Search

Background: Sedatives are administered to 85% of intensive care unit (ICU) patients. The most commonly used sedatives are intravenous benzodiazepines and propofol. These agents are associated with over-sedation in 40 to 60% of patients, which can lead to prolonged intubation, delirium and drug-induced hypotension. Evidence is increasing that volatile anesthetic agents are associated with faster extubation times, improved cardiovascular stability with no end-organ toxicity in comparison to our standard intravenous agents for short-term critical care sedation. Use of volatile agents within the ICU is a novel technique using a specialized delivery and scavenging system, which requires staff training and cultural acceptance. This pilot randomized controlled trial aims to assess the safety and feasibility of delivering volatile agents for long-term patient sedation in the ICU with limited or no experience of this technique., Methods/design: This is a prospective multicenter pragmatic pilot RCT that is blinded to the data analyst. This study aims to recruit 60 adult ICU patients requiring mechanical ventilation and sedation for more than 48 h. Patients will be randomized 2:1 to receive inhaled isoflurane (40 patients) or intravenous midazolam and/or propofol (20 patients) sedation. Sedation is titrated to a targeted Sedation Analgesia Score (SAS) using an explicit sedation-analgesia algorithm until extubation or tracheostomy. Primary safety and feasibility outcomes will assess atmospheric volatile concentration levels and adherence to our sedation-analgesia protocol. Secondary outcomes include time to extubation, duration of ventilation, quality of sedation, delirium, vasoactive drug support, length of stay, serum fluoride levels and mortality., Discussion: This pilot project will serve as the basis for a larger RCT that will be powered for important clinical outcomes., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01983800 (registration date 2 July 2013).

Background: Accurate risk stratification may help reduce the burden of excessive blood loss after cardiac surgery. We measured the incremental value of thrombelastography to an existing risk prediction model for excessive blood loss in cardiac surgery., Methods: This observational study included 434 patients who underwent cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) and had thrombelastographic measures before and during CPB, their risk of excessive blood loss could be calculated with an existing risk prediction model and they had not received clopidogrel or warfarin within 5 days of surgery. Excessive blood loss was defined as transfusion of > or = 5 U of red blood cells from termination of CPB to 1 day after surgery. Logistic regression models including an existing risk prediction model without and with thrombelastographic measures were constructed. Improvement in risk prediction was measured by the area under the curve and net reclassification improvement., Results: Excessive blood loss occurred in 59 of 434 patients (13.6%). The only thrombelastographic measure that improved risk stratification was maximum amplitude during CPB, which reflects maximum clot strength. Although the addition of this variable to the existing prediction model did not have a material effect on the area under the curve (increased from 0.780 to 0.784; P = 0.8), it did improve the net reclassification improvement by 12% (P = 0.05), primarily by improving the detection of high-risk cases., Conclusions: Risk stratification for excessive blood loss after cardiac surgery is improved when on-CPB thrombelastography is added to an existing risk prediction model that incorporates readily available patient- and surgery-related variables, but large, multicenter trials are needed to verify this finding and create a new risk prediction model.