Search

Background: Current intensive care unit (ICU) sedation guidelines recommend strategies using non-benzodiazepine sedatives. This survey was undertaken to explore inhaled ICU sedation practice in France. Methods: In this national survey, medical directors of French adult ICUs were contacted by phone or email between July and August 2019. ICU medical directors were questioned about the characteristics of their department, their knowledge on inhaled sedation, and practical aspects of inhaled sedation use in their department. Results: Among the 374 ICUs contacted, 187 provided responses (50%). Most ICU directors (73%) knew about the use of inhaled ICU sedation and 21% used inhaled sedation in their unit, mostly with the Anaesthetic Conserving Device (AnaConDa, Sedana Medical). Most respondents had used volatile agents for sedation for <5 years (63%) and in <20 patients per year (75%), with their main indications being: failure of intravenous sedation, severe asthma or bronchial obstruction, and acute respiratory distress syndrome. Sevoflurane and isoflurane were mainly used (88% and 20%, respectively). The main reasons for not using inhaled ICU sedation were: "device not available" (40%), "lack of medical interest" (37%), "lack of familiarity or knowledge about the technique" (35%) and "elevated cost" (21%). Most respondents (80%) were overall satisfied with the use of inhaled sedation. Almost 75% stated that inhaled sedation was a seducing alternative to intravenous sedation. Conclusion: This survey highlights the widespread knowledge about inhaled ICU sedation in France but shows its limited use to date. Differences in education and knowledge, as well as the recent and relatively scarce literature on the use of volatile agents in the ICU, might explain the diverse practices that were observed. The low rate of mild adverse effects, as perceived by respondents, and the users' satisfaction, are promising for this potentially important tool for ICU sedation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rationale: Sevoflurane improves gas exchange, and reduces alveolar edema and inflammation in preclinical studies of lung injury, but its therapeutic effects have never been investigated in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS).Objectives: To assess whether sevoflurane would improve gas exchange and inflammation in ARDS.Methods: We did a parallel, open-label single-center randomized controlled trial at three intensive care units from a French university hospital between April 2014 and February 2016. Adult patients were randomized within 24 hours of moderate-to-severe ARDS onset to receive either intravenous midazolam or inhaled sevoflurane for 48 hours. The primary outcome was the PaO2/FiO2 ratio on Day 2. Secondary endpoints included alveolar and plasma levels of cytokines and soluble form of the receptor for advanced glycation end-products, and safety. Investigators who did the analyses were masked to group allocation. Analysis was by intention to treat.Measurements and Main Results: Twenty-five patients were assigned to the sevoflurane group and 25 to the midazolam group. On Day 2, PaO2/FiO2 ratio was higher in the sevoflurane group than in the midazolam group (mean ± SD, 205 ± 56 vs. 166 ± 59, respectively; P = 0.04). There was a significant reduction over time in cytokines and soluble form of the receptor for advanced glycation end-products levels in the sevoflurane group, compared with the midazolam group, and no serious adverse event was observed with sevoflurane.Conclusions: In patients with ARDS, use of inhaled sevoflurane improved oxygenation and decreased levels of a marker of epithelial injury and of some inflammatory markers, compared with midazolam. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT 02166853). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]