Intensive care medicine in 2050: nanotechnology. Emerging technologies and approaches and their impact on critical care

Relationship Between the Expression of PD-1 and CTLA-4 on T Lymphocytes and the Severity and Prognosis of Sepsis

Purpose

The study aimed to investigate the relationship between the expression of PD-1 and CTLA-4 on the surface of peripheral blood T lymphocyte subsets in patients with sepsis and the severity and prognosis of the disease.

Patients and Methods

The study included patients with sepsis who were admitted to the intensive care unit. The expression of PD-1 and CTLA-4 on T lymphocyte subsets was detected by flow cytometry, and the severity of sepsis was assessed using the SOFA score.

Results

The expression of PD-1 on CD4⁺T cells, PD-1 on Tregs, and CTLA-4 on Tregs increased with the severity of the disease (P<0.05). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that PD-1 expression on CD4⁺T cells, CTLA-4 expression on Tregs, and the SOFA score were independent risk factors for 28-day mortality in patients with sepsis (P<0.05). The area under the curve of the SOFA score combined with the expression of PD-1 on CD4⁺T cells and CTLA-4 on Treg cells was significantly higher than any single indicator (P<0.05). Patients with high expression of PD-1 on CD4⁺T cells (>31.25%) and CTLA-4 on Tregs (>12.64%) had a lower 28-day survival rate (P<0.05).

Conclusion

The increased expression of PD-1 and CTLA-4 on CD4⁺T cells and Tregs is significantly associated with the severity and prognosis of sepsis patients. The combination of the SOFA score and the expression of PD-1 on CD4⁺T cells and CTLA-4 on Tregs can further improve the prognostic predictive value. These findings may be promising biomarkers for prognostic assessment, risk stratification, and identification of immunosuppression in patients with sepsis.

Recent advancements of nanoparticles application in cancer and neurodegenerative disorders: At a glance

Nanoscale engineering is one of the innovative approaches to heal multitudes of ailments, such as varieties of malignancies, neurological problems, and infectious illnesses. Therapeutics for neurodegenerative diseases (NDs) may be modified in aspect because of their ability to stimulate physiological response while limiting negative consequences by interfacing and activating possible targets. Nanomaterials have been extensively studied and employed for cancerous therapeutic strategies since nanomaterials potentially play a significant role in medical transportation. When compared to conventional drug delivery, nanocarriers drug delivery offers various benefits, such as excellent reliability, bioactivity, improved penetration and retention impact, as well as precise targeting and administering. Upregulation of drug efflux transporters, dysfunctional apoptotic mechanisms, and a hypoxic atmosphere are all elements that lead to cancer treatment sensitivity in humans. It has been possible to target these pathways using nanoparticles and increase the effectiveness of multidrug resistance treatments. As innovative strategies of tumor chemoresistance are uncovered, nanomaterials are being developed to target specific pathways of tumor resilience. Scientists have recently begun investigating the function of nanoparticles in immunotherapy, a field that is becoming increasingly useful in the care of malignancies. Nanoscale therapeutics have been explored in this scientific literature and represent the most current approaches to neurodegenerative illnesses and cancer therapy. In addition, current findings and various biomedical nanomaterials' future promise for tissue regeneration, prospective medication design, and the synthesis of novel delivery approaches have been emphasized.

Droplet digital polymerase chain reaction for rapid broad-spectrum detection of bloodstream infections

The droplet digital polymerase chain reaction (ddPCR) is a novel molecular technique that allows rapid quantification of rare target DNA sequences. Aim of this study was to explore the feasibility of the ddPCR technique to detect pathogen DNA in whole blood and to assess the diagnostic accuracy of ddPCR to detect bloodstream infections (BSIs), benchmarked against blood cultures. Broad-range primers and probes were designed to detect bacterial 16S rRNA (and Gram stain for differentiation) and fungal 28S rRNA. To determine the detection limit of ddPCR, 10-fold serial dilutions of E. coli and C. albicans were spiked in both PBS and whole blood. The diagnostic accuracy of ddPCR was tested in historically collected frozen blood samples from adult patients suspected of a BSI and compared with blood cultures. Analyses were independently performed by two research analysts. Outcomes included sensitivity and specificity of ddPCR. Within 4 h, blood samples were drawn, and DNA was isolated and analysed. The ddPCR detection limit was approximately 1-2 bacteria or fungi per ddPCR reaction. In total, 45 blood samples were collected from patients, of which 15 (33%) presented with positive blood cultures. The overall sensitivity of ddPCR was 80% (95% CI 52-96) and specificity 87% (95% CI 69-96). In conclusion, the ddPCR technique has considerable potential and is able to detect very low amounts of pathogen DNA in whole blood within 4 h. Currently, ddPCR has a reasonable sensitivity and specificity, but requires further optimization to make it more useful for clinical practice.

Thinking forward: promising but unproven ideas for future intensive care

Progress toward determining the true worth of ongoing practices or value of recent innovations can be glacially slow when we insist on following the conventional stepwise scientific pathway. Moreover, a widely accepted but flawed conceptual paradigm often proves difficult to challenge, modify or reject. Yet, most experienced clinicians, educators and clinical scientists privately entertain untested ideas about how care could or should be improved, even if the supporting evidence base is currently thin or non-existent. This symposium encouraged experts to share such intriguing but unproven concepts, each based upon what the speaker considered a logical but unproven rationale. Such free interchange invited dialog that pointed toward new or neglected lines of research needed to improve care of the critically ill. In this summary of those presentations, a brief background outlines the rationale for each novel and deliberately provocative unconfirmed idea endorsed by the presenter.

Surviving sepsis campaign: research priorities for sepsis and septic shock

Objective

To identify research priorities in the management, epidemiology, outcome and underlying causes of sepsis and septic shock.

Design

A consensus committee of 16 international experts representing the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine and Society of Critical Care Medicine was convened at the annual meetings of both societies. Subgroups had teleconference and electronic-based discussion. The entire committee iteratively developed the entire document and recommendations.

Methods

Each committee member independently gave their top five priorities for sepsis research. A total of 88 suggestions (ESM 1 - supplemental table 1) were grouped into categories by the committee co-chairs, leading to the formation of seven subgroups: infection, fluids and vasoactive agents, adjunctive therapy, administration/epidemiology, scoring/identification, post-intensive care unit, and basic/translational science. Each subgroup had teleconferences to go over each priority followed by formal voting within each subgroup. The entire committee also voted on top priorities across all subgroups except for basic/translational science.

Results

The Surviving Sepsis Research Committee provides 26 priorities for sepsis and septic shock. Of these, the top six clinical priorities were identified and include the following questions: (1) can targeted/personalized/precision medicine approaches determine which therapies will work for which patients at which times?; (2) what are ideal endpoints for volume resuscitation and how should volume resuscitation be titrated?; (3) should rapid diagnostic tests be implemented in clinical practice?; (4) should empiric antibiotic combination therapy be used in sepsis or septic shock?; (5) what are the predictors of sepsis long-term morbidity and mortality?; and (6) what information identifies organ dysfunction?

Conclusions

While the Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines give multiple recommendations on the treatment of sepsis, significant knowledge gaps remain, both in bedside issues directly applicable to clinicians, as well as understanding the fundamental mechanisms underlying the development and progression of sepsis. The priorities identified represent a roadmap for research in sepsis and septic shock.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00134-018-5175-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.