Fluid therapy and pulmonary complications in abdominal surgeries: randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

There is no consensus on the most effective strategy for Postoperative Pulmonary Complication (PPC) reduction. This study hypothesized that a Goal-Directed Fluid Therapy (GDFT) protocol of infusion of predetermined boluses reduces the occurrence of PPC in patients undergoing elective open abdominal surgeries when compared with Standard of Care (SOC) strategy.

METHODS

Randomized, prospective, controlled study, conducted from May 2012 to December 2014, with ASA I, II or III patients undergoing open abdominal surgeries, lasting at least 120 min, under general anesthesia, randomized into the SOC and the GDFT group. In the SOC, fluid administration was according to the anesthesiologist's discretion. In the GDFT, the intervention protocol, based on bolus infusion according to blood pressure and delta pulse pressure, was applied. Patients were postoperatively evaluated by an anesthesiologist blinded to the group allocation regarding PPC incidence, mortality, and Length of Hospital Stay (LOHS).

RESULTS

Forty-two patients in the SOC group and 43 in the GDFT group. Nineteen patients (45%) in the SOC and 6 in the GDFT (14%) had at least one PPC (p = 0.003). There was no difference in mortality or LOHS between the groups. Among the patients with PPC, four died (25%), compared to two deaths in patients without PPC (3%) (p = 0.001). The LOHS had a median of 14.5 days in the group with PPC and 9 days in the group without PPC (p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The GDFT protocol resulted in a lower rate of PPC; however, the LOHS and mortality did not reduce.

Prevalence of adverse events in pronated intubated adult COVID-19 patients: A systematic review with meta-analysis

AIM

To present the pooled estimated prevalence of adverse events in pronated intubated adult COVID-19 patients.

DESIGN

A systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

This study used the Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Embase, LILACS, Livivo, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases as data sources.

METHODS

The studies were meta-analysed using JAMOVI 1.6.15 software. A random-effects model was used to identify the global prevalence of adverse events, confidence intervals and the heterogeneity data. Risk of bias was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute tool, and the certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach.

RESULTS

Of the 7904 studies identified, 169 were included for full reading, and 10 were included in the review. The most prevalent adverse events were pressure injuries (59%), haemodynamic instability (23%), death (17%) and device loss or traction (9%).

CONCLUSION

The most prevalent adverse events in mechanically ventilated pronated patients with COVID-19 are pressure injuries, presence of haemodynamic instability, death and device loss or traction.

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PATIENT CARE

The evidence identified in this review can help improve the quality and safety of patient care by helping to design care protocols to avoid the development of adverse events that can cause permanent sequelae in these patients.

IMPACT

This systematic review addressed the adverse events related to prone position in intubated adult COVID-19 patients. We identified that the most prevalent adverse events in these patients were pressure injuries, haemodynamic instability, device loss or traction and death. The results of this review may influence the clinical practice of nurses who work in intensive care units and, consequently, the nursing care provided not only to COVID-19 patients but for all intubated patients due to other reasons in intensive care units.

REPORTING METHOD

This systematic review adhered to the PRISMA reporting guideline.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

As this is a systematic review, we analysed data from primary studies conducted by many researchers. Thus, there was no patient or public contribution in this review.

Durometry as an alternative tool to the modified Rodnan's skin score in the assessment of diffuse systemic sclerosis patients: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

The reproducibility and reliability of the modified Rodnan's Skin Score (mRSS) are debated due to investigator-related subjectivity. Here, we evaluate if durometry correlates with mRSS in patients with diffuse systemic sclerosis (SSc).

METHODS

This cross-sectional study was conducted from December 2018 to June 2019, including 58 diffuse SSc patients. Two certified researchers, blind to each other's scores, performed the mRSS, followed by durometry at 17 predefined skin sites. For durometry and mRSS, individual scores per skin site were registered. Durometry and mRSS results measured by each researcher, as well as scores from different researchers, were compared. Skin thickness measurements from forearm skin biopsies were available in a subset of the patients, for comparisons. Statistical analyses included Cohen's Kappa Coefficient, Intraclass Correlation Coefficient, Kendall's Coefficient and Spearman's test.

RESULTS

Mean (standard deviation, SD) patient age was 44.8 (12.9) years, and 88% were female. Inter-rater agreement varied from 0.88 to 0.99 (Intraclass correlation coefficient) for durometry, and 0.54 to 0.79 (Cohen's Kappa coefficient) for mRSS, according to the specific evaluated sites. When data were compared with skin thickness assessed in forearm biopsies, durometry correlated better with skin thickness than mRSS.

CONCLUSION

Durometry may be considered as an alternative method to quantify skin involvement in patients with diffuse SSc. The strong inter-rater agreement suggests that the method may be useful for the assessment of patients by multiple researchers, as in clinical trials.