Search

Background: Patients with cancer represent an important proportion of intensive care unit (ICU) admissions. Oncologists and intensivists have distinct knowledge backgrounds, and conflicts about the appropriate management of these patients may emerge., Methods: We surveyed oncologists and intensivists at 2 academic cancer centers regarding their management of 2 hypothetical patients with different cancer types (metastatic pancreatic cancer and metastatic breast cancer with positive receptors for estrogen, progesterone, and HER-2) who develop septic shock and multiple organ failure., Results: Sixty intensivists and 46 oncologists responded to the survey. Oncologists and intensivists similarly favored withdrawal of life support measures for the patient with pancreatic cancer (33/46 [72%] vs 48/60 [80%], P = .45). On the other hand, intensivists favored more withdrawal of life support measures for the patient with breast cancer compared to oncologists (32/59 [54%] vs 9/44 [21%], P < .001). In the multinomial logistic regression, the oncology specialists were more likely to advocate for a full-code status for the patient with breast cancer (OR = 5.931; CI 95%, 1.762-19.956; P = .004)., Conclusions: Oncologists and intensivists share different views regarding life support measures in critically ill patients with cancer. Oncologists tend to focus on the cancer characteristics, whereas intensivists focus on multiple organ failure when weighing in on the same decisions. Regular meetings between oncologists and intensivists may reduce possible conflicts regarding the critical care of patients with cancer.

Purpose: Strategies aiming light sedation are associated with decreased length on mechanical ventilation. However, awake or easily arousable patients may be prone to greater prevalence of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). These systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the safety of light sedation strategies regarding the prevalence of PTSD., Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science from inception to November 2014 for randomized controlled trials that evaluated light sedation strategies and addressed PTSD prevalence in the follow-up as a specific outcome. Because not all trials performed the same comparisons, we performed a network meta-analysis to evaluate indirect comparisons., Results: Five studies fulfilled our inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. Two studies compared daily sedation interruption with usual care (92 patients), 2 studies compared a light sedation protocol with daily sedation interruption (47 patients), and 1 study compared light and deep sedation (102 patients). Compared with usual sedation care/deep sedation, neither daily interruption of sedation (odds ratio=0.66; 95% confidence interval, 0.22-1.98) nor a light sedation protocol (odds ratio=0.90, 95% confidence interval, 0.27-3.05) was associated with increased risks on long-term PTSD prevalence., Conclusion: Light sedation strategies seem to be safe in terms of PTSD prevalence. However, the small number of included trials and patients may not be sufficient to drive strong statements., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To develop and demonstrate the feasibility of a Global Open Source Severity of Illness Score (GOSSIS)-1 for critical care patients, which generalizes across healthcare systems and countries., Design: A merger of several critical care multicenter cohorts derived from registry and electronic health record data. Data were split into training (70%) and test (30%) sets, using each set exclusively for development and evaluation, respectively. Missing data were imputed when not available., Setting/patients: Two large multicenter datasets from Australia and New Zealand (Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Adult Patient Database [ANZICS-APD]) and the United States (eICU Collaborative Research Database [eICU-CRD]) representing 249,229 and 131,051 patients, respectively. ANZICS-APD and eICU-CRD contributed data from 162 and 204 hospitals, respectively. The cohort included all ICU admissions discharged in 2014-2015, excluding patients less than 16 years old, admissions less than 6 hours, and those with a previous ICU stay., Interventions: Not applicable., Measurements and Main Results: GOSSIS-1 uses data collected during the ICU stay's first 24 hours, including extrema values for vital signs and laboratory results, admission diagnosis, the Glasgow Coma Scale, chronic comorbidities, and admission/demographic variables. The datasets showed significant variation in admission-related variables, case-mix, and average physiologic state. Despite this heterogeneity, test set discrimination of GOSSIS-1 was high (area under the receiver operator characteristic curve [AUROC], 0.918; 95% CI, 0.915-0.921) and calibration was excellent (standardized mortality ratio [SMR], 0.986; 95% CI, 0.966-1.005; Brier score, 0.050). Performance was held within ANZICS-APD (AUROC, 0.925; SMR, 0.982; Brier score, 0.047) and eICU-CRD (AUROC, 0.904; SMR, 0.992; Brier score, 0.055). Compared with GOSSIS-1, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE)-IIIj (ANZICS-APD) and APACHE-IVa (eICU-CRD), had worse discrimination with AUROCs of 0.904 and 0.869, and poorer calibration with SMRs of 0.594 and 0.770, and Brier scores of 0.059 and 0.063, respectively., Conclusions: GOSSIS-1 is a modern, free, open-source inhospital mortality prediction algorithm for critical care patients, achieving excellent discrimination and calibration across three countries., Competing Interests: Drs. Raffa’s, Pollard’s, and Mark’s institutions received funding from Philips Healthcare. Drs. Raffa, Pollard, Mark, and Celi received support for article research from the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Dr. Johnson’s institution received funding from the NIH. Dr. Badawi received funding from Philips Healthcare. The remaining authors have disclosed that they do not have any potential conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 by the Society of Critical Care Medicine and Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All Rights Reserved.)

Competing Interests: Dr. Thompson received funding from Elsevier. Dr. Lacroix received funding from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. The remaining authors have disclosed that they do not have any potential conflicts of interest.

Assessment of urine concentrations of sodium, chloride, and potassium is a widely available, rapid, and low-cost diagnostic option for the management of critically ill patients. Urine electrolytes have long been suggested in the diagnostic workup of hypovolemia, kidney injury, and acid-base and electrolyte disturbances. However, due to the wide range of normal reference values and challenges in interpretation, their use is controversial. To clarify their potential role in managing critical patients, we reviewed existing evidence on the use of urine electrolytes for diagnostic and therapeutic evaluation and assessment in critical illness. This review will describe the normal physiology of water and electrolyte excretion, summarize the use of urine electrolytes in hypovolemia, acute kidney injury, acid-base, and electrolyte disorders, and suggest some practical flowcharts for the potential use of urine electrolytes in daily critical care practice.

Background: Ventilation management may differ between COVID–19 ARDS (COVID–ARDS) patients and patients with pre–COVID ARDS (CLASSIC–ARDS); it is uncertain whether associations of ventilation management with outcomes for CLASSIC–ARDS also exist in COVID–ARDS. Methods: Individual patient data analysis of COVID–ARDS and CLASSIC–ARDS patients in six observational studies of ventilation, four in the COVID–19 pandemic and two pre–pandemic. Descriptive statistics were used to compare epidemiology and ventilation characteristics. The primary endpoint were key ventilation parameters; other outcomes included mortality and ventilator–free days and alive (VFD–60) at day 60. Results: This analysis included 6702 COVID–ARDS patients and 1415 CLASSIC–ARDS patients. COVID–ARDS patients received lower median VT (6.6 [6.0 to 7.4] vs 7.3 [6.4 to 8.5] ml/kg PBW; p < 0.001) and higher median PEEP (12.0 [10.0 to 14.0] vs 8.0 [6.0 to 10.0] cm H2O; p < 0.001), at lower median ΔP (13.0 [10.0 to 15.0] vs 16.0 [IQR 12.0 to 20.0] cm H2O; p < 0.001) and higher median Crs (33.5 [26.6 to 42.1] vs 28.1 [21.6 to 38.4] mL/cm H2O; p < 0.001). Following multivariable adjustment, higher ΔP had an independent association with higher 60–day mortality and less VFD–60 in both groups. Higher PEEP had an association with less VFD–60, but only in COVID–ARDS patients. Conclusions: Our findings show important differences in key ventilation parameters and associations thereof with outcomes between COVID–ARDS and CLASSIC–ARDS. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov (identifier NCT05650957), December 14, 2022. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Understanding the characteristics and outcomes of cancer patients with unplanned ICU admission is imperative for therapeutic decisions and prognostication purposes. Objective: To describe the clinical characteristics of patients with hematological and non-hematological malignancies (NHM) who require unplanned ICU admission and to determine the predictors of mortality and long-term survival. Methods: This retrospective study included all patients with cancer who had an unplanned ICU admission between 2011 and 2016 at a tertiary hospital in Saudi Arabia. The following variables were collected: age, gender, ICU length of stay (LOS), APACHE II score, type of malignancy, febrile neutropenia, source and time of admission, and need for mechanical ventilation (MV), renal replacement therapy (RRT), and treatment with vasopressors (VP). Predictors of mortality and survival rates at 28 days and 3, 6, and 12 months were calculated. Results: The study included 410 cancer patients with 466 unplanned ICU admissions. Of these, 52% had NHM. The average LOS in the ICU was 9.6 days and the mean APACHE score was 21.9. MV was needed in 73% of the patients, RRT in 15%, and VP in 24%, while febrile neutropenia was present in 24%. There were statistically significant differences between survivors and non-survivors in the APACHE II score (17.7 ± 8.0 vs. 25.6 ± 9.2), MV use (52% vs. 92%), need for RRT (6% vs. 23%), VP use (42% vs. 85%), and presence of febrile neutropenia (18% vs. 30%). The predictors of mortality were need for MV (OR = 4.97), VP (OR = 3.43), RRT (OR = 3.31), and APACHE II score (OR = 1.10). Survival rates at 28 days, 3, 6, and 12 months were 52%, 28%, 22%, and 15%, respectively. Conclusion: The survival rate of cancer patients with an unplanned admission to the ICU remains low. Predictors of mortality include need for MV, RRT, and VP and presence of febrile neutropenia. About 85% of cancer patients died within 1 year after ICU admission. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This study aimed to investigate the early, late, and total constipation frequency, related factors, and their effects on the hospitalization day, gastric residual volume, vomiting, distension, and diarrhea, the feeding type, white blood cells, and C-reactive protein levels, and body temperature. Method: Data from this observational cross-sectional study were collected in an anesthesia and reanimation intensive care unit of a public hospital in Bolu, Turkey. The sample included 116 patients who met the criteria of the study. The sample size was determined using power analysis according to the results of a pilot study. The patient information form, daily observation form, and Bristol stool consistency scale were used for collecting the data. Results: The constipation frequency was 63.8% in the unit. The early constipation frequency was 18.9%, and the late constipation frequency was 6.8%. The hospitalization day in these groups was longer than those without constipation. Also, the patients receiving mechanical ventilator support, enteral tube feeding, and diuretic medication had a higher risk for constipation. The enema/laxative was applied to half of the patients who developed constipation in the unit, after which more than half developed diarrhea. Distension and enteral feeding were more frequent in late-type constipation patients. The levels of white blood cells, C-reactive protein levels, and body temperature between all groups were not statistically different (p>0.05). Conclusion: The frequency of constipation was higher in the intensive care unit, even when the defecation period was considered four days. Receiving mechanical ventilator support, enteral tube feeding, and diuretics increased the risk of constipation. Amaç: Bu çalışma erken, geç ve toplam konstipasyon sıklığı, ilişkili faktörler ve bunların hastaneye yatış günü, mide rezidüel hacmi, kusma, distansiyon, diyare, beslenme şekli, beyaz kan hücreleri, C-reaktif protein seviyeleri ve vücut sıcaklığı üzerine etkilerinin incelenmesini amaçladı. Yöntem: Bu gözlemsel kesitsel çalışmanın verileri, Türkiye'de Bolu ilinde bulunan bir devlet hastanesinin anestezi ve reanimasyon yoğun bakım ünitesinde toplandı. Örneklem, çalışmanın kriterlerini karşılayan 116 hastayı içerdi. Örneklem büyüklüğü, pilot çalışmanın sonuçlarına göre güç analizi kullanılarak belirlendi. Verilerin toplanmasında hasta bilgi formu, günlük gözlem formu ve Bristol dışkı kıvam ölçeği kullanıldı. Bulgular: Yoğun bakımda konstipasyon sıklığı %63,8 idi. Erken konstipasyon sıklığı %18,9, geç konstipasyon sıklığı ise %6,8 olarak belirlendi. Bu gruplarda hastanede kalış günü konstipasyonu olmayanlara göre daha uzundu. Ayrıca mekanik ventilatör desteği, enteral tüple beslenme ve diüretik ilaç kullanan hastalarda konstipasyon riski daha yüksekti. Yoğun bakımda konstipasyon gelişen hastaların yarısına lavman/laksatif uygulandı, sonrasında yarısından fazlasında diyare gelişti. Geç tip konstipasyon hastalarında distansiyon ve enteral beslenme daha sık görüldü. Beyaz kan hücreleri, C-reaktif protein seviyeleri ve vücut sıcaklığı tüm gruplar arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı değildi (p>0,05). Sonuç: Yoğun bakım ünitesinde dışkılama süresi dört gün olarak kabul edildiğinde bile konstipasyon sıklığının daha yüksek olduğu görüldü. Mekanik ventilatör desteği almak, enteral tüple beslenmek ve diüretik kullanmak konstipasyon riskini artırmaktadır. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is conflicting evidence on association between quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) and sepsis mortality in ICU patients. The primary aim of this study was to determine the association between qSOFA and 28-day mortality in ICU patients admitted for sepsis. Association of qSOFA with early (3-day), medium (28-day), late (90-day) mortality was assessed in low and lower middle income (LLMIC), upper middle income (UMIC) and high income (HIC) countries/regions. Methods: This was a secondary analysis of the MOSAICS II study, an international prospective observational study on sepsis epidemiology in Asian ICUs. Associations between qSOFA at ICU admission and mortality were separately assessed in LLMIC, UMIC and HIC countries/regions. Modified Poisson regression was used to determine the adjusted relative risk (RR) of qSOFA score on mortality at 28 days with adjustments for confounders identified in the MOSAICS II study. Results: Among the MOSAICS II study cohort of 4980 patients, 4826 patients from 343 ICUs and 22 countries were included in this secondary analysis. Higher qSOFA was associated with increasing 28-day mortality, but this was only observed in LLMIC (p < 0.001) and UMIC (p < 0.001) and not HIC (p = 0.220) countries/regions. Similarly, higher 90-day mortality was associated with increased qSOFA in LLMIC (p < 0.001) and UMIC (p < 0.001) only. In contrast, higher 3-day mortality with increasing qSOFA score was observed across all income countries/regions (p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis showed that qSOFA remained associated with 28-day mortality (adjusted RR 1.09 (1.00–1.18), p = 0.038) even after adjustments for covariates including APACHE II, SOFA, income country/region and administration of antibiotics within 3 h. Conclusions: qSOFA was independently associated with 28-day mortality in ICU patients admitted for sepsis. In LLMIC and UMIC countries/regions, qSOFA was associated with early to late mortality but only early mortality in HIC countries/regions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patients admitted to the hospital floor (non-intensive care (ICU) settings) from the emergency department (ED) are generally stable. Unfortunately, some will unexpectedly decompensate rapidly. This study explores these patients and their characteristics. Methods: This retrospective, observational study examined patients admitted to non-ICU settings at a community hospital. Patients were identified by rapid response team (RRT) activation, triggered by acute decompensation. ED chief complaint, reason for activation, and vital signs were compared between patients transferred to a higher level of care versus those who were not. Results: Throughout 2019, 424 episodes of acute decompensation were identified, 118 occurring within 24 h of admission. A higher rate of ICU transfers was seen in patients with initial ED chief complaints of general malaise (87.5% vs 12.5%, p = 0.023) and dyspnea (70.6% vs 29.4%, p = 0.050). Patients with sudden decompensation were more likely to need ICU transfer if the RRT reason was respiratory issues (47% vs 24%, p = 0.010) or hypertension (9.1% vs 0%, p = 0.019). Patients with syncope as a reason for decompensation were less likely to need transfer (0% vs 10.3%, p = 0.014). Patients requiring ICU transfer were significantly older (74.4 vs 71.8 years, p = 0.016). No differences in admission vital signs, APACHE score, or qSOFA score were found. Conclusions: Patients admitted to the floor with chief complaint of general malaise or dyspnea should be considered at higher risk of having a sudden decompensation requiring transfer to a higher level of care. Therefore, greater attention should be taken with disposition of these patients at the time of admission. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A retrospective secondary analysis of 4,200 patients was collected from two academic medical centers. Delirium was assessed using the Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit (CAM-ICU) in all patients. Univariate and multivariate Cox models, logistic regression analysis, and Chi-square Automatic Interaction Detector (CHAID) decision tree modeling were used to explore delirium risk factors. Increased delirium risk was associated with exposed only to artificial light (AL) hazard ratio (HR) 1.84 (95 % CI: 1.66-2.044, P<0.001), physical restraint application 1.11 (95 % CI: 1.001-1.226, P=0.049), and high nursing care requirements (>8 hours per 8-hour shift) 1.18 (95 % CI: 1.048-1.338, P=0.007). Delirium incidence was inversely associated with greater family engagement 0.092 (95 % CI: 0.014-0.596, P=0.012), low staff burnout and anticipated turnover scores 0.093 (95 % CI: 0.014-0.600, P=0.013), non-ICU length-of-stay (LOS)<15 days 0.725 (95 % CI: 0.655-0.804, P<0.001), and ICU LOS ≤15 days 0.509 (95 % CI: 0.456-0.567, P<0.001). CHAID modeling indicated that AL exposure and age <65 years were associated with a high risk of delirium incidence, whereas SOFA score ≤11, APACHE IV score >15 and natural light (NL) exposure were associated with moderate risk, and female sex was associated with low risk. More rapid time to delirium onset correlated with baseline sleep disturbance (P=0.049), high nursing care requirements (P=0.019), and prolonged ICU and non-ICU hospital LOS (P<0.001). Delirium recurrence correlated with age >65 years (HR 2.198; 95 % CI: 1.101-4.388, P=0.026) and high nursing care requirements (HR 1.978, 95 % CI: 1.096-3.569), with CHAID modeling identifying AL exposure (P<0.001) and age >65 years (P=0.032) as predictive variables. Development of ICU delirium correlated with application of physical restraints, high nursing care requirements, prolonged ICU and non-ICU LOS, exposure exclusively to AL (rather than natural), less family engagement, and greater staff burnout and anticipated turnover scores. ICU delirium occurred more rapidly in patients with baseline sleep disturbance, and recurrence correlated with the presence of delirium on ICU admission, exclusive AL exposure, and high nursing care requirements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Very few studies assessed the association between Intensive Care Unit (ICU) triage decisions and mortality. The aim of this study was to assess whether an association could be found between 30-day mortality, and ICU admission consultation conditions and triage decisions. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study in two large referral university hospitals in the Netherlands. We identified all adult cancer patients for whom ICU admission was requested from 2016 to 2019. Via a multivariable logistic regression analysis, we assessed the association between 30-day mortality, and ICU admission consultation conditions and triage decisions. Results: Of the 780 cancer patients for whom ICU admission was requested, 332 patients (42.6%) were considered 'too well to benefit' from ICU admission, 382 (49%) patients were immediately admitted to the ICU and 66 patients (8.4%) were considered 'too sick to benefit' according to the consulting intensivist(s). The 30-day mortality in these subgroups was 30.1%, 36.9% and 81.8%, respectively. In the patient group considered 'too well to benefit', 258 patients were never admitted to the ICU and 74 patients (9.5% of the overall study population, 22.3% of the patients 'too well to benefit') were admitted to the ICU after a second ICU admission request (delayed ICU admission). Thirty-day mortality in these groups was 25.6% and 45.9%. After adjustment for confounders, ICU consultations during off-hours (OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.09–2.38, p-value 0.02) and delayed ICU admission (OR 1.83, 95% CI 1.00–3.33, p-value 0.048 compared to "ICU admission") were independently associated with 30-day mortality. Conclusion: The ICU denial rate in our study was high (51%). Sixty percent of the ICU triage decisions in cancer patients were made during off-hours, and 22.3% of the patients initially considered "too well to benefit" from ICU admission were subsequently admitted to the ICU. Both decisions during off-hours and a delayed ICU admission were associated with an increased risk of death at 30 days. Our study suggests that in cancer patients, ICU triage decisions should be discussed during on-hours, and ICU admission policy should be broadened, with a lower admission threshold for critically ill cancer patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To evaluate how performance status impairment and acute organ dysfunction influence hospital mortality in critically ill patients with cancer who were admitted with suspected sepsis. Methods: Data were obtained from a retrospective cohort of patients, admitted to an intensive care unit, with cancer and with a suspected infection who received parenteral antibiotics and underwent the collection of bodily fluid samples. We used logistic regression with hospital mortality as the outcome and the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group status, and their interactions as predictors. Results: Of 450 patients included, 265 (58.9%) died in the hospital. For patients admitted to the intensive care unit with lower Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (≤ 6), performance status impairment influenced the in-hospital mortality, which was 32% among those with no and minor performance status impairment and 52% among those with moderate and severe performance status impairment, p < 0.01. However, for those with higher Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (> 6), performance status impairment did not influence the in-hospital mortality (73% among those with no and minor impairment and 84% among those with moderate and severe impairment; p = 0.1). Conclusion: Performance status impairment seems to influence hospital mortality in critically ill cancer patients with suspected sepsis when they have less severe acute organ dysfunction at the time of intensive care unit admission. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Colombian Journal of Anesthesiology / Revista Colombiana de Anestesiología is the property of Sociedad Colombiana de Anestesiologia y Reanimacion and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Introduction: Previous studies have evaluated procalcitonin clearance (PCTc) as a marker of sepsis severity but at different time points and cutoffs. We aimed to assess the predictive performance of PCTc at different time points of sepsis management in patients with cancer. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included patients with cancer admitted to an intensive care unit between 2013 and 2016. We calculated PCTc at 24, 48, 72, and 96 hours after admission. Its predictive performance for hospital and 90-day mortality was analyzed with receiver operating characteristic curves and areas under the curves (AUCs). Sensitivity and specificity were calculated for different time points using different cutoffs. Results: We included 301 patients. Areas under the curves ranged from 0.62 for PCTc at 24 hours to 0.68 for PCTc at 72 and 96 hours for hospital mortality prediction, and from 0.61 for PCTc at 24 hours to 0.68 for PCTc at 72 hours for 90-day mortality prediction. For hospital mortality prediction, PCTc at 72 hours ≤80% showed the best sensitivity (96.0%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 90.8%-98.7%), and PCTc at 96 hours ≤50% showed the best specificity (70.7%; 95% CI: 54.5%-83.9%). Conclusions: Procalcitonin clearance at 24, 48, 72, and 96 hours poorly predicted hospital and 90-day mortality. Therefore, daily PCT measurement should not be used to predict mortality for patients with cancer and sepsis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Constipation can be a significant problem in critically unwell patients, associated with detrimental outcomes. Opioids are thought to contribute to the mechanism of bowel dysfunction. We tested if methylnaltrexone, a pure peripheral mu-opioid receptor antagonist, could reverse opioid-induced constipation.Methods: The MOTION trial is a multi-centre, double blind, randomised placebo-controlled trial to investigate whether methylnaltrexone alleviates opioid-induced constipation (OIC) in critical care patients. Eligibility criteria included adult ICU patients who were mechanically ventilated, receiving opioids and were constipated (had not opened bowels for a minimum 48 h) despite prior administration of regular laxatives as per local bowel management protocol. The primary outcome was time to significant rescue-free laxation. Secondary outcomes included gastric residual volume, tolerance of enteral feeds, requirement for rescue laxatives, requirement for prokinetics, average number of bowel movements per day, escalation of opioid dose due to antagonism/reversal of analgesia, incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia, incidence of diarrhoea and Clostridium difficile infection and finally 28 day, ICU and hospital mortality.Results: A total of 84 patients were enrolled and randomized (41 to methylnaltrexone and 43 to placebo). The baseline demographic characteristics of the two groups were generally well balanced. There was no significant difference in time to rescue-free laxation between the groups (Hazard ratio 1.42, 95% CI 0.82-2.46, p = 0.22). There were no significant differences in the majority of secondary outcomes, particularly days 1-3. However, during days 4-28, there were fewer median number of bowel movements per day in the methylnaltrexone group, (p = 0.01) and a greater incidence of diarrhoea in the placebo group (p = 0.02). There was a marked difference in mortality between the groups, with ten deaths in the methylnaltrexone group and two in the placebo group during days 4-28 (p = 0.007).Conclusion: We found no evidence to support the addition of methylnaltrexone to regular laxatives for the treatment of opioid-induced constipation in critically ill patients; however, the confidence interval was wide and a clinically important difference cannot be excluded. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of the study was to analyze the effectiveness of adding nebulized antibiotics to systemic antimicrobials in critically ill patients with respiratory tract infections (pneumonia or tracheobronchitis) and the effect on renal function. A retrospective observational cohort study including critically ill patients with respiratory tract infections during a 2-year period was conducted. Intervention group included patients that received nebulized and systemic antimicrobials. Patients in the control group received only systemic antimicrobials. Clinical resolution was the primary endpoint. Secondary outcomes included change in fever, inflammatory parameters, and creatinine clearance; length of hospital stay, systemic therapy, and mechanical ventilation; hospital readmission; and mortality. Regression models were performed to estimate the effect of nebulized antibiotics on outcome variables adjusted by potential confounders. A total of 136 patients were included (93 in control group and 43 in intervention group). The intervention group had higher odds of clinical resolution (adjusted odds ratio (OR): 7.1; 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 1.2, 43.3). Nebulized antibiotic therapy was independently associated with reduction in procalcitonin (adjusted OR: 12.4; 95% CI: 1.4, 109.7). There were no significant differences in the rest of the secondary outcomes or in creatinine clearance reduction. Adding nebulized antibiotics for the management of respiratory tract infections has a positive impact on clinical resolution without increasing the risk of renal toxicity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Turkish Journal of Geriatrics / Türk Geriatri Dergisi is the property of Turkish Geriatrics Society and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva is the property of Associacao de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Delirium in the intensive care unit (ICU) is associated with many negative outcomes, including increased length of stay in both the ICU and the hospital, increased duration of mechanical ventilation, increased mortality, worse long-term cognitive impairment, and increased costs. The 2013 American College of Critical Care Medicine (ACCM)/ Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM) clinical practice guidelines for pain, agitation, and delirium (PAD), based on available evidence, strongly recommend that critically ill patients be routinely monitored for delirium in the ICU using a validated tool. After conducting a thorough psychometric review of available delirium assessment tools, the 2013 PAD guideline group concluded that the Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU (CAM-ICU) and the Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist (ICDSC) are the ICU delirium screening tools with the strongest validity and reliability. This article discusses the importance and feasibility of delirium screening in the ICU and compares the most commonly used critical care delirium screening instruments. Strategies needed to implement and sustain delirium screening efforts in different critically ill populations are introduced and discussed. Accurate detection is the first step in managing ICU patients who develop delirium in an attempt to reduce the negative sequelae of delirium in this population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Early recognition of sepsis is challenging, and diagnostic criteria have changed repeatedly. We assessed the robustness of sepsis-3 criteria in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. Methods: We studied the apparent incidence and associated mortality of sepsis-3 among patients who were prospectively enrolled in the Molecular Diagnosis and Risk Stratification of Sepsis (MARS) cohort in the Netherlands, and explored the effects of minor variations in the precise definition and timing of diagnostic criteria for organ failure. Results: Among 1081 patients with suspected infection upon ICU admission, 648 (60%) were considered to have sepsis according to prospective adjudication in the MARS study, whereas 976 (90%) met sepsis-3 criteria, yielding only 64% agreement at the individual patient level. Among 501 subjects developing ICU-acquired infection, these rates were 270 (54%) and 260 (52%), respectively (yielding 58% agreement). Hospital mortality was 234 (36%) vs 277 (28%) for those meeting MARS-sepsis or sepsis-3 criteria upon presentation (p < 0.001), and 121 (45%) vs 103 (40%) for those having sepsis onset in the ICU (p < 0.001). Minor variations in timing and interpretation of organ failure criteria had a considerable effect on the apparent prevalence of sepsis-3, which ranged from 68 to 96% among those with infection at admission, and from 22 to 99% among ICU-acquired cases. Conclusion: The sepsis-3 definition lacks robustness as well as discriminatory ability, since nearly all patients presenting to ICU with suspected infection fulfill its criteria. These should therefore be specified in greater detail, and applied more consistently, during future sepsis studies. Trial registration: The MARS study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier NCT 01905033). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]