2020 The Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Foundation. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: In patients with septic shock, mortality is high, and survivors experience long-term physical, mental and social impairments. The ongoing Conservative vs Liberal Approach to fluid therapy of Septic Shock in Intensive Care (CLASSIC) trial assesses the benefits and harms of a restrictive vs standard-care intravenous (IV) fluid therapy. The hypothesis is that IV fluid restriction improves patient-important long-term outcomes., Aim: To assess the predefined patient-important long-term outcomes in patients randomised into the CLASSIC trial., Methods: In this pre-planned follow-up study of the CLASSIC trial, we will assess all-cause mortality, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and cognitive function 1 year after randomisation in the two intervention groups. The 1-year mortality will be collected from electronic patient records or central national registries in most participating countries. We will contact survivors and assess EuroQol 5-Dimension, -5-Level (EQ-5D-5L) and EuroQol-Visual Analogue Scale and Montreal Cognitive Assessment 5-minute protocol score. We will analyse mortality by logistic regression and use general linear models to assess HRQoL and cognitive function., Discussion: With this pre-planned follow-up study of the CLASSIC trial, we will provide patient-important data on long-term survival, HRQoL and cognitive function of restrictive vs standard-care IV fluid therapy in patients with septic shock., (© 2019 The Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Foundation. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Introduction: Intravenous (IV) fluid is a key intervention in the management of septic shock. The benefits and harms of lower versus higher fluid volumes are unknown and thus clinical equipoise exists. We describe the protocol and detailed statistical analysis plan for the conservative versus liberal approach to fluid therapy of septic shock in the Intensive Care (CLASSIC) trial. The aim of the CLASSIC trial is to assess benefits and harms of IV fluid restriction versus standard care in adult intensive care unit (ICU) patients with septic shock., Methods: CLASSIC trial is an investigator-initiated, international, randomised, stratified, and analyst-blinded trial. We will allocate 1554 adult patients with septic shock, who are planned to be or are admitted to an ICU, to IV fluid restriction versus standard care. The primary outcome is mortality at day 90. Secondary outcomes are serious adverse events (SAEs), serious adverse reactions (SARs), days alive at day 90 without life support, days alive and out of the hospital at day 90 and mortality, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and cognitive function at 1 year. We will conduct the statistical analyses according to a pre-defined statistical analysis plan, including three interim analyses. For the primary analysis, we will use logistic regression adjusted for the stratification variables comparing the two interventions in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population., Discussion: The CLASSIC trial results will provide important evidence to guide clinicians' choice regarding the IV fluid therapy in adults with septic shock., (© 2019 The Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Foundation. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: In intensive care units, blood sampling is done commonly as part of daily routine. It remains unknown whether this practice is associated with harms or benefits, as not all routine blood tests may be clinically indicated, and blood sampling done without specific indications may be problematic. Accordingly, we aim to assess the body of evidence regarding the usage of routine vs on-demand blood sampling in critically ill patients in a scoping review., Methods: We will conduct a scoping review in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement as well as the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). Using a PICO-based search strategy, we will systematically search the Cochrane Library, Embase and Medline for relevant studies regardless of design. Two authors will independently screen studies for inclusion and extract data. We will provide a descriptive analysis of the data and asses the quality of evidence in accordance with the Grading of Recommended Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach., Discussion: The outlined scoping review will provide an important overview on the current body of evidence regarding the use of daily routine vs on-demand blood sampling in critical care settings. The findings of this scoping review will guide further research., (© 2019 The Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Foundation. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Increased survival with high-volume continuous veno-venous haemofiltration (CVVH) has been demonstrated in critically ill patients. This may be the result of intensified blood purification or an effect on the immune system. We hypothesized that CVVH modifies the cell-mediated immunity. We investigated the effect of high-volume CVVH for 24 h on the cell-mediated immunity following endotoxin infusion., Methods: Thirty pigs were divided into three groups. Ten pigs received 30 microg/kg of Escherichia coli endotoxin. These pigs were treated with CVVH (replacement 35 ml/kg/h) over the following 24 h. Ten pigs received the same bolus of endotoxin and ten pigs served as a control group. The adhesion molecules CD18, CD44 and CD62L and the ability to respond with an oxidative burst were measured. The number of neutrophils was counted in blood and lung tissue. The lymphoproliferative response and cytokines interleukin-6 and interleukin-10 were measured., Results: The infusion of endotoxin was followed by initial granulocytopenia and, later, granulocytosis, activation of CD18 and CD62L, and increased oxidative burst. The cytokine level was increased. CVVH had no effect on the adhesion molecules or cytokine level and did not reduce the number of granulocytes in the lung significantly. CVVH, however, reduced the oxidative burst activity of neutrophils after 2 h of treatment., Conclusion: In the first few hours after endotoxaemia, high-volume CVVH reduced the oxidative burst activity of neutrophils. However, in the long term, CVVH was unable to modify the endotoxin-induced changes in cell-mediated immunity.