Propofol is associated with favorable outcomes compared with benzodiazepines in ventilated intensive care unit patients

Inhaled sedation versus propofol in respiratory failure in the ICU (INSPiRE-ICU2): study protocol for a multicenter randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Patients undergoing invasive mechanical ventilation often require pharmacologic sedation to facilitate tolerance of this life-sustaining intervention, but sedatives currently used in routine care have substantial limitations. Isoflurane is an inhaled volatile anesthetic with pharmacologic properties potentially suitable to sedation of ventilator-dependent critically ill patients, but need for specialized drug administration equipment has limited its use historically to general anesthesia in the operating theatre. This trial will evaluate isoflurane, administered using a novel drug delivery system, for sedation of ventilator-dependent adult intensive care unit (ICU) patients in the United States (US).

METHODS

The Inhaled Sedation versus Propofol in Respiratory Failure in the ICU (INSPiRE-ICU2) is a phase 3, multicenter, randomized, controlled, assessor-blinded non-inferiority trial that will evaluate efficacy and safety of inhaled isoflurane delivered via the Sedaconda ACD-S, compared to intravenous propofol, for sedation of mechanically ventilated adult ICU patients. At 16 US hospitals, 235 enrolled patients requiring continuous sedation during invasive mechanical ventilation will be randomized in 1.5:1 ratio to inhaled isoflurane or intravenous propofol for sedation. Treatment duration is expected to be at least 12 h and may last up to 48 (± 6) h or until no longer needing continuous sedation, whichever occurs first. The primary endpoint is the percentage of time sedation depth is maintained within the targeted range (Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale - 1 to - 4), in the absence of rescue sedation, during the treatment period. Secondary superiority outcomes include opioid exposure, wake-up time, cognitive recovery after end-of-treatment, and preservation of spontaneous breathing effort.

DISCUSSION

The INSPiRE-ICU2 trial will help determine the potential role of isoflurane for sedation of ventilator-dependent adult patients in the ICU. Key trial design features, including adoption of the estimand framework and blinded assessments of sedation depth, pain, and cognitive recovery, will ensure a rigorous evaluation of isoflurane for ICU sedation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05327296. First registered on April 5, 2022.

Propofol, Triglycerides, and Acute Pancreatitis: A Multicenter Epidemiologic Analysis

Rationale: Propofol is one of the first-line sedative-hypnotic agents for critically ill adults requiring mechanical ventilation. Although propofol can elevate triglyceride levels, and the latter is a risk factor for pancreatitis, the association between propofol and acute pancreatitis is unclear. Objectives: We sought to determine the clinical impact and potential associations between propofol infusion, hypertriglyceridemia, and acute pancreatitis. Methods: This is an observational multicenter study of adults (⩾18 yr old) who were admitted to an intensive care unit, who required mechanical ventilation and received continuous propofol infusion for at least 24 hours. The primary outcomes were the frequency of hypertriglyceridemia (>400 mg/dl) and acute pancreatitis. Further analyses were done to determine the clinical impact of elevated triglyceride levels (i.e., sedation changes) and risk factors for pancreatitis development. Results: Of 11,828 patients included, 33.2% (n = 3,922) had triglyceride levels measured, of whom 21.7% (n = 851) had hypertriglyceridemia at 4.5 days (SD = 6.8) after propofol initiation. Of those still requiring sedation, 70.4% (n = 576/818) received alternative sedatives after developing hypertriglyceridemia. Pancreatitis occurred in 1.2% of patients (n = 47/3,922) and was more frequent in those with hypertriglyceridemia (3.2%, 27/851; vs. 0.7%, 20/3,071; P < 0.001). After adjustment for potential confounding variables, each 100 mg/dl increase in triglyceride levels was associated with an 11% increase in risk of pancreatitis. Propofol dose was not associated with pancreatitis development. Conclusions: Acute pancreatitis is uncommon in patients receiving propofol infusion, and it occurs over a wide range of triglyceride levels, indicating a multifactorial pathophysiology. Hypertriglyceridemia frequently prompts the use of alternative sedatives. Further study is needed to determine how to best monitor and treat hypertriglyceridemia in critically ill patients receiving propofol infusion.

Optimizing Sedation Strategies in the Cardiac ICU: Induction, Maintenance and Weaning

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

We aim to summarize the available literature guiding tailored sedation practices for specific conditions encountered in the Cardiovascular Intensive Care Unit (CICU).

RECENT FINDINGS

Data specific for the CICU population is lacking. Preclinical data and observational studies guide sedation approaches for specific pathologies that we have used to generate a guideline for sedative choice for various scenarios. We discuss the challenges associated with extubation and highlight the importance of spontaneous breathing trials and role of non invasive ventilation. Understanding the underlying pathology and the effects of sedation and positive pressure ventilation is the base to guide induction and sedation management for patients in the CICU. There is a pressing need for further research to generate high quality clinical data to improve sedation techniques in the CICU.

Management of pain and sedation in the intensive care unit

Advances in our approach to treating pain and sedation when caring for patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) have been propelled by decades of robust trial data, knowledge gained from patient experiences, and our evolving understanding of how pain and sedation strategies affect patient survival and long term outcomes. These data contribute to current practice guidelines prioritizing analgesia-first sedation strategies (analgosedation) that target light sedation when possible, use of short acting sedatives, and avoidance of benzodiazepines. Together, these strategies allow the patient to be more awake and able to participate in early mobilization and family interactions. The covid-19 pandemic introduced unique challenges in the ICU that affected delivery of best practices and patient outcomes. Compliance with best practices has not returned to pre-covid levels. After emerging from the pandemic and refocusing our attention on optimal pain and sedation management in the ICU, it is imperative to revisit the data that contributed to our current recommendations, review the importance of best practices on patient outcomes, and consider new strategies when advancing patient care.

INhaled Sedation versus Propofol in REspiratory failure in the Intensive Care Unit (INSPiRE-ICU1): protocol for a randomised, controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Sedation in mechanically ventilated adults in the intensive care unit (ICU) is commonly achieved with intravenous infusions of propofol, dexmedetomidine or benzodiazepines. Significant limitations associated with each can impact their usage. Inhaled isoflurane has potential benefit for ICU sedation due to its safety record, sedation profile, lack of metabolism and accumulation, and fast wake-up time. Administration in the ICU has historically been restricted by the lack of a safe and effective delivery system for the ICU. The Sedaconda Anaesthetic Conserving Device-S (Sedaconda ACD-S) has enabled the delivery of inhaled volatile anaesthetics for sedation with standard ICU ventilators, but it has not yet been rigorously evaluated in the USA. We aim to evaluate the efficacy and safety of inhaled isoflurane delivered via the Sedaconda ACD-S compared with intravenous propofol for sedation of mechanically ventilated ICU adults in USA hospitals.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

INhaled Sedation versus Propofol in REspiratory failure in the ICU (INSPiRE-ICU1) is a phase 3, multicentre, randomised, controlled, open-label, assessor-blinded trial that aims to enrol 235 critically ill adults in 14 hospitals across the USA. Eligible patients are randomised in a 1.5:1 ratio for a treatment duration of up to 48 (±6) hours or extubation, whichever occurs first, with primary follow-up period of 30 days and additional follow-up to 6 months. Primary outcome is percentage of time at target sedation range. Key secondary outcomes include use of opioids during treatment, spontaneous breathing efforts during treatment, wake-up time at end of treatment and cognitive recovery after treatment.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Trial protocol has been approved by US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and central (Advarra SSU00208265) or local institutional review boards ((IRB), Cleveland Clinic IRB FWA 00005367, Tufts HS IRB 20221969, Houston Methodist IRB PRO00035247, Mayo Clinic IRB Mod22-001084-08, University of Chicago IRB21-1917-AM011 and Intermountain IRB 033175). Results will be presented at scientific conferences, submitted for publication, and provided to the FDA.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05312385.

Propofol vs Midazolam As the Initial Sedation Strategy for Mechanically Ventilated Patients: A Single-Center Experience From Saudi Arabia

Background Propofol and midazolam are the most common sedative agents used in critical settings. Propofol and midazolam might have different mortality rates after sedation administration. Some studies mention that propofol is associated with a lower mortality rate than midazolam in mechanically ventilated patients, but other studies have contradicting results. This study aims to compare the 28-day mortality of propofol versus midazolam for patients undergoing mechanical ventilation in the National Guard Hospital Health Affairs (NGHA)-Western Region (WR). Methods A retrospective chart review was conducted at (NGHA-WR) from March 2016 to July 2022. The inclusion criteria were those mechanically ventilated patients aged 18 years or older who were admitted to ICU, where they were given either propofol or midazolam as the initial sedative agent. Those who signed DNR (Do Not Resuscitate) or were contraindicated to sedation, such as allergy, were excluded from the study. Data were retrospectively retrieved and obtained from the Hospital Information System (HIS-BestCare, Saudi-Korean Health Informatics Company, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia) and the Office of Data Intelligence. Results There is a significant difference between the type of sedation and the 28-day mortality rate. Midazolam was associated with higher rates of mortality - 104 (47.93%) when compared to propofol - three (14.29%). Also, patients who used midazolam had longer durations of ICU stay compared to propofol, with a mean number of 19.23 days vs 7.55 days, respectively. Conclusion There is a significant difference regarding the 28-day mortality between patients who were given propofol or midazolam as an initial sedative agent for mechanical ventilation ≥ 24 hours. Moreover, the use of propofol is associated with fewer days of being intubated or being in ICU when compared to midazolam.

Sevoflurane alleviates lung injury and inflammatory response compared with propofol in a rat model of VV ECMO

INTRODUCTION

Although venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) is a reasonable salvage treatment for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), it requires sedating the patient. Sevoflurane and propofol have pulmonary protective and immunomodulatory properties. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of sevoflurane and propofol on rats with induced ARDS undergoing VV ECMO.

METHODS

Fifteen sprague-dawley (SD) rats were randomly divided into three groups: Con group, sevoflurane (Sevo) group and propofol (Pro) group. Arterial blood gas tests were performed at time pointsT0 (baseline), T1 (the time to ARDS), and T2 (weaning from ECMO). Oxygenation index (PaO2/FiO2) was calculated, and lung edema assessed by determining the lung wet:dry ratio. The protein concentration in bronchial alveolar lavage fluid (BALF) was determined by using bicinchoninic acid assay. Haematoxylin and eosin staining was used to evaluate the lung pathological scores in each group. IL-1β and TNF-α were also measured in the BALF, serum and lung.

RESULTS

Oxygenation index showed improvement in the Sevo group versus Pro group. The wet:dry ratio was reduced in the Sevo group compared with propofol-treated rats. Lung pathological scores were substantially lower in the Sevo group versus the Pro group. Protein concentrations in the BALF and levels of IL-1β and TNF-α in the Sevo group were substantially lower versus Pro group.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates that compared with propofol, sevoflurane was more efficacious in improving oxygenation and decreasing inflammatory response in rat models with ARDS subject to VV ECMO treatment.

Sedation for Patients with Sepsis: Towards a Personalised Approach

This article looks at the challenges of sedoanalgesia for sepsis patients, and argues for a personalised approach. Sedation is a necessary part of treatment for patients in intensive care to reduce stress and anxiety and improve long-term prognoses. Sepsis patients present particular difficulties as they are at increased risk of a wide range of complications, such as multiple organ failure, neurological dysfunction, septic shock, ARDS, abdominal compartment syndrome, vasoplegic syndrome, and myocardial dysfunction. The development of any one of these complications can cause the patient's rapid deterioration, and each has distinct implications in terms of appropriate and safe forms of sedation. In this way, the present article reviews the sedative and analgesic drugs commonly used in the ICU and, placing special emphasis on their strategic administration in sepsis patients, develops a set of proposals for sedoanalgesia aimed at improving outcomes for this group of patients. These proposals represent a move away from simplistic approaches like avoiding benzodiazepines to more "objective-guided sedation" that accounts for a patient's principal pathology, as well as any comorbidities, and takes full advantage of the therapeutic arsenal currently available to achieve personalised, patient-centred treatment goals.

Outcomes of critically ill older adults with COVID-19: a multicentre retrospective cohort study

PURPOSE

Older adults with COVID-19 have a high prevalence of complications and mortality during hospitalization. Given the large proportion of older adults requiring admission to an intensive care unit (ICU), we aimed to describe the management and outcomes of older adults with COVID-19 requiring ICU care and identify predictors of hospital mortality.

METHODS

We included consecutive patients ≥ 65 yr of age who were admitted between 11 March 2020 and 30 June 2021 to one of five Toronto (ON, Canada) ICUs with a primary diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection in a retrospective cohort study. Patient characteristics, ICU treatment, and outcomes were recorded. We used multivariable logistic regression to identify predictors of in-hospital mortality.

RESULTS

Of the 273 patients, the median [interquartile range] age was 74 [69-80] yr, 104 (38.1%) were female, and 164 (60.1%) required invasive mechanical ventilation. One hundred and forty-two patients (52.0%) survived their hospital stay. Compared with survivors, nonsurvivors were older (74 [70-82] yr vs 73 [68-78] yr; P = 0.03), and a smaller proportion was female (39/131, 29.8% vs 65/142, 45.8%; P = 0.01). Patients had long hospital (19 [11-35] days) and ICU (9 [5-22] days) stays, with no significant differences in ICU length of stay or duration of invasive mechanical ventilation between the two groups. Higher APACHE II score, increasing age, and the need for organ support were independently associated with higher in-hospital mortality while female sex was associated with lower mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Older critically ill COVID-19 patients had long ICU and hospital stays, and approximately half died in hospital. Further research is needed to identify individuals who will benefit most from an ICU admission and to evaluate posthospitalization outcomes.

Efficacy and safety of propofol target-controlled infusion combined with butorphanol for sedated colonoscopy

BACKGROUND

Propofol is a short-acting, rapid-recovering anesthetic widely used in sedated colonoscopy for the early detection, diagnosis and treatment of colon diseases. However, the use of propofol alone may require high doses to achieve the induction of anesthesia in sedated colonoscopy, which has been associated with anesthesia-related adverse events (AEs), including hypoxemia, sinus bradycardia, and hypotension. Therefore, propofol co-administrated with other anesthetics has been proposed to reduce the required dose of propofol, enhance the efficacy, and improve the satisfaction of patients receiving colonoscopy under sedation.

AIM

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of propofol target-controlled infusion (TCI) in combination with butorphanol for sedation during colonoscopy.

METHODS

In this controlled clinical trial, a total of 106 patients, who were scheduled for sedated colonoscopy, were prospectively recruited and assigned into three groups to receive different doses of butorphanol before propofol TCI: Low-dose butorphanol group (5 μg/kg, group B1), high-dose butorphanol group (10 μg/kg, group B2), and control group (normal saline, group C). Anesthesia was achieved by propofol TCI. The primary outcome was the median effective concentration (EC50) of propofol TCI, which was measured using the up-and-down sequential method. The secondary outcomes included AEs in perianesthesia and recovery characteristics.

RESULTS

The EC50 of propofol for TCI was 3.03 μg/mL [95% confidence interval (CI): 2.83-3.23 μg/mL] in group B2, 3.41 μg/mL (95%CI: 3.20-3.62 μg/mL) in group B1, and 4.05 μg/mL (95%CI: 3.78-4.34 μg/mL) in group C. The amount of propofol necessary for anesthesia was 132 mg [interquartile range (IQR), 125-144.75 mg] in group B2 and 142 mg (IQR, 135-154 mg) in group B1. Furthermore, the awakening concentration was 1.1 μg/mL (IQR, 0.9-1.2 μg/mL) in group B2 and 1.2 μg/mL (IQR, 1.025-1.5 μg/mL) in group B1. Notably, the propofol TCI plus butorphanol groups (groups B1 and B2) had a lower incidence of anesthesia AEs, when compared to group C. Furthermore, no significant differences were observed in the rates of AEs in perianesthesia, including hypoxemia, sinus bradycardia, hypotension, nausea and vomiting, and vertigo, among group C, group B1 and group B2.

CONCLUSION

The combined use with butorphanol reduces the EC50 of propofol TCI for anesthesia. The decrease in propofol might contribute to the reduced anesthesia-related AEs in patients undergoing sedated colonoscopy.

Liberation From Mechanical Ventilation in the Cardiac Intensive Care Unit

The prevalence of respiratory failure is increasing in the contemporary cardiac intensive care unit (CICU) and is associated with a significant increase in morbidity and mortality. For patients that survive their initial respiratory decompensation, liberation from invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) and the decision to extubate requires careful clinical assessment and planning. Therefore, it is essential for the CICU clinician to know how to assess and manage the various stages of IMV liberation, including ventilator weaning, evaluation of extubation readiness, and provide post-extubation care. In this review, we provide a comprehensive approach to liberation from IMV in the CICU, including cardiopulmonary interactions relative to withdrawal from positive pressure ventilation, evaluation of readiness for and assessment of spontaneous breathing trials, sedation management to optimize extubation, strategies for patients at a high risk for extubation failure, and tracheostomy in the cardiovascular patient.

Time-of-day dependent effects of midazolam administration on myocardial injury in non-cardiac surgery

Background

Animal studies have shown that midazolam can increase vulnerability to cardiac ischemia, potentially via circadian-mediated mechanisms. We hypothesized that perioperative midazolam administration is associated with an increased incidence of myocardial injury in patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery (MINS) and that circadian biology may underlie this relationship.

Methods

We analyzed intraoperative data from the Multicenter Perioperative Outcomes Group for the occurrence of MINS across 50 institutions from 2014 to 2019. The primary outcome was the occurrence of MINS. MINS was defined as having at least one troponin-I lab value ≥0.03 ng/ml from anesthesia start to 72 h after anesthesia end. To account for bias, propensity scores and inverse probability of treatment weighting were applied.

Results

A total of 1,773,118 cases were available for analysis. Of these subjects, 951,345 (53.7%) received midazolam perioperatively, and 16,404 (0.93%) met criteria for perioperative MINS. There was no association between perioperative midazolam administration and risk of MINS in the study population as a whole (odds ratio (OR) 0.98, confidence interval (CI) [0.94, 1.01]). However, we found a strong association between midazolam administration and risk of MINS when surgery occurred overnight (OR 3.52, CI [3.10, 4.00]) or when surgery occurred in ASA 1 or 2 patients (OR 1.25, CI [1.13, 1.39]).

Conclusion

Perioperative midazolam administration may not pose a significant risk for MINS occurrence. However, midazolam administration at night and in healthier patients could increase MINS, which warrants further clinical investigation with an emphasis on circadian biology.

Pharmacologic Management of Delirium in the Intensive Care Unit

Delirium, often underdiagnosed in the intensive care unit, is a common complication of critical illness that contributes to significant morbidity and mortality. Clinicians should be aware of common risk factors and triggers and should work to mitigate these as much as possible to reduce the occurrence of delirium. This review first provides an overview of the epidemiology, pathophysiology, evaluation, and consequences of delirium in critically ill patients. Presented next is the current evidence for the pharmacologic management of delirium, focusing on prevention and treatment of delirium in the intensive care unit. It concludes by outlining some emerging treatments of delirium.

Effect of midazolam on delirium in critically ill patients: a propensity score analysis

Objective

To observe the association between exposure to midazolam within 24 hours prior to delirium assessment and the risk of delirium.

Methods

We performed a systematic cohort study with two sets of cohorts to estimate the relative risks of outcomes among patients administered midazolam within 24 hours prior to delirium assessment. Propensity score matching was performed to generate a balanced 1:1 matched cohort and identify potential prognostic factors. The outcomes included the odds of delirium, mortality, length of intensive care unit stay, length of hospitalization, and odds of being discharged home.

Results

A total of 78,364 patients were included in this study, of whom 22,159 (28.28%) had positive records. Propensity matching successfully balanced covariates for 9348 patients (4674 per group). Compared with no administration of midazolam, midazolam administration was associated with a significantly higher risk of delirium, higher mortality, and a longer intensive care unit stay. Patients treated with midazolam were relatively less likely to be discharged home. There was no significant difference in hospitalization duration.

Conclusions

Midazolam may be an independent risk factor for delirium in critically ill patients.

Outcomes in Temporary ICUs Versus Conventional ICUs: An Observational Cohort of Mechanically Ventilated Patients With COVID-19-Induced Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome

Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, thousands of temporary ICUs have been established worldwide. The outcomes and management of mechanically ventilated patients in these areas remain unknown.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate mortality and management of mechanically ventilated patients in temporary ICUs.

DESIGN SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Observational cohort study in a single-institution academic center. We included all adult patients with severe COVID-19 hospitalized in temporary and conventional ICUs for invasive mechanical ventilation due to acute respiratory distress syndrome from March 23, 2020, to April 5, 2021.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

To determine if management in temporary ICUs increased 30-day in-hospital mortality compared with conventional ICUs. Ventilator-free days, ICU-free days (both at 28 d), hospital length of stay, and ICU readmission were also assessed.

RESULTS

We included 776 patients (326 conventional and 450 temporary ICUs). Thirty-day in-hospital unadjusted mortality (28.8% conventional vs 36.0% temporary, log-rank test p = 0.023) was higher in temporary ICUs. After controlling for potential confounders, hospitalization in temporary ICUs was an independent risk factor associated with mortality (hazard ratio, 1.4; CI, 1.06-1.83; p = 0.016).There were no differences in ICU-free days at 28 days (6; IQR, 0-16 vs 2; IQR, 0-15; p = 0.5) or ventilator-free days at 28 days (8; IQR, 0-16 vs 5; IQR, 0-15; p = 0.6). We observed higher reintubation (18% vs 12%; p = 0.029) and readmission (5% vs 1.6%; p = 0.004) rates in conventional ICUs despite higher use of postextubation noninvasive mechanical ventilation (13% vs 8%; p = 0.025). Use of lung-protective ventilation (87% vs 85%; p = 0.5), prone positioning (76% vs 79%; p = 0.4), neuromuscular blockade (96% vs 98%; p = 0.4), and COVID-19 pharmacologic treatment was similar.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

We observed a higher 30-day in-hospital mortality in temporary ICUs. Although both areas had high adherence to evidence-based management, hospitalization in temporary ICUs was an independent risk factor associated with mortality.

Immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome: A therapeutic approach in the critically ill

Immunotherapy with chimeric antigen-specific receptor modified T cells, known as CAR-T, is emerging as a promising approach to hematological malignancies. In this regard, CAR-T against human cluster of differentiation (CD) 19 has demonstrated antitumor efficacy in application to B cell neoplasms resistant to conventional therapy. However, activation of the immune system induces severe and specific complications which can prove life-threatening. These include cytokine release syndrome and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (known as ICANS) - the latter being the subject of the present review. Although the physiopathological mechanisms underlying ICANS are not well known, a number of clinical and biological factors increase the risk of developing neurotoxicity associated to CAR-T therapy. Treatment is based on close monitoring, measures of support, anticonvulsivants, corticosteroids, and early admission to intensive care. The present study offers a comprehensive review of the available literature from a multidisciplinary perspective, including recommendations from intensivists, neurologists and hematologists dedicated to the care of critically ill adults.

Variations in analgesic, sedation, and delirium management between trauma and non-trauma critically ill children

INTRODUCTION

Studies have shown the benefit of intensive care unit (ICU) bundled protocols; however, they are primarily derived from medical patients. We hypothesized that patients and their medication profiles are different between critically ill medical, surgical, and trauma patients.

METHODS

The Pediatric Health Information System 2017 dataset was used to perform a retrospective cohort study of critically ill children. The pediatric medical, surgical, and trauma cohorts were separated based on ICD-10 codes. Data collected included demographics, secondary diagnoses, outcomes, and medication data. Medications were grouped as opiates, GABA-agonists, alpha-2 agonists, anti-psychotics, paralytics, and "other" sedatives. A non-parametric Kolmogorov-Smirnov test (KS test) and odds ratios (reference group: medical cohort) were calculated to compare medication administration between the study cohorts for the first 30 ICU days.

RESULTS

A total of 4488 critically ill children (medical 2078, surgical 1650, and trauma 760) were identified. The trauma cohort had increased incidence of delirium (medical 10.8%, surgical 11.5%, trauma 13.8%; p < 0.01) and mortality (medical 5.4%, surgical 2.4%, trauma 11.7%; p < 0.01). For all study cohorts, > 50% received GABA-agonists on ICU days 0-30. With the KS test, there was a significant difference in administration of opiates, GABA-agonists, alpha-2 agonists, anti-psychotics, and "other" sedatives over the first 30 days in the ICU. Relative to medical patients, trauma patients had significantly higher odds of receiving anti-psychotics on ICU days 10-20 and 22-24.

CONCLUSION

Critically ill pediatric trauma, medical, and surgical patients are distinctly different patient populations with differing pharmacologic profiles for analgesia, sedation, and delirium.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III (Retrospective Comparative Study).

Prior benzodiazepine use and mortality among adult patients with sepsis: A retrospective population-based cohort study in South Korea

OBJECTIVES

This study investigated whether long-term benzodiazepine use is associated with increased 90-day mortality among patients with sepsis.

METHODS

A retrospective population-based cohort study based on health records obtained from the National Health Insurance Service database in South Korea was conducted. All adult patients (≥18 years) admitted to the hospital with a primary diagnosis of sepsis or septic shock during 2010-2018 were included in the study. Sepsis and septic shock were diagnosed based on the International Classification of Diseases (10th revision: A40, A41 and R65.2). Benzodiazepine users were defined as individuals who were prescribed regular benzodiazepine continuously for over 6 months before admission.

RESULTS

A total of 251 837 patients with sepsis were included in this study, 16 686 of which (6.6%) were benzodiazepine users, and 235 151 (93.4%) were non-users. After propensity score (PS) matching, 33 370 patients (16 685 in both groups) were ultimately included. Moreover, following PS matching, the 90-day mortality among benzodiazepine users and non-users was 60.9% (10 167) and 41.4% (6916), respectively. Cox regression analysis further revealed the hazard ratio (HR) for 90-day mortality in benzodiazepine users to be 1.75, compared with non-users [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.70-1.81; P < .001]. Sensitivity analyses showed that, compared with non-users, HRs for 90-day mortality in benzodiazepine users without and with other psychiatric illnesses were 1.43 (95% CI: 1.38-1.49; P < .001) and 1.89 (95% CI: 1.84-1.94; P < .001), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Long-term benzodiazepine use is associated with increased 90-day mortality among adult patients with sepsis compared with non-users. This association was more evident in benzodiazepine users with other psychiatric diseases, such as depression or anxiety disorder.

Effect of Sedatives on In-hospital and Long-term Mortality of Critically Ill Patients Requiring Extended Mechanical Ventilation for ≥ 48 Hours

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to assess the correlation between sedatives and mortality in critically ill patients who required mechanical ventilation (MV) for ≥ 48 hours from 2008 to 2016.

METHODS

We conducted a nationwide retrospective cohort study using population-based healthcare reimbursement claims database. Data from adult patients (aged ≥ 18) who underwent MV for ≥ 48 hours between 2008 and 2016 were identified and extracted from the National Health Insurance Service database. The benzodiazepine group consisted of patients who were administered benzodiazepines for sedation during MV. All other patients were assigned to the non-benzodiazepine group.

RESULTS

A total of 158,712 patients requiring MV for ≥ 48 hours were admitted in 55 centers in Korea from 2008 to 2016. The benzodiazepine group had significantly higher in-hospital and one-year mortality compared to the non-benzodiazepine group (37.0% vs. 34.3%, 55.0% vs. 54.4%, respectively). Benzodiazepine use decreased from 2008 to 2016, after adjusting for age, sex, and mean Elixhauser comorbidity index in the Poisson regression analysis (incidence rate ratio, 0.968; 95% confident interval, 0.954-0.983; P < 0.001). Benzodiazepine use, older age, lower case volume (≤ 500 cases/year), chronic kidney disease, and higher Elixhauser comorbidity index were common significant risk factors for in-hospital and one-year mortality.

CONCLUSION

In critically ill patients undergoing MV for ≥ 48 hour, the use of benzodiazepines for sedation, older age, and chronic kidney disease were associated with higher in-hospital mortality and one-year mortality. Further studies are needed to evaluate the impact of benzodiazepines on the mortality in elderly patients with chronic kidney disease requiring MV for ≥ 48 hours.

Sedation strategy and ICU delirium: a multicentre, population-based propensity score-matched cohort study

OBJECTIVES

We examined the relationship between dominant sedation strategy, risk of delirium and patient-centred outcomes in adults admitted to intensive care units (ICUs).

DESIGN

Retrospective propensity-matched cohort study.

SETTING

Mechanically ventilated adults (≥ 18 years) admitted to four Canadian hospital medical/surgical ICUs from 2014 to 2016 in Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

PARTICIPANTS

2837 mechanically ventilated adults (≥ 18 years) requiring admission to a medical/surgical ICU were evaluated for the relationship between sedation strategy and delirium.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary exposure was dominant sedation strategy, defined as the sedative infusion, including midazolam, propofol or fentanyl, with the longest duration before the first delirium assessment. The primary outcome was 'ever delirium' identified using the Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist. Secondary outcomes included mortality, length of stay (LOS), ventilation duration and days with delirium. The cohort was analysed in two propensity score (patient characteristics and therapies received) matched cohorts (propofol vs fentanyl and propofol vs midazolam).

RESULTS

2837 patients (60.7% male; median age 57 years (IQR 43-68)) were considered for propensity matching. In propensity score-matched cohorts(propofol vs midazolam, n=712; propofol vs fentanyl, n=1732), the odds of delirium were significantly higher with midazolam (OR 1.46 (95% CI 1.06 to 2.00)) and fentanyl (OR 1.22 (95% CI 1.00 to 1.48)) compared with propofol dominant sedation strategies. Dominant sedation strategy with midazolam and fentanyl were associated with a longer duration of ventilation compared with propofol. Fentanyl was also associated with increased ICU mortality (OR 1.50, 95% CI 1.07 to 2.12)) ICU and hospital LOS compared with a propofol dominant sedation strategy.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified a novel association between fentanyl dominant sedation strategies and an increased risk of delirium, a composite outcome of delirium or death, duration of mechanical ventilation, ICU LOS and hospital LOS. Midazolam dominant sedation strategies were associated with increased delirium risk and mechanical ventilation duration.

Assessment and Management of Delirium in the Pediatric Intensive Care Unit: A Review

Many critically ill patients suffer from delirium which is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. There is a paucity of data about the incidence, symptoms, or treatment of delirium in the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU). Risk factors for delirium are common in the PICU including central nervous system immaturity, developmental delay, mechanical ventilation, and use of anticholinergic agents, corticosteroids, vasopressors, opioids, or benzodiazepines. Hypoactive delirium is the most common subtype in pediatric patients; however, hyperactive delirium has also been reported. Various screening tools are validated in the pediatric population, with the Cornell Assessment of Pediatric Delirium (CAPD) applicable to the largest age range and able to detect signs and symptoms consistent with both hypo- and hyperactive delirium. Treatment of delirium should always include identification and reversal of the underlying etiology, reserving pharmacologic management for those patients without symptom resolution, or with significant impact to medical care. Atypical antipsychotics (olanzapine, quetiapine, and risperidone) should be used first-line in patients requiring pharmacologic treatment owing to their apparent efficacy and low incidence of reported adverse effects. The choice of atypical antipsychotic should be based on adverse effect profile, available dosage forms, and consideration of medication interactions. Intravenous haloperidol may be a potential treatment option in patients unable to tolerate oral medications and with significant symptoms. However, given the high incidence of serious adverse effects with intravenous haloperidol, routine use should be avoided. Dexmedetomidine should be used when sedation is needed and when clinically appropriate, given the positive impact on delirium. Additional well-designed trials assessing screening and treatment of PICU delirium are needed.

Butorphanol versus Propofol in Patients Undergoing Noninvasive Ventilation: A Prospective Observational Study

Background

The present study aimed to explore sedation management in agitated patients who suffered from acute respiratory failure (ARF) and were treated with noninvasive ventilation (NIV).

Patients and Methods

We divided 118 patients undergoing NIV treatment with butorphanol or propofol into two groups: group B (n = 57, butorphanol was initiated at the rate of 0.12 µg/kg/min as a continuous intravenous infusion and then titrated by 0.06 µg/kg/min every half an hour, group P (n = 61, propofol was initiated at the rate of 5 µg/kg/min as a continuous intravenous infusion and then titrated by 1.5 µg/kg/min every half an hour). Score of Sedation Agitation Scale (SAS) in the two groups was maintained between 3 and 4. Medications including sedative, analgesic, and antipsychotic, NIV intolerance score, SAS score, visual analog scale (VAS), medication use and adverse events were recorded repeatedly.

Results

Patients receiving butorphanol required significantly less total amount of fentanyl than patients receiving propofol during NIV to maintain the target VAS [0 (0–0) µg vs 150 (50–200) µg, P< 0.005]. Hemodynamic stability during NIV showed it was better kept in patients treated with butorphanol.

Conclusion

Butorphanol not only decreased the requirements of fentanyl but also enhanced hemodynamic stability in agitated patients suffering from ARF receiving NIV.

Trial Registration

Registered at http://www.chictr.org.cn/ (ChiCTR1800015534).

Association of an Emergency Department-embedded Critical Care Unit with Hospital Outcomes and Intensive Care Unit Use

Rationale: A small but growing number of hospitals are experimenting with emergency department-embedded critical care units (CCUs) in an effort to improve the quality of care for critically ill patients with sepsis and acute respiratory failure (ARF).Objectives: To evaluate the potential impact of an emergency department-embedded CCU at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania among patients with sepsis and ARF admitted from the emergency department to a medical ward or intensive care unit (ICU) from January 2016 to December 2017.Methods: The exposure was eligibility for admission to the emergency department-embedded CCU, which was defined as meeting a clinical definition for sepsis or ARF and admission to the emergency department during the intervention period on a weekday. The primary outcome was hospital length of stay (LOS); secondary outcomes included total emergency department plus ICU LOS, hospital survival, direct admission to the ICU, and unplanned ICU admission. Primary interrupted time series analyses were performed using ordinary least squares regression comparing monthly means. Secondary retrospective cohort and before-after analyses used multivariable Cox proportional hazard and logistic regression.Results: In the baseline and intervention periods, 3,897 patients met the inclusion criteria for sepsis and 1,865 patients met the criteria for ARF. Among patients admitted with sepsis, opening of the emergency department-embedded CCU was not associated with hospital LOS (β = -1.82 d; 95% confidence interval [CI], -4.50 to 0.87; P = 0.17 for the first month after emergency department-embedded CCU opening compared with baseline; β = -0.26 d; 95% CI, -0.58 to 0.06; P = 0.10 for subsequent months). Among patients admitted with ARF, the emergency department-embedded CCU was not associated with a significant change in hospital LOS for the first month after emergency department-embedded CCU opening (β = -3.25 d; 95% CI, -7.86 to 1.36; P = 0.15) but was associated with a 0.64 d/mo shorter hospital LOS for subsequent months (β = -0.64 d; 95% CI, -1.12 to -0.17; P = 0.01). This result persisted among higher acuity patients requiring ventilatory support but was not supported by alternative analytic approaches. Among patients admitted with sepsis who did not require mechanical ventilation or vasopressors in the emergency department, the emergency department-embedded CCU was associated with an initial 9.9% reduction in direct ICU admissions in the first month (β = -0.099; 95% CI, -0.153 to -0.044; P = 0.002), followed by a 1.1% per month increase back toward baseline in subsequent months (β = 0.011; 95% CI, 0.003-0.019; P = 0.009). This relationship was supported by alternative analytic approaches and was not seen in ARF. No associations with emergency department plus ICU LOS, hospital survival, or unplanned ICU admission were observed among patients with sepsis or ARF.Conclusions: The emergency department-embedded CCU was not associated with clinical outcomes among patients admitted with sepsis or ARF. Among less sick patients with sepsis, the emergency department-embedded CCU was initially associated with reduced rates of direct ICU admission from the emergency department. Additional research is necessary to further evaluate the impact and utility of the emergency department-embedded CCU model.

Lung protection in acute respiratory distress syndrome: what should we target?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Most clinical trials of lung-protective ventilation have tested one-size-fits-all strategies with mixed results. Data are lacking on how best to tailor mechanical ventilation to patient-specific risk of lung injury.

RECENT FINDINGS

Risk of ventilation-induced lung injury is determined by biological predisposition to biophysical lung injury and physical mechanical perturbations that concentrate stress and strain regionally within the lung. Recent investigations have identified molecular subphenotypes classified as hyperinflammatory and hypoinflammatory acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), which may have dissimilar risk for ventilation-induced lung injury. Mechanically, gravity-dependent atelectasis has long been recognized to decrease total aerated lung volume available for tidal ventilation, a concept termed the 'ARDS baby lung'. Recent studies have demonstrated that the aerated baby lung also has nonuniform stress/strain distribution, with potentially injurious forces concentrated in zones of heterogeneity where aerated alveoli are adjacent to flooded or atelectatic alveoli. The preponderance of evidence also indicates that current standard-of-care tidal volume management is not universally protective in ARDS. When considering escalation of lung-protective interventions, potential benefits of the intervention should be weighed against tradeoffs of accompanying cointerventions required, for example, deeper sedation or neuromuscular blockade. A precision medicine approach to lung-protection would weigh.

SUMMARY

A precision medicine approach to lung-protective ventilation requires weighing four key factors in each patient: biological predisposition to biophysical lung injury, mechanical predisposition to biophysical injury accounting for spatial mechanical heterogeneity within the lung, anticipated benefits of escalating lung-protective interventions, and potential unintended adverse effects of mandatory cointerventions.

Immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome: A therapeutic approach in the critically ill

Immunotherapy with chimeric antigen-specific receptor modified T cells, known as CAR-T, is emerging as a promising approach to hematological malignancies. In this regard, CAR-T against human cluster of differentiation (CD) 19 has demonstrated antitumor efficacy in application to B cell neoplasms resistant to conventional therapy. However, activation of the immune system induces severe and specific complications which can prove life-threatening. These include cytokine release syndrome and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (known as ICANS) - the latter being the subject of the present review. Although the physiopathological mechanisms underlying ICANS are not well known, a number of clinical and biological factors increase the risk of developing neurotoxicity associated to CAR-T therapy. Treatment is based on close monitoring, measures of support, anticonvulsivants, corticosteroids, and early admission to intensive care. The present study offers a comprehensive review of the available literature from a multidisciplinary perspective, including recommendations from intensivists, neurologists and hematologists dedicated to the care of critically ill adults.

A Progressive Early Mobilization Program Is Significantly Associated With Clinical and Economic Improvement: A Single-Center Quality Comparison Study

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether a progressive early mobilization protocol improves patient outcomes, including in-hospital mortality and total hospital costs.

DESIGN

Retrospective preintervention and postintervention quality comparison study.

SETTINGS

Single tertiary community hospital with a 12-bed closed-mixed ICU.

PATIENTS

All consecutive patients 18 years old or older were eligible. Patients who met exclusion criteria or were discharged from the ICU within 48 hours were excluded. Patients from January 2014 to May 2015 were defined as the preintervention group (group A) and from June 2015 to December 2016 was the postintervention group (group B).

INTERVENTION

Maebashi early mobilization protocol.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Group A included 204 patients and group B included 187 patients. Baseline characteristics evaluated include age, severity, mechanical ventilation, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, and in group B additional comorbidities and use of steroids. Hospital mortality was reduced in group B (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.13-0.49; p < 0.01). This early mobilization protocol is significantly associated with decreased mortality, even after adjusting for baseline characteristics such as sedation. Total hospital costs decreased from $29,220 to $22,706. The decrease occurred soon after initiating the intervention and this effect was sustained. The estimated effect was $-5,167 per patient, a 27% reduction. Reductions in ICU and hospital lengths of stay, time on mechanical ventilation, and improvement in physical function at hospital discharge were also seen. The change in Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score at ICU discharge were significantly reduced after the intervention, despite a similar Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score at admission and at maximum.

CONCLUSIONS

In-hospital mortality and total hospital costs are reduced after the introduction of a progressive early mobilization program, which is significantly associated with decreased mortality. Cost savings were realized early after the intervention and sustained. Further prospective studies to investigate causality are warranted.

Circadian-Hypoxia Link and its Potential for Treatment of Cardiovascular Disease

Throughout the evolutionary time, all organisms and species on Earth evolved with an adaptation to consistent oscillations of sunlight and darkness, now recognized as 'circadian rhythm.' Single-cellular to multisystem organisms use circadian biology to synchronize to the external environment and provide predictive adaptation to changes in cellular homeostasis. Dysregulation of circadian biology has been implicated in numerous prevalent human diseases, and subsequently targeting the circadian machinery may provide innovative preventative or treatment strategies. Discovery of 'peripheral circadian clocks' unleashed widespread investigations into the potential roles of clock biology in cellular, tissue, and organ function in healthy and diseased states. Particularly, oxygen-sensing pathways (e.g. hypoxia inducible factor, HIF1), are critical for adaptation to changes in oxygen availability in diseases such as myocardial ischemia. Recent investigations have identified a connection between the circadian rhythm protein Period 2 (PER2) and HIF1A that may elucidate an evolutionarily conserved cellular network that can be targeted to manipulate metabolic function in stressed conditions like hypoxia or ischemia. Understanding the link between circadian and hypoxia pathways may provide insights and subsequent innovative therapeutic strategies for patients with myocardial ischemia. This review addresses our current understanding of the connection between light-sensing pathways (PER2), and oxygen-sensing pathways (HIF1A), in the context of myocardial ischemia and lays the groundwork for future studies to take advantage of these two evolutionarily conserved pathways in the treatment of myocardial ischemia.

Clinical outcomes associated with sedation and analgesia in patients supported with venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation

Sedatives and analgesics are frequently used in critically ill adult patients requiring mechanical ventilation in the intensive care unit, but optimal agent selection and dosing in patients supported with venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation remain poorly defined. This retrospective study evaluated whether sedative and analgesic agent selection and dosing had any impact on clinical outcomes after venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation decannulation. The primary endpoint of our study was the incidence of delirium within 48 h after venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation decannulation in patients who received an empiric ⩾50% sedation reduction of benzodiazepines (N = 22, group 2) compared to those who did not (N = 10, group 1) and those who required no sedatives within 24 h prior to venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation decannulation (N = 21, group 3). Secondary endpoints included time to extubation after decannulation, need for tracheostomy after decannulation, intensive care unit length of stay after decannulation, total hospital length of stay, and in-hospital mortality. Delirium within 48 h after decannulation was observed in 47% of all patients and did not differ between the three groups (50% vs 50% vs 43%, p = 0.9). No differences were observed in the secondary endpoints; though there was a trend toward shorter duration of mechanical ventilation and intensive care unit length of stay in patients who received an empiric ⩾50% sedation reduction. Our study suggests that we may need more than a 50% reduction in sedation but prospective studies with a larger sample size are warranted to evaluate how sedative/analgesic selection and dosing affect important clinical outcomes.

Short-Term Clinical and Quality Outcomes Have Inconsistent Changes From a Quality Improvement Initiative to Increase Access to Physical Therapy in the Cardiovascular and Surgical ICU

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Studies of mobility during critical illness have mostly examined transitions from immobility (passive activities) or limited mobility to active “early mobility.”

Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: Etiology, Pathogenesis, and Summary on Management

The acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) has multiple causes and is characterized by acute lung inflammation and increased pulmonary vascular permeability, leading to hypoxemic respiratory failure and bilateral pulmonary radiographic opacities. The acute respiratory distress syndrome is associated with substantial morbidity and mortality, and effective treatment strategies are limited. This review presents the current state of the literature regarding the etiology, pathogenesis, and management strategies for ARDS.

Dexmedetomidine versus midazolam and propofol for sedation in critically ill patients: Mining the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care data

Background

The benefits of dexmedetomidine on reducing mortality and length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay are still controversial. We aimed to evaluate the superiority of dexmedetomidine by comparing it with midazolam and propofol.

Methods

Subjects who were given dexmedetomidine, midazolam and propofol exclusively as sedatives in the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center between 2001 and 2012 were identified from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care (MIMIC) III database. Univariate, multivariate and stratified analysis was performed to compare the mortality and length of ICU stay between the dexmedetomidine, midazolam and propofol groups. To compare the depth of sedation between the midazolam and propofol group, we used propensity score matching (PSM) to create comparable units and their Richmond Agitation Sedation Score (RASS) were analyzed.

Results

A total of 1,542 unique ICU records were identified in the MIMIC-III database, among which 163 belonged to the dexmedetomidine group and 531 belonged to the midazolam group and 848 belonged to the propofol group. Mortality was decreased in dexmedetomidine group compared with midazolam group (OR 15.25; 95% CI, 5.29-64.80, P<0.001) and propofol group (OR 5.51; 95% CI, 1.91-23.45, P=0.006). In patients with high Simplified Acute Physiologic Score (SAPS) II (>52), midazolam was related to a higher mortality (~50%). But competing risk analysis revealed that dexmedetomidine was associated with longer ICU stay (P<0.001). There was no significant difference in the RASS between propofol and midazolam group (P=0.300).

Conclusions

Dexmedetomidine was significantly related to lower mortality when compared with midazolam and propofol. Midazolam had a comparably higher mortality than propofol and dexmedetomidine in patients with high SAPS II. Propofol and midazolam were equivalent in sedative efficacy. Further evaluation is needed.

Invasive mechanical ventilation in the emergency department

Emergency department (ED) lenght of stay of the patients requiring admission to the intensive care units has increased gradually in recent years. Mechanical ventilation is an integral part of critical care and mechanically ventilated patients have to be managed and monitored by emergency physicians for longer than expected in EDs. This early period of care has significant impact on the outcomes of these patients. Therefore, emergency physicians should have comprehensive knowledge of mechanical ventilation. This review will summarize the current literature of the basic concepts, appropriate clinical applications, monitoring parameters, components and mechanisms of mechanical ventilation in the ED.

Sedation Practice in Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation-Treated Patients with Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: A Retrospective Study

Our objective was to characterize sedation management in adult patients with severe respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) treated with venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO). We conducted a retrospective chart review of these patients treated at Toronto General Hospital between January 2012 and October 2015. Medications administered (sedative, analgesic, paralytic, and antipsychotic), sedation depth (Sedation Agitation Scale [SAS] score) delirium assessments, and mobilization were recorded daily. Forty-five adults (33 males, median age 47 years; interquartile range [IQR], 35-56]) with ARDS (median PaO2/FiO2 71; IQR 59-83) because of respiratory infection (91%) were treated with VV-ECMO for a median of 11 days (IQR, 7-17). After ECMO initiation, 96% patients were deeply sedated (SAS score < 3) with continuous infusions of midazolam (49%), propofol (18%), or both (29%) and 98% were receiving opioid infusions (93% fentanyl). Patients were deeply sedated for a median of 6 days (IQR, 3-10) after cannulation before transitioning to intermediate or light sedation (SAS score ≥ 3). Before ECMO discontinuation, 77% of surviving patients were intermediately or lightly sedated, 20% were receiving no sedatives, and 9% were receiving no opioids. During ECMO, 58% had positive delirium assessment and 24% experienced agitation (SAS ≥ 6). During ECMO support, 71% received physical therapy that occurred after a median of 7 days (IQR, 4-12) after cannulation. In conclusion, we found that although patients were deeply sedated for a prolonged duration after VV-ECMO initiation, many were able to safely achieve light sedation and active mobilization.

Propofol-based sedation does not negatively influence oxygenator running time compared to midazolam in patients with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation

OBJECTIVE

Patients on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation are frequently in need for sedation. Use of propofol has been associated with impaired oxygenator function due to adsorption to the membrane as well as lipid load. The aim of our retrospective analysis was to compare two different sedation regimens containing either propofol or midazolam with respect to oxygenator running time.

METHODS

Midazolam was used in 73 patients whereas propofol was used in 49 patients, respectively. In the propofol group, veno-arterial-extracorporeal membrane oxygenation was used predominantly (84%), while veno-venous-extracorporeal membrane oxygenation was used more often in the midazolam group (64%).

RESULTS

Oxygenator running time until first exchange was 7 days in both groups ( p = 0.759). No statistically significant differences could be observed between the subgroup of patients receiving lipid-free (n = 24) and lipid-containing (n = 31) parenteral nutrition, respectively. Laboratory parameters like triglycerides, free hemoglobin, fibrinogen, platelets, and activated partial thromboplastin time were not significantly different between both sedation regimens ( p = 0.462, p = 0.489, p = 0.960, p = 0.134, and p = 0.843) and were not associated with oxygenator running time.

CONCLUSION

The use of propofol as sedative seems suitable in patients undergoing extracorporeal membrane oxygenation therapy.

The Use of Volatile Anesthetics as Sedatives for Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) remains to pose a high morbidity and mortality without any targeted therapies. Sedation, usually given intravenously, is an important part of clinical practice in intensive care unit (ICU), and the effect of sedatives on patients’ outcomes has been studied intensively. Although volatile anesthetics are not routine sedatives in ICU, preclinical and clinical studies suggested their potential benefit in pulmonary pathophysiology. This review will summarize the current knowledge of ARDS and the role of volatile anesthetic sedation in this setting from both clinical and mechanistic standpoints. In addition, we will review the infrastructure to use volatile anesthetics.

Effects From Continuous Infusions of Dexmedetomidine and Propofol on Hemodynamic Stability in Critically Ill Adult Patients With Septic Shock

PURPOSE

To compare the development of clinically significant hemodynamic event (ie, hypotension or bradycardia) in adults with septic shock receiving either propofol or dexmedetomidine.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of adults with septic shock admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU) at an academic medical center between July 2013 and July 2017.

RESULTS

Patients in the propofol (n = 35) and dexmedetomidine (n = 37) groups developed a clinically significant hemodynamic event at similar frequencies (31.4 vs 29.7%, P = .99). All patients with an event experienced hypotension, whereas 2 (5.4%) patients in the dexmedetomidine group also experienced bradycardia. Most patients in both groups (70% vs 90%) received an escalating sedative dose, and almost half (42.9%) in the dexmedetomidine group had the sedative dosage increased more frequently than every 30 minutes. Patients in both groups had similar ICU (24.1 vs 24.3 days, P = .98) and hospital (37.9 vs 29.7 days, P = .29) lengths of stay. There was no difference in median time to hemodynamic event between the groups (propofol 1 hour [interquartile range, IQR: 0.5-9.9] vs dexmedetomidine 2 hours [IQR: 1.5-11.1 hours], P = .85).

CONCLUSION

Patients with septic shock receiving propofol or dexmedetomidine experienced similar rates of clinically significant hemodynamic events. Most patients did not experience an event and those who did most frequently did so in the first couple of hours of therapy.

Improving Outcomes for Critically Ill Cardiovascular Patients Through Increased Physical Therapy Staffing

OBJECTIVE

To examine the effect of increasing physical therapy (PT) staff in a cardiovascular intensive care unit (CVICU) on temporal measures of PT interventions and on outcomes important to patients and hospitals.

DESIGN

Retrospective pre/post subgroup analysis from a quality improvement initiative.

SETTING

Academic medical center.

PARTICIPANTS

Cardiovascular patients in either a baseline (N=52) or quality improvement period (N=62) with a CVICU length of stay (LOS) ≥7 days and use of any one of the following: mechanical ventilation, continuous renal replacement therapy, or mechanical circulatory support.

INTERVENTIONS

The 6-month quality improvement initiative increased CVICU-dedicated PT staff from 2 to 4.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Changes in physical therapy delivery were examined using the frequency and daily duration of PT intervention. Post-CVICU LOS was the primary outcome. CVICU LOS, mobility change, and discharge level of care were secondary outcomes. A secondary analysis of hospital survivors was also conducted.

RESULTS

Compared to those in the baseline period, cardiovascular patients in the quality improvement period participated in PT for an additional 9.6 minutes (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.9, 17.2) per day for all patients and 15.1 minutes (95% CI: 7.6, 22.6) for survivors. Post-CVICU LOS decreased 2.2 (95% CI: -6.0, 1.0) days for all patients and 2.6 days (95% CI: -5.3, 0.0) for survivors. CVICU LOS decreased 3.6 days (95% CI: -6.4, -0.8) for all patients and 3.1 days (95% CI: -6.4, -0.9) for survivors. Differences in mobility change and discharge level of care were not significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Additional CVICU-dedicated PT staff was associated with increased PT treatment and reductions in CVICU and post-CVICU LOS. The effects of each were greatest for hospital survivors.

Outcomes When Using Adjunct Dexmedetomidine with Propofol Sedation in Mechanically Ventilated Surgical Intensive Care Patients

Objective: Compare the duration of mechanical ventilation between patients receiving sedation with continuous infusions of propofol alone or combination with the use of dexmedetomidine and propofol. Design: Retrospective, propensity matched (1:1) cohort study, employing eight variables chosen a priori for matching. Timing of exposure to dexmedetomidine initiation was incorporated into a matching algorithm. Setting: Level 1, university-based, 32-bed, adult, mixed trauma and surgical intensive care unit (SICU). Continuous sedation was delivered according to a protocol methodology with daily sedation vacation and spontaneous breathing trials. Choice of sedation agent was physician directed. Patients: Between 2010 and 2014, 149 SICU patients receiving mechanical ventilation for >24 h received dexmedetomidine with propofol. Propensity matching resulted in 143 pair cohorts. Interventions: Dexmedetomidine with propofol or propofol alone. Measurements and Main Results: There was no statistical difference in SICU length of stay (LOS), with a median absolute difference of 5.3 h for propofol alone group (p = 0.43). The SICU mortality was not statistically different (RR = 1.002, p = 0.88). Examining a 14-day period post-treatment with dexmedetomidine, on any given day (excluding days 1 and 14), dexmedetomidine with propofol-treated patients had a 0.5% to 22.5% greater likelihood of being delirious (CAM-ICU positive). In addition, dexmedetomidine with propofol-treated patients had a 4.5% to 18.8% higher likelihood of being above the target sedation score (more agitated) compared to propofol-alone patients. Conclusions: In this propensity matched cohort study, adjunct use of dexmedetomidine to propofol did not show a statistically significant reduction with respect to mechanical ventilation (MV) duration, SICU LOS, or SICU mortality, despite a trend toward receiving fewer hours of propofol. There was no evidence that dexmedetomidine with propofol improved sedation scores or reduced delirium.

Outcomes When Using Adjunct Dexmedetomidine with Propofol Sedation in Mechanically Ventilated Surgical Intensive Care Patients

Objective: Compare the duration of mechanical ventilation between patients receiving sedation with continuous infusions of propofol alone or combination with the use of dexmedetomidine and propofol. Design: Retrospective, propensity matched (1:1) cohort study, employing eight variables chosen a priori for matching. Timing of exposure to dexmedetomidine initiation was incorporated into a matching algorithm. Setting: Level 1, university-based, 32-bed, adult, mixed trauma and surgical intensive care unit (SICU). Continuous sedation was delivered according to a protocol methodology with daily sedation vacation and spontaneous breathing trials. Choice of sedation agent was physician directed. Patients: Between 2010 and 2014, 149 SICU patients receiving mechanical ventilation for >24 h received dexmedetomidine with propofol. Propensity matching resulted in 143 pair cohorts. Interventions: Dexmedetomidine with propofol or propofol alone. Measurements and Main Results: There was no statistical difference in SICU length of stay (LOS), with a median absolute difference of 5.3 h for propofol alone group (p = 0.43). The SICU mortality was not statistically different (RR = 1.002, p = 0.88). Examining a 14-day period post-treatment with dexmedetomidine, on any given day (excluding days 1 and 14), dexmedetomidine with propofol-treated patients had a 0.5% to 22.5% greater likelihood of being delirious (CAM-ICU positive). In addition, dexmedetomidine with propofol-treated patients had a 4.5% to 18.8% higher likelihood of being above the target sedation score (more agitated) compared to propofol-alone patients. Conclusions: In this propensity matched cohort study, adjunct use of dexmedetomidine to propofol did not show a statistically significant reduction with respect to mechanical ventilation (MV) duration, SICU LOS, or SICU mortality, despite a trend toward receiving fewer hours of propofol. There was no evidence that dexmedetomidine with propofol improved sedation scores or reduced delirium.

Propofol and Clevidipine-induced Hypertriglyceridemia

Hypertriglyceridemia and related pancreatitis due to the use of lipid emulsions such as propofol has been documented, but less is known about the additive adverse effects of propofol and clevidipine lipid emulsions in the literature. We report an unusual case, highlighting the trend of serum triglyceride and pancreatic enzymes (amylase/lipase) with the administration of propofol and clevidipine for a prolonged period in the neurocritical care setting. We present a case of a 27-year-old male who was admitted to the neuroscience intensive care unit (NSICU) for management of severe subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) with six-millimeter (mm) midline shift to the left from the rupture of anterior communicating artery aneurysm. The patient was given propofol infusion to maintain sedation and manage intracranial pressures, and clevidipine was chosen over other antihypertensive class for blood pressure management secondary to renal impairment. To focus on the risk of hypertriglyceridemia and associated pancreatitis with the combined use of lipid emulsions we quantified the effect of lipid emulsions on serum triglycerides. We calculated the total calorie and fat content the patient received from the propofol and clevidipine along with the calorie intake from enteral nutrition (Fibersource® tube feed). The patient received a total propofol infusion of 44,391.2 milligrams (mg) over 16 days which accounts for 4,882.99 kilocalories (kcal) and 443.91 grams of fat. He received a total clevidipine infusion of 297 mg over the 48-hour period which contributes 594 kcal and 59.4 grams of fat. The required daily calorie intake through enteral nutrition of Fibresource® was titrated to a goal of 80 mL/hour which provided 2,304 kcal and 76.8 grams of fat each day. We also graphically depicted the rise in the serum triglyceride level after continuous infusion of propofol and clevidipine and subsequent improvement in the amylase and lipase level after the propofol was discontinued. Hence we conclude, careful and periodic monitoring of the serum triglyceride levels and limitation on the total calories from other fat sources such as enteral nutrition can help to mitigate the drug-induced effects.

Limiting sedation for patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome - time to wake up

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Critically ill patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) may require sedation in their clinical care. The goals of sedation in ARDS patients are to improve patient comfort and tolerance of supportive and therapeutic measures without contributing to adverse outcomes. This review discusses the current evidence for sedation management in patients with ARDS.

RECENT FINDINGS

Deep sedation strategies should be avoided in the care of patients with ARDS because deep sedation has been associated with increased time on mechanical ventilation, longer ICU and hospital length of stay, and higher mortality in critically ill patients. Adoption of protocol-based, light-sedation strategies is preferred and improves patient outcomes. Although the optimal sedative agent for ARDS patients is unclear, benzodiazepines should be avoided because of associations with oversedation, delirium, prolonged ICU and hospital length of stay, and increased mortality. Minimizing sedation in patients with ARDS facilitates early mobilization and early discharge from the ICU, potentially aiding in recovery from critical illness. Strategies to optimize ventilation in ARDS patients, such as low tidal volume ventilation and high positive end-expiratory pressure can be employed without deep sedation; however, deep sedation is required if patients receive neuromuscular blockade, which may benefit some ARDS patients. Knowledge gaps persist as to whether or not prone positioning and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation can be tolerated with light sedation.

SUMMARY

Current evidence supports the use of protocol-based, light-sedation strategies in critically ill patients with ARDS. Further research into sedation management specifically in ARDS populations is needed.

A National Multicenter Survey on Management of Pain, Agitation, and Delirium in Intensive Care Units in China

Background:

The management of pain, agitation, and delirium (PAD) in Intensive Care Unit (ICU) is beneficial for patients and makes it widely applied in clinical practice. Previous studies showed that the clinical practice of PAD in ICU was improving; yet relatively little information is available in China. This study aimed to investigate the practice of PAD in ICUs in China.

Methods:

A multicenter, nationwide survey was conducted using a clinician-directed questionnaire from September 19 to December 18, 2016. The questionnaire focused on the assessment and management of PAD by the clinicians in ICUs. The practice of PAD was compared among the four regions of China (North, Southeast, Northwest, and Southwest). The data were expressed as percentage and frequency. The Chi-square test, Fisher's exact test, and line-row Chi-square test were used.

Results:

Of the 1011 valid questionnaire forms, the response rate was 80.37%. The clinicians came from 704 hospitals across 158 cities of China. The rate of PAD assessment was 75.77%, 90.21%, and 66.77%, respectively. The rates of PAD scores were 45.8%, 68.94%, and 34.03%, respectively. The visual analog scale, Richmond agitation-sedation scale, and confusion assessment method for the ICU were the first choices of scales for PAD assessment. Fentanyl, midazolam, and dexmedetomidine were the first choices of agents for analgesic, sedation, and delirium treatment. While choosing analgesics and sedatives, the clinicians put the pharmacological characteristics of drugs in the first place (66.07% and 76.36%). Daily interruption for sedation was carried out by 67.26% clinicians. Most of the clinicians (87.24%) used analgesics while using sedatives. Of the 738 (73%) clinicians titrating the sedatives on the basis of the proposed target sedation level, 268 (26.61%) clinicians just depended on their clinical experience. Totally, 519 (51.34%) clinicians never used other nondrug strategies for PAD. The working time of clinicians was an important factor in the management of analgesia and sedation rather than their titles and educational background. The ratios of pain score and sedation score in the Southwest China were the highest and the North China were the lowest. The ratios of delirium assessment and score were the same in the four regions of China. Moreover, the first choices of scales for PAD in the four regions were the same. However, the top three choices of agents in PAD treatment in the four regions were not the same.

Conclusions:

The practice of PAD in China follows the international guidelines; however, the pain assessment should be improved. The PAD practice is a little different across the four regions of China; however, the trend is consistent.

Trial Registration:

The study is registered at http://www.clinicaltrials.gov (No. ChiCTR-OOC-16009014, www.chictr.org.cn/index.aspx.).

Cardiogenic Shock: Recent Developments and Significant Knowledge Gaps

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Patients with cardiogenic shock (CS) continue to have high rates of morbidity and mortality. We aimed to describe current principles in the management of CS including coronary revascularization, medical management, mechanical circulatory support, and supportive care.

RECENT FINDINGS

Revascularization is still recommended, but trials have not found a benefit in the revascularization of nonculprit artery lesions. New mechanical circulatory support options are available, but optimal use remains uncertain. Overall improvement in outcomes appears to have plateaued. There remain substantial knowledge gaps about the management of CS. The ideal timing and selection criteria for mechanical support remain under-developed. There has been little systematic study to inform medical management or supportive care of this patient population. A more expansive research focus is necessary to improve the care of CS.

Multiple Organ Dysfunction: The Defining Syndrome of Sepsis

BACKGROUND

Sepsis as a process has been recognized since the time of the Ancient Greeks. The concept has evolved recently to reflect a disease process of a severe, systemic response to infection. Acute, life-threatening but potentially reversible organ dysfunction is its hallmark, and unresolving organ dysfunction is the dominant cause of death in critical illness. Its evolution, persistence, and resolution reflect a complex interplay of factors originating in the initial inciting insult, the innate immune and metabolic response of the host, and the beneficial and harmful consequences of intensive care unit (ICU) supportive care.

DISCUSSION

We describe the common clinical manifestations of the six prototypic organ system dysfunction syndromes of severe sepsis and review the associated epidemiology and suspected pathophysiology.