Search

Objectives: Our primary aim was to ascertain the frequency of postintubation hypotension in immunocompromised critically ill adults with secondary aims of arriving at potential risk factors for the development of postintubation hypotension and its impact on patient-related outcomes. Methods: Critically ill adult patients (≥18 years) were included from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2014. We defined immunocompromised as patients with any solid organ or nonsolid organ malignancy or transplant, whether solid organ or not, requiring current chemotherapy. Postintubation hypotension was defined as a decrease in systolic blood pressure to less than 90 mm Hg or a decrease in mean arterial pressure to less than 65 mm Hg or the initiation of any vasopressor medication. Patients were then stratified based on development of postintubation hypotension. Potential risk factors and intensive care unit (ICU) outcome metrics were electronically captured by a validated data mart system. Results: The final cohort included 269 patients. Postintubation hypotension occurred in 141 (52%; 95% confidence interval: 46-58) patients. Several risk factors predicted postintubation hypotension on univariate analysis; however, only Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation III score in the first 24 hours, preintubation shock status, and preintubation hemodynamic instability remained significant on all 4 multivariate analyses. Patients developing postintubation hypotension had higher ICU and hospital mortality (54 [38%] vs 31 [24%], P =.01; 69 [49%] vs 47 [37%], P =.04). Conclusion: Based on previous literature, we found a higher frequency of postintubation hypotension in the immunocompromised than in the nonimmunocompromised critically ill adult patients. Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation III score in the first 24 hours, preintubation shock status, and preintubation hemodynamic instability were significant predictors on multivariate analyses. Postintubation hypotension led to higher ICU and hospital mortality in those experiencing this complication. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Data regarding best practices for ventilator management strategies that improve outcomes in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) are readily available. However, little is known regarding processes to ensure compliance with these strategies. We developed a goal-directed mechanical ventilation order set that included physician-specified lung-protective ventilation and oxygenation goals to be implemented by respiratory therapists (RTs). We sought as a primary outcome to determine whether an RT-driven order set with predefined oxygenation and ventilation goals could be implemented and associated with improved adherence with best practice. Methods: We evaluated 1302 patients undergoing invasive mechanical ventilation (1693 separate episodes of invasive mechanical ventilation) prior to and after institution of a standardized, goal-directed mechanical ventilation order set using a controlled before-and-after study design. Patient-specific goals for oxygenation partial pressure of oxygen in arterial blood (Pa o 2), ARDS Network [Net] positive end-expiratory pressure [PEEP]/fraction of inspired oxygen [F io 2] table use) and ventilation (pH, partial pressure of carbon dioxide) were selected by prescribers and implemented by RTs. Results: Compliance with the new mechanical ventilation order set was high: 88.2% compliance versus 3.8% before implementation of the order set (P <.001). Adherence to the PEEP/F io 2 table after implementation of the order set was significantly greater (86.0% after vs 82.9% before, P =.02). There was no difference in duration of mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay, and in-hospital or ICU mortality. Conclusions: A standardized best practice mechanical ventilation order set can be implemented by a multidisciplinary team and is associated with improved compliance to written orders and adherence to the ARDSNet PEEP/F io 2 table. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Our primary aim was to determine the factors leading to prophylactic endotracheal intubation in intensive care unit (ICU) patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy. Secondary aims were to determine the rate of unplanned endotracheal intubations during endoscopy and to determine the rate of aspiration following endoscopy for patients admitted to the ICU. Methods: Critically ill adult (≥18 years) patients who underwent upper and lower endoscopic procedures from January 2012 to July 2016 in a medical/surgical ICU were included. Determinants of prophylactic endotracheal intubation prior to endoscopy as well as other postprocedure outcomes were electronically captured by a validated data mart system. Given our focus on aspiration in those who were not endotracheally intubated prior to endoscopy, we used a validated definition a priori. Results: A total of 320 patients were included in the final analysis: 76(24%) were intubated prior to endoscopy and 244 (76%) were not. The endotracheally intubated group had a significantly higher Acute Physiologic and Chronic Health Evaluation III (44.5 [16.2] vs 39.5 [15.5]; P =.02) and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (6.9 [4.4] vs 3.8 [3]; P ≤.01) scores, higher rate of hematemesis within 24 hours of endoscopy (28 [37%] vs 45 [18%]; P ≤.01), and higher rate of upper endoscopy (72 [96%] vs 181 [74%]; P ≤.01). We composed a composite outcome for multivariable analyses, which demonstrated the rate of any complication was significantly higher among those who were intubated prior to the procedure versus those who were not intubated previously (odds ratio: 2.80, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.16-6.72, P =.02). Conclusion: Endoscopy performed in the ICU without endotracheal intubation is safe. However, patient selection for prophylactic intubation prior to endoscopy is of critical importance as illustrated in this study with higher illness severity, planned upper endoscopy, and hematemesis 24 hours prior being key factors on deciding to perform endotracheal intubation. Prophylactic intubation for endoscopy and preexisting cardiac disease were associated with a higher rate of adverse outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To describe the practice of intubation of the critically ill at a single academic institution, Mayo Clinic's campus in Rochester, Minnesota, and to report the incidence of immediate postintubation complications. Patients and Methods: Critically ill adult (≥18 years) patients admitted to a medical–surgical intensive care unit from January 1, 2013, to December 31, 2014, who required endotracheal intubation included. Results: The final cohort included 420 patients. The mean age at intubation was 62.9 ± 16.3 years, with 58% (244) of the cohort as male. The most common reason for intubation was respiratory failure (282 [67%]). The most common airway device used was video laryngoscopy (204 [49%]). Paralysis was used in 264 (63%) patients, with ketamine as the most common sedative (194 [46%]). The most common complication was hypotension (170 [41%]; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 35.7-45.3) followed by hypoxemia (74 [17.6%]; 95% CI: 14.1-21.6), with difficult intubation occurring in 20 (5%; 95% CI: 2.9-7.3). Conclusion: We found a high success rate of first-pass intubation in critically ill patients (89.8%), despite the procedure being done primarily by trainees 92.6% of the time; video was the preferred method of laryngoscopy (48.6%). Although our difficult intubation (4.8%) and complication rates typically associated with the act of intubation such as aspiration (1.2%; 95% CI: 0.4-2.8) and esophageal intubation (0.2%; 95% CI: 0.01-1.3) are very low compared to other published rates (8.09%), postintubation hypotension (40.5%) and hypoxemia (17.6%) higher. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To assess whether exposure to modified shock index (MSI) in the first 24 hours of intensive care unit (ICU) admission is associated with increased in-hospital mortality. Methods: Adult critically ill patients were included in a case–control design with 1:2 matching. Cases (death) and controls (alive) were abstracted by a reviewer blinded to exposure status (MSI). Cases were matched to controls on 3 factors—age, end-stage renal disease, and ICU admission diagnosis. Results: Eighty-three cases and 159 controls were included. On univariate analysis, lorazepam administration (odds ratio [OR]: 5.75, confidence interval [CI] = 2.28-14.47; P ≤ .01), shock requiring vasopressors (OR: 3.62, CI = 1.77-7.40; P ≤ .01), maximum MSI (OR: 2.77 per unit, CI = 1.63-4.71; P ≤ .001), and elevated acute physiologic and chronic health evaluation (APACHE) III score at 1 hour (OR: 1.41 per 10 units, CI = 1.19-1.66; P ≤ .001) were associated with mortality. Maximum MSI (OR: 1.93 per unit, CI = 1.07-3.48, P = .03) and APACHE III score at 1 hour (OR: 1.29 per 10 units, CI = 1.09-1.53; P = .003) remained significant with mortality in the multivariate analysis. The optimal cutoff point for high MSI and mortality was 1.8. Conclusion: Critically ill patients who demonstrate an elevated MSI within the first 24 hours of ICU admission have a significant mortality risk. Given that MSI is easily calculated at the bedside, clinicians may institute interventions earlier which could improve survival. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: In the last decade, the practice of intubation in the intensive care unit (ICU) has evolved. To further examine the current intubation practice in the ICU, we administered a survey to critical care physicians. Design: Cross-sectional survey study design. Setting: Thirty-two academic/nonacademic centers nationally and internationally. Measurements and Main Results: The survey was developed among a core group of physicians with the assistance of the Survey Research Center at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota. The survey was pilot tested for functionality and reliability. The response rate was 82 (51%) of 160 among the 32 centers. Although propofol was the induction drug of choice, there was a significant difference with actual ketamine use and those who indicated a preference for it (ketamine: 52% vs 61%; P < .001). The most common airway device used for intubation was direct laryngoscopy (Miller laryngoscope blade) at 56 (68%) followed by video laryngoscopy at 26 (32%). Most (>90%) indicated that they have a difficult airway cart, but only 55 (67%) indicated they have a documented plan to handle a difficult airway with even lower results for documented review of adverse events (49%). Conclusion: Although propofol was the induction drug of choice, ketamine was a medication that many preferred to use, possibly relating to the fact that the most common complication postintubation is hypotension. Direct laryngoscopy remains the primary airway device for endotracheal intubation. Finally, although the majority stated they had a difficult airway cart available, most did not have a documented plan in place when encountering a difficult airway or a documented process to review adverse events surrounding intubation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

With the ever-increasing adoption of shift models for intensive care unit (ICU) staffing, improving shift-to-shift handoffs represents an important step in reducing medical errors. The authors developed an electronic handoff tool integrated within the existing electronic medical record to improve handoffs in an adult ICU. First, stakeholder (staff intensivists, fellows, and nurse practitioners/physician assistants) input was sought to define what elements they perceived as being essential to a quality handoff. The principal outcome measure of handoff accuracy was the concordance between data transmitted by the outgoing team and data received by the incoming team (termed as agreement). Based on stakeholder input, the authors developed the handoff tool and provided regular education on its use. Handoffs were observed before and after implementation of the tool. There was an increase in the level of agreement for tasks and other important data points handed off without an increase in the time required to complete the handoff. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The discovery and utilization of volatile anesthetics has significantly transformed surgical practices since their inception in the mid-19th century. Recently, a paradigm shift is observed as volatile anesthetics extend beyond traditional confines of the operating theatres, finding diverse applications in intensive care settings. In the dynamic landscape of intensive care, volatile anesthetics emerge as a promising avenue for addressing complex sedation requirements, managing refractory lung pathologies including acute respiratory distress syndrome and status asthmaticus, conditions of high sedative requirements including burns, high opioid or alcohol use and neurological conditions such as status epilepticus. Volatile anesthetics can be administered through either inhaled route via anesthetic machines/devices or through extracorporeal membrane oxygenation circuitry, providing intensivists with multiple options to tailor therapy. Furthermore, their unique pharmacokinetic profiles render them titratable and empower clinicians to individualize management with heightened accuracy, mitigating risks associated with conventional sedation modalities. Despite the amounting enthusiasm for the use of these therapies, barriers to widespread utilization include expanding equipment availability, staff familiarity and training of safe use. This article delves into the realm of applying inhaled volatile anesthetics in the intensive care unit through discussing their pharmacology, administration considerations in intensive care settings, complication considerations, and listing indications and evidence of the use of volatile anesthetics in the critically ill patient population., Competing Interests: Conflict-of-interest statement: All authors declare no conflicts of interest., (©The Author(s) 2024. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: High-dose catecholamines can impair hypoxic pulmonary vasoconstriction and increase shunt fraction. We aimed to determine if Angiotensin II (Ang-2) is associated with improved PaO 2 /FiO 2 and SpO 2 /FiO 2 in patients in shock., Methods: Adult patients at four tertiary care centers and one community hospital in the United States who received Ang-2 from July 2018-September 2020 were included in this retrospective, observational cohort study. PaO 2 , SpO 2 , and FiO 2 were measured at 13 timepoints during the 48-h before and after Ang-2 initiation. Piecewise linear mixed models of PaO 2 /FiO 2 and SpO 2 /FiO 2 were created to evaluate hourly changes in oxygenation after Ang-2 initiation. The difference in the proportion of patients with PaO 2 /FiO 2  ≤ 300 mm Hg at the time of Ang-2 initiation and 48 h after was also examined., Results: The study included 254 patients. In the 48 h prior to Ang-2 initiation, oxygenation was significantly declining (hourly PaO 2 /FiO 2 change -4.7 mm Hg/hr, 95% CI - 6.0 to -3.5, p  < .001; hourly SpO 2 /FiO 2 change -3.1/hr, 95% CI-3.7 to -2.4, p  < .001). Ang-2 treatment was associated with significant improvements in PaO 2 /FiO 2 and SpO 2 /FiO 2 in the 48-h after initiation (hourly PaO 2 /FiO 2 change +1.5 mm Hg/hr, 95% CI 0.5-2.5, p   =  .003; hourly SpO 2 /FiO 2 change +0.9/hr, 95% CI 0.5-1.2, p  < .001). The difference in the hourly change in oxygenation before and after Ang-2 initiation was also significant ( p interaction  < 0.001 for both PaO 2 /FiO 2 and SpO 2 /FiO 2 ). This improvement was associated with significantly fewer patients having a PaO 2 /FiO 2  ≤ 300 mm Hg at 48 h compared to baseline (mean difference -14.9%, 95% CI -25.3% to -4.6%, p   =  .011). Subgroup analysis found that patients with either a baseline PaO 2 /FiO 2  ≤ 300 mm Hg or a norepinephrine-equivalent dose requirement >0.2 µg/kg/min had the greatest associations with oxygenation improvement., Conclusions: Ang-2 is associated with improved PaO 2 /FiO 2 and SpO 2 /FiO 2 . The mechanisms for this improvement are not entirely clear but may be due to catecholamine-sparing effect or may also be related to improved ventilation-perfusion matching, intrapulmonary shunt, or oxygen delivery.

Endotracheal intubation is frequently performed in the intensive care unit (ICU). It can be life-saving for many patients who present with acute respiratory distress. However, it is equally associated with complications that may lead to unwanted effects in this patient population. According to the literature, the rate of complications associated with endotracheal intubation is much higher in an environment such as the ICU as compared to other, more controlled environments (i.e., operating room). Thus, the conduct of performing such a procedure needs to be accomplished with the utmost care. To facilitate establishment of the breathing tube, sedation is routinely administered. Given the tenuous hemodynamic status of the critically ill, etomidate was frequently chosen to blunt further decreases in blood pressure and/or heart rate. Recently however, reports have demonstrated a possible association with the use of etomidate for endotracheal intubation and mortality in the critically ill. In addition, this association seems to be predominantly in patients diagnosed with sepsis. As a result, some have advocated against the use of this medication in septic patients. Due to the negative associations identified with etomidate and mortality, several investigators have evaluated potential alternatives to this solution (e.g., ketamine and ketamine-propofol admixture). These studies have shown promise. However, despite the evidence against using etomidate for endotracheal intubation, other studies have demonstrated no such association. This leaves the critical care clinician with uncertainty regarding the best sedative to administer in this patient population. The following editorial discusses current evidence regarding etomidate use for endotracheal intubation and mortality. In particular, we highlight a recent article with the largest population to date that found no association between etomidate and mortality in the critically ill and illustrate important findings that the reader should be aware of regarding this article.

Background: The primary aim of this study was to determine the period prevalence of the single-syringe ketamine-propofol admixture used for sedation and induction among anesthesia providers during a 5-year period before and after educational sessions addressing barriers to its use. Secondary aims were to determine barriers to its use and address the most prevalent concerns through educational sessions., Material and Methods: Surveys were administered to certified and student registered nurse anesthetists, anesthesia residents, and anesthesiologists at Mayo Clinic Rochester, MN before and after educational sessions addressing common barriers. Identified barriers were addressed by oral and/or electronic presentations with identical content., Results: Pre-education period prevalence for sedation was 110 (43%) and 64 (25%) for induction. Identified barriers were uncertainty of benefit in 62 respondents (23%), mixed controlled substance disposal in 48 (18%), regulatory/institutional policies in 20 (7%), and compatibility in 9 (3%). Post-education period prevalence for sedation was 102 (44%), and induction 63 (27%). No concerns were noted in 72% of the post-education group verses 42% in the pre-education group (p<0.01). No concerns were reported in 51% of the electronic only education group verses 64% in the oral education group (p<0.01)., Conclusions: The period prevalence of "ketofol" was greater for sedation than induction. The period prevalence following education showed a slight increase in both sedation and induction use. There was a significant reduction in barriers following education, with oral presentations being more effective than electronic only. Period prevalence was increasing following education; however, allowing more time may have shown a significant practice change.

Background: Endotracheal intubation is a common procedure performed for critically ill patients that can have immediate life-threatening complications. Induction medications are routinely given to facilitate the procedure, but most of these medications are associated with hypotension. While etomidate is known for its neutral hemodynamic profile, it has been linked with increased mortality in septic patients and increased morbidity in trauma patients. Ketamine and propofol are effective anesthetics with counteracting cardiovascular profiles. No data are available about the use of this combination in critically ill patients undergoing endotracheal intubation., Case Report: We describe 6 cases in which the combination of ketamine and propofol ("ketofol") was used as an induction agent for endotracheal intubation in critically ill patients with a focus on hemodynamic outcomes. All patients received a neuromuscular blocker and fentanyl, while 5 patients received midazolam. We recorded mean arterial pressure (MAP) 1 minute before induction and 15 minutes after intubation with the combination. Of the 6 patients, 5 maintained a MAP ≥ 65 mmHg 15 minutes after intubation. One patient was on norepinephrine infusion with a MAP of 64 mmHg, and did not require an increase in the dose of the vasopressor 15 minutes after intubation. No hemodynamic complications were reported after any of the intubations., Conclusions: This case series describes the use of the "ketofol" combination as an induction agent for intubation in critically ill patients when hemodynamic stability is desired. Further research is needed to establish the safety of this combination and how it compares to other induction medications.