Does the subspecialty of an intensive care unit (ICU) has an impact on outcome in patients suffering from aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage?

Comparison of Outcomes Among Neurovascular Patients Managed in Dedicated Neurological Intensive Care Units vs. General Intensive Care Units

Background/Objectives: Patients with neurovascular conditions often require multidisciplinary management to optimize recovery. Our systematic review identifies literature comparing outcomes among neurovascular patients managed at dedicated neurological intensive care units (ICUs) compared to general ICUs. Methods: PubMed was searched to identify articles that reported outcomes among patients managed at dedicated neurological ICUs versus general ICUs. Articles that reported outcomes among patients with neurovascular conditions were included. Articles that reported outcomes among patients managed at stroke units were excluded. The Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to assess for risk of bias across individual studies. Results: After a title and abstract screen followed by a full-text review, seven studies met criteria for inclusion. These studies reported outcomes among patients managed for intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH), acute ischemic stroke (AIS) and aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH). Two studies reported lower mortality, improved functional outcome and reduced costs among patients with ICH who were managed at dedicated neurological ICUs. Among patients with aSAH, only less-severe cases experienced better functional outcome after management at dedicated neurological ICUs. Six out of seven studies were considered high quality. Conclusions: Our review highlights the potential benefits of receiving care at dedicated neurological ICUs, as evidenced by lower mortality, improved functional outcome and reduced costs in patients with ICH and low-grade aSAH. However, future research is necessary to clarify whether dedicated neurological ICU care confers significant advantage over general ICUs among patients with AIS and other neurovascular conditions.

Association of Neurocritical Care Services With Mortality and Functional Outcomes for Adults With Brain Injury: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Importance

Neurocritical care (NCC) aims to improve the outcomes of critically ill patients with brain injury, although the benefits of such subspecialized care are yet to be determined.

Objective

To evaluate the association of NCC with patient-centered outcomes in adults with acute brain injury who were admitted to intensive care units (ICUs). The protocol was preregistered on PROSPERO (CRD42020177190).

Data Sources

Three electronic databases were searched (Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) from inception through December 15, 2021, and by citation chaining.

Study Selection

Studies were included for interventions of neurocritical care units (NCCUs), neurointensivists, or NCC consulting services compared with general care in populations of neurologically ill adults or adults with acute brain injury in ICUs.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

Data extraction was performed in keeping with PRISMA guidelines and risk of bias assessed through the ROBINS-I Cochrane tool by 2 independent reviewers. Data were pooled using a random-effects model.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at longest follow-up until 6 months. Secondary outcomes were ICU length of stay (LOS), hospital LOS, and functional outcomes. Data were measured as risk ratio (RR) if dichotomous or standardized mean difference if continuous. Subgroup analyses were performed for disease and models of NCC delivery.

Results

After 5659 nonduplicated published records were screened, 26 nonrandomized observational studies fulfilled eligibility criteria. A meta-analysis of mortality outcomes for 55 792 patients demonstrated a 17% relative risk reduction (RR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.75-0.92; P = .001) in those receiving subspecialized care (n = 27 061) compared with general care (n = 27 694). Subgroup analyses did not identify subgroup differences. Eight studies including 4667 patients demonstrated a 17% relative risk reduction (RR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.70-0.97; P = .03) for an unfavorable functional outcome with subspecialized care compared with general care. There were no differences in LOS outcomes. Heterogeneity was substantial in all analyses.

Conclusions and Relevance

Subspecialized NCC is associated with improved survival and functional outcomes for critically ill adults with brain injury. However, confidence in the evidence is limited by substantial heterogeneity. Further investigations are necessary to determine the specific aspects of NCC that contribute to these improved outcomes and its cost-effectiveness.

The role of acute care surgeons in treating rib fractures-a retrospective cohort study from a single level I trauma center

BACKGROUND

Rib fractures are the most common thoracic injury in patients who sustained blunt trauma, and potentially life-threatening associated injuries are prevalent. Multi-disciplinary work-up is crucial to achieving a comprehensive understanding of these patients. The present study demonstrated the experience of an acute care surgery (ACS) model for rib fracture management from a single level I trauma center over 13 years.

METHODS

Data from patients diagnosed with acute rib fractures from January 2008 to December 2020 were collected from the trauma registry of Chang Gung Memorial Hospital (CGMH). Information, including patient age, sex, injury mechanism, Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) in different anatomic regions, injury severity score (ISS), index admission department, intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS), total admission LOS, mortality, and other characteristics of multiple rib fracture, were analyzed. Patients who received surgical stabilization of rib fractures (SSRF) were analyzed separately, and basic demographics and clinical outcomes were compared between acute care and thoracic surgeons.

RESULTS

A total of 5103 patients diagnosed with acute rib fracture were admitted via the emergency department (ED) of CGMH in the 13-year study period. The Department of Trauma and Emergency Surgery (TR) received the most patients (70.8%), and the Department of Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery (CTS) received only 3.1% of the total patients. SSRF was initiated in 2017, and TR performed fixation for 141 patients, while CTS operated for 16 patients. The basic demographics were similar between the two groups, and no significant differences were noted in the outcomes, including LOS, LCU LOS, length of indwelling chest tube, or complications. There was only one mortality in all SSRF patients, and the patient was from the CTS group.

CONCLUSIONS

Acute care surgeons provided good-quality care to rib fracture patients, whether SSRF or non-SSRF. Acute care surgeons also safely performed SSRF. Therefore, we propose that the ACS model may be an option for rib fracture management, depending on the deployment of staff in each institute.

Impact of Implementing an Elaborated CT Perfusion Protocol for Aneurysmal SAH on Functional Outcome: CTP Protocol for SAH

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The acute phase of aneurysmal SAH is characterized by a plethora of impending complications with the potential to worsen patients' outcomes. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether an elaborated CTP-based imaging protocol during the acute aneurysmal SAH phase is able to prevent delayed infarctions and contribute to a better outcome.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In 2012, an elaborated CTP-based protocol was implemented for the management of patients with aneurysmal SAH. Retrospective analysis of patients with aneurysmal SAH treated from 2010 to 2013 was performed, comparing the patients treated before (group one, 2010-2011) with those treated after the protocol implementation (group two, 2012-2013) with regard to delayed infarctions and outcome according to the mRS at 3-months' follow-up.

RESULTS

A total of 133 patients were enrolled, of whom 57 were included in group 1, and 76, in group 2. There were no significant differences between the groups concerning baseline characteristics. In the multivariate analysis, independent predictors of a good outcome (mRS ≤ 2) were younger age (P < .001), lower World Federation of Neurosurgical Societies grade (P < .001), absence of delayed infarction (P = .01), and management according to the CTP protocol (P = .01). Larger or multiple infarctions occurred significantly more often in group 1 compared with group 2 (88% versus 33% of all delayed infarctions, P = .03). The outcome in group 2 was significantly better compared with group 1 (P = .005).

CONCLUSIONS

The findings suggest that implementation of an elaborated CTP protocol is associated with a better outcome. An earlier initiation of further diagnostics and treatment with prevention of large territorial and/or multiple infarctions might have led to this finding.