Pulmonary embolism in intensive care units: More frequent or more Known? Prospective study of 75 cases

Application of Precise Positioning for Sputum Expectoration in ICU Patients with Pulmonary Infection

Objective

To determine the application value of precise positioning for sputum expectoration in intensive care unit (ICU) hospitalized patients with pulmonary infection (PI).

Methods

A total of 183 patients with PI treated in the ICUs of Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University from June 2019 to June 2020 were divided into a control group (n = 91) and an observation group (n = 92), all of whom received conventional drug therapy. The control group was given routine nursing intervention, based on which, the observation group was supplemented with precise positioning for sputum expectoration. The 24-hour sputum volume, respiratory rate (RR), blood gas analysis indexes, inflammatory indicators, Clinical Pulmonary Infection Score (CPIS), Modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) dyspnea scale score, and quality of life (36-Item Short-Form Health Survey, SF-36) were observed in both arms before and after intervention. The incidence of adverse reactions was counted.

Results

The observation group showed better mMRC scores than the control group (P < 0.05). Compared with the control group, the sputum volume, RR, and CPIS score were lower, and the SF-36 score was higher in the observation group 7 days after intervention (P < 0.05). After intervention, the oxygen saturation (SaO2) and partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2) were higher, while the carbon dioxide partial pressure (PaCO2), C-reactive protein (CRP), procalcitonin (PCT), and leukocyte count were lower in the observation group compared with the control group (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in the incidence of complications between the two arms (P > 0.05).

Conclusion

The application of precise positioning for sputum expectoration in nursing intervention of ICU patients with PI can alleviate the severity of PI and dyspnea, reduce inflammatory reaction, and improve the quality of life of patients.

Risk Factors for Pulmonary Embolism in ICU Patients: A Retrospective Cohort Study from the MIMIC-III Database

Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a common and potentially lethal form of venous thromboembolic disease in ICU patients. A limited number of risk factors have been associated with PE in ICU patients. In this study, we aimed to screen the independent risk factors of PE in ICU patients that can be used to evaluate the patient's condition and provide targeted treatment. We performed a retrospective cohort study using a freely accessible critical care database Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care (MIMIC)-III. The ICU patients were divided into two groups based on the incidence of PE. Finally, 9871 ICU patients were included, among which 204 patients (2.1%) had pulmonary embolism. During the multivariate logistic regression analysis, sepsis, hospital_LOS (the length of stay in hospital), type of admission, tumor, APTT (activated partial thromboplastin time) and platelet were independent risk factors for patients for PE in ICU, with OR values of 1.471 (95%CI 1.001-2.162), 1.001 (95%CI 1.001-1.001), 3.745 (95%CI 2.187-6.414), 1.709 (95%CI 1.247-2.341), 1.014 (95%CI 1.010-1.017) and 1.002 (95%CI 1.001-1.003) (P_s < 0.05). ROC curve analysis showed that the composite indicator had a higher predictive value for ICU patients with PE, with a ROC area under the curve (AUC) of 0.743 (95%CI 0.710 -0.776, p < 0.001). Finally, sepsis, tumor, platelet count, length of stay in the hospital, emergency admission and APTT were independent predictors of PE in ICU patients.

Venous Thromboembolism in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients

BACKGROUND

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is increasingly reported in seriously ill patients with COVID-19 infection. Incidence of VTE has been reported before and results varied widely in study cohorts.

AREA OF UNCERTAINTY

Incidence of major VTE (segmental pulmonary embolism and above and proximal deep vein thrombosis) which is a contributor to mortality and morbidity is not known. Also, data is unclear on the optimal anticoagulation regimen to prevent VTE.

DATA SOURCES

Multiple databases including PubMed were searched until May 12, 2020, to include studies reporting VTE in hospitalized COVID-19 adult patients. MOOSE guidelines were followed in selection, and 11 studies were included. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to quantitatively assess the VTE burden in hospitalized COVID-19 patients and potential benefits of therapeutic dosing of anticoagulation compared with prophylaxis dosing for VTE prevention.

THERAPEUTIC ADVANCES

Many societies and experts recommend routine prophylactic anticoagulation with heparin for VTE prevention in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. In this meta-analysis, the pooled rate of major VTE was 12.5% in hospitalized patients and 17.2% in intensive care unit patients. When therapeutic anticoagulation dosing was compared with prophylactic anticoagulation, the pooled odds ratio of VTE was 0.33 (95% confidence interval 0.14-0.75; P = 0.008, I = 0%) suggesting statistical significance with therapeutic dosing of anticoagulation for primary prevention of VTE in all hospitalized patients. However, this should be interpreted with caution as the bleeding events and safety profile could not be ascertained because of lack of adequate information. We recommend applying this finding to hospitalized COVID 19 patients only after carefully weighing individual bleeding risks and benefits.

CONCLUSION

Major VTE events, especially pulmonary embolism, seem to be high in COVID-19 patients admitted to the intensive care unit. Therapeutic anticoagulation dosing seems to significantly benefit the odds of preventing any VTE when compared with prophylactic dosing in all hospitalized patients.