Clinical study of midazolam sequential with dexmedetomidine for agitated patients undergoing weaning to implement light sedation in intensive care unit

Weaning-associated interventions for ventilated intensive care patients: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Mechanical ventilation is a core intervention in critical care, but may also lead to negative consequences. Therefore, ventilator weaning is crucial for patient recovery. Numerous weaning interventions have been investigated, but an overview of interventions to evaluate different foci on weaning research is still missing.

AIM

To provide an overview of interventions associated with ventilator weaning.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a scoping review. A systematic search of the Medline, CINAHL and Cochrane Library databases was carried out in May 2023. Interventions from studies or reviews that aimed to extubate or decannulate mechanically ventilated patients in intensive care units were included. Studies concerning children, outpatients or non-invasive ventilation were excluded. Screening and data extraction were conducted independently by three reviewers. Identified interventions were thematically analysed and clustered.

RESULTS

Of the 7175 records identified, 193 studies were included. A total of six clusters were formed: entitled enteral nutrition (three studies), tracheostomy (17 studies), physical treatment (13 studies), ventilation modes and settings (47 studies), intervention bundles (42 studies), and pharmacological interventions including analgesic agents (8 studies), sedative agents (53 studies) and other agents (15 studies).

CONCLUSIONS

Ventilator weaning is widely researched with a special focus on ventilation modes and pharmacological agents. Some aspects remain poorly researched or unaddressed (e.g. nutrition, delirium treatment, sleep promotion).

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

This review compiles studies on ventilator weaning interventions in thematic clusters, highlighting the need for multidisciplinary care and consideration of various interventions. Future research should combine different interventions and investigate their interconnection.

The Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock 2020 (J-SSCG 2020)

The Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock 2020 (J-SSCG 2020), a Japanese-specific set of clinical practice guidelines for sepsis and septic shock created as revised from J-SSCG 2016 jointly by the Japanese Society of Intensive Care Medicine and the Japanese Association for Acute Medicine, was first released in September 2020 and published in February 2021. An English-language version of these guidelines was created based on the contents of the original Japanese-language version. The purpose of this guideline is to assist medical staff in making appropriate decisions to improve the prognosis of patients undergoing treatment for sepsis and septic shock. We aimed to provide high-quality guidelines that are easy to use and understand for specialists, general clinicians, and multidisciplinary medical professionals. J-SSCG 2016 took up new subjects that were not present in SSCG 2016 (e.g., ICU-acquired weakness [ICU-AW], post-intensive care syndrome [PICS], and body temperature management). The J-SSCG 2020 covered a total of 22 areas with four additional new areas (patient- and family-centered care, sepsis treatment system, neuro-intensive treatment, and stress ulcers). A total of 118 important clinical issues (clinical questions, CQs) were extracted regardless of the presence or absence of evidence. These CQs also include those that have been given particular focus within Japan. This is a large-scale guideline covering multiple fields; thus, in addition to the 25 committee members, we had the participation and support of a total of 226 members who are professionals (physicians, nurses, physiotherapists, clinical engineers, and pharmacists) and medical workers with a history of sepsis or critical illness. The GRADE method was adopted for making recommendations, and the modified Delphi method was used to determine recommendations by voting from all committee members.As a result, 79 GRADE-based recommendations, 5 Good Practice Statements (GPS), 18 expert consensuses, 27 answers to background questions (BQs), and summaries of definitions and diagnosis of sepsis were created as responses to 118 CQs. We also incorporated visual information for each CQ according to the time course of treatment, and we will also distribute this as an app. The J-SSCG 2020 is expected to be widely used as a useful bedside guideline in the field of sepsis treatment both in Japan and overseas involving multiple disciplines.

The Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock 2020 (J-SSCG 2020)

The Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock 2020 (J-SSCG 2020), a Japanese-specific set of clinical practice guidelines for sepsis and septic shock created as revised from J-SSCG 2016 jointly by the Japanese Society of Intensive Care Medicine and the Japanese Association for Acute Medicine, was first released in September 2020 and published in February 2021. An English-language version of these guidelines was created based on the contents of the original Japanese-language version. The purpose of this guideline is to assist medical staff in making appropriate decisions to improve the prognosis of patients undergoing treatment for sepsis and septic shock. We aimed to provide high-quality guidelines that are easy to use and understand for specialists, general clinicians, and multidisciplinary medical professionals. J-SSCG 2016 took up new subjects that were not present in SSCG 2016 (e.g., ICU-acquired weakness [ICU-AW], post-intensive care syndrome [PICS], and body temperature management). The J-SSCG 2020 covered a total of 22 areas with four additional new areas (patient- and family-centered care, sepsis treatment system, neuro-intensive treatment, and stress ulcers). A total of 118 important clinical issues (clinical questions, CQs) were extracted regardless of the presence or absence of evidence. These CQs also include those that have been given particular focus within Japan. This is a large-scale guideline covering multiple fields; thus, in addition to the 25 committee members, we had the participation and support of a total of 226 members who are professionals (physicians, nurses, physiotherapists, clinical engineers, and pharmacists) and medical workers with a history of sepsis or critical illness. The GRADE method was adopted for making recommendations, and the modified Delphi method was used to determine recommendations by voting from all committee members. As a result, 79 GRADE-based recommendations, 5 Good Practice Statements (GPS), 18 expert consensuses, 27 answers to background questions (BQs), and summaries of definitions and diagnosis of sepsis were created as responses to 118 CQs. We also incorporated visual information for each CQ according to the time course of treatment, and we will also distribute this as an app. The J-SSCG 2020 is expected to be widely used as a useful bedside guideline in the field of sepsis treatment both in Japan and overseas involving multiple disciplines.

Effect of dexmedetomidine on delirium during sedation in adult patients in intensive care units: A systematic review and meta-analysis

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To compare the effect of sedation protocols with and without dexmedetomidine on delirium risk and duration in adult patients in intensive care units (ICUs).

DESIGN

A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

REVIEW METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, EMBASE, and ISI Web of Science from inception to September 3, 2020. We included studies comparing the effect of dexmedetomidine-based sedation on delirium risk with non-dexmedetomidine-based sedation in adult patients in ICUs. We pooled the data using a random-effects model using Review Manager 5.2, and assessed publication bias using Stata 11.0. The quality of evidence was rated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 36 studies involving 9623 participants. The use of dexmedetomidine was associated with reduced risk of delirium (risk ratio [RR], 0.63; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.54-0.75; very low-quality evidence), but higher incidences of hypotension and bradycardia during hospital stay. Dexmedetomidine was also associated with shorter durations of ICU stay, hospital stay and mechanical ventilation. Dexmedetomidine did not affect ICU mortality (RR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.89-1.14; low-quality evidence), hospital mortality (RR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.91-1.12; very low-quality evidence), or 30-day mortality (RR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.58-1.01; moderate-quality evidence), or duration of delirium (mean difference, -0.74 days; 95% CI, -1.83 to 0.36 days; very low-quality evidence). We identified publication bias for risk and duration of delirium, length of ICU stay, and hospital stay.

CONCLUSIONS

Low- or very low-quality evidence suggests that dexmedetomidine was associated with a clinically-small reduction of delirium risk, ICU/hospital stay and mechanical ventilation duration, but were not associated with improved mortality or shorter delirium duration in ICU patients. These findings were inconclusive because of publication bias, heterogeneity, and limited sample size. Significant adverse effects of dexmedetomidine include hypotension and bradycardia. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42018095358.

Dexmedetomidine for Facilitating Mechanical Ventilation Extubation in Difficult-to-Wean ICU Patients: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Clinical Trials

BACKGROUND

Agitation and delirium are common in mechanically ventilated adult intensive care unit (ICU) patients and may contribute to delayed extubation times. Difficult-to-wean ICU patients have been associated with an increased risk of longer ICU length of stays and mortality. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to evaluate the evidence of dexmedetomidine facilitating successful mechanical ventilation extubation in difficult-to-wean ICU patients and clinical outcomes.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Global Health, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Clinical Trial Registries, and the Health Technology Assessment Database from inception to December 5, 2019. Randomized controlled trials evaluating dexmedetomidine with the intended purpose to facilitate mechanical ventilation liberation in adult ICU patients (≥18 years) experiencing extubation failure were included. The primary outcome of time to extubation was evaluated using the weighted mean difference (WMD), with a random effects model. Secondary analyses included hospital and ICU length of stay, in-hospital mortality, hypotension, and bradycardia.

RESULTS

A total of 6 trials (n = 306 patients) were included. Dexmedetomidine significantly reduced the time to extubation (WMD: -11.61 hours, 95% CI: -16.5 to -6.7, P = .005) and ICU length of stay (WMD: -3.04 days; 95% CI: -4.66 to -1.43). Hypotension risk was increased with dexmedetomidine (risk ratio [RR]: 1.62, 95% CI: 1.05-2.51), but there was no difference in bradycardia risk (RR: 3.98, 95% CI: 0.70-22.78). No differences were observed in mortality rates (RR: 1.30, 95% CI: 0.45-3.75) or hospital length of stay (WMD: -2.67 days; 95% CI: -7.73 to 2.39).

CONCLUSIONS

Dexmedetomidine was associated with a significant reduction in the time to extubation and shorter ICU stay in difficult-to-wean ICU patients. Although hypotension risk was increased with dexmedetomidine, no differences in other clinical outcomes were observed.

A systematic review of interventions to facilitate extubation in patients difficult-to-wean due to delirium, agitation, or anxiety and a meta-analysis of the effect of dexmedetomidine

BACKGROUND

Delirium, agitation, and anxiety may hinder weaning from mechanical ventilation and lead to increased morbidity and healthcare costs. The most appropriate clinical approach to weaning in these contexts remains unclear and challenging to clinicians. The objective of this systematic review was to identify effective and safe interventions to wean patients that are difficult-to-wean from mechanical ventilation due to delirium, agitation, or anxiety.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PubMed. Studies evaluating mechanically ventilated patients deemed difficult-to-wean due to delirium, agitation, or anxiety, and comparing the effects of an intervention with a comparator arm were sought. Time-to-extubation was the primary outcome while the secondary outcome was intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay.

RESULTS

From 10,860 studies identified, eight met the inclusion criteria: six studies assessed dexmedetomidine while the remaining two assessed loxapine and biofeedback. Pooled analysis of studies assessing dexmedetomidine showed reduced time-to-extubation (six studies, n = 303) by 10.9 hr compared with controls (95% confidence interval [CI], -15.7 to -6.1; I² = 68%) and ICU length of stay (four studies, n = 191) by 2.6 days (95% CI, 1.9 to 3.3; I² = 0%). Nevertheless, the evidence was deemed to be of low quality given the small sample sizes and high heterogeneity. Studies assessing other interventions did not identify improvements compared with controls. Safety assessment was globally poorly reported.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review and meta-analysis provides low quality evidence to suggest the use of dexmedetomidine in patients deemed difficult-to-wean due to agitation, delirium, or anxiety. Insufficient evidence was found regarding other interventions to provide any recommendation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO (CRD42016042528); registered 15 July, 2016.