Desirability of Outcome Ranking and Response Adjusted for Antibiotic Risk (DOOR/RADAR) Post Hoc Analysis Supports Equipoise for Antibiotic Initiation Strategies in Intensive Care Unit-Acquired Pneumonia

Background: Pneumonia is the most common intensive care unit (ICU)-acquired infection and source of potential sepsis in ICU populations but can be difficult to diagnose in real-time. Despite limited data, rapid initiation of antibiotic agents is endorsed by society guidelines. We hypothesized that a post hoc analysis of a recent randomized pilot study would show no difference between two antibiotic initiation strategies. Patients and Methods: The recent Trial of Antibiotic Restraint in Presumed Pneumonia (TARPP) was a pragmatic cluster-randomized pilot of antibiotic initiation strategies for patients with suspected ICU-acquired pneumonia. Participating ICUs were cluster-randomized to either an immediate initiation protocol or a specimen-initiated protocol where a gram stain was required for initiation of antibiotics. Patients in the study were divided into one of seven mutually exclusive outcome rankings (desirability of outcome ranking; DOOR): (1) Survival, No Pneumonia, No adverse events; (2) Survival, Pneumonia, No adverse events; (3) Survival, No Pneumonia, ventilator-free-alive days ≤14; (4) Survival, Pneumonia, ventilator-free-alive days ≤14; (5) Survival, No Pneumonia, Subsequent episode of suspected pneumonia; (6) Survival, Pneumonia, Subsequent episode of suspected pneumonia; and (7) Death. These rankings were further refined using the duration of antibiotics prescribed for pneumonia (response adjusted for antibiotic risk; RADAR). Results: There were 186 patients enrolled in the study. After applying the DOOR analysis, a randomly selected patient was equally likely to have a better outcome in specimen-initiated arm as in the immediate initiation arm (DOOR probability: 50.8%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 42.7%-58.9%). Outcome probabilities were similar after applying the RADAR analysis (52.5%; 95% CI, 44.2%-60.6%; p = 0.31). Conclusions: We found that patients for whom antibiotic agents were withheld until there was objective evidence (specimen-initiated group) had similar outcome rankings to patients for whom antibiotic agents were started immediately. This supports the findings of the TARPP pilot trial and provides further evidence for equipoise between these two treatment strategies.

Provider Perceptions of Antibiotic Initiation Strategies for Hospital-Acquired Pneumonia

Background: The practice of rapidly initiating antibiotic therapy for patients with suspected infection has recently been criticized yet remains commonplace. Provider comfort level has been an understudied aspect of this practice. Hypothesis: We hypothesized that there would be no significant differences in provider comfort level between the two treatment groups. Methods: We prospectively surveyed critical care intensivists who provided care for patients enrolled in the Trial of Antibiotic Restraint in Presumed Pneumonia (TARPP), which was a multicenter cluster-randomized crossover trial that evaluated an immediate antibiotic initiation protocol compared with a protocol of specimen-initiated antibiotic initiation in ventilated patients with suspected new-onset pneumonia. At the end of each enrollment arm, physicians at each center were surveyed regarding their overall comfort level with the recently completed treatment arm, and perception of adherence. Both a paired and unpaired analysis was performed. Results: We collected 51 survey responses from 31 unique participants. Providers perceived a higher rate of adherence to the immediate initiation arm than the specimen-initiated arm (Always Adherent: 37.5% vs. 11.1%; p = 0.045). Providers were less comfortable waiting for objective evidence of infection in the specimen-initiated arm than with starting antibiotic agents immediately (Very Comfortable: 83.3% vs. 40.7%; p = 0.004). For the smaller paired analysis, there was no longer a difference in comfort level. Conclusions: There may be differences in provider comfort levels and perceptions of adherence when considering two different antibiotic initiation strategies for suspected pneumonia in ventilated patients. These findings should be considered when planning future studies.

Awake prone positioning in acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure: An international expert guidance

BACKGROUND

Awake prone positioning (APP) of non-intubated patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure (AHRF) has been inconsistently adopted into routine care of patients with COVID-19, likely due to apparent conflicting evidence from recent trials. This short guideline aims to provide evidence-based recommendations for the use of APP in various clinical scenarios.

METHODS

An international multidisciplinary panel, assembled for their expertise and representativeness, and supported by a methodologist, performed a systematic literature search, summarized the available evidence derived from randomized clinical trials, and developed recommendations using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) methodology.

RESULTS

The panel strongly recommends that APP rather than standard supine care be used in patients with COVID-19 receiving advanced respiratory support (high-flow nasal cannula, continuous positive airway pressure or non-invasive ventilation). Due to lack of evidence from randomized controlled trials, the panel provides no recommendation on the use of APP in patients with COVID-19 supported with conventional oxygen therapy, nor in patients with AHRF due to causes other than COVID-19.

CONCLUSION

APP should be routinely implemented in patients with COVID-19 receiving advanced respiratory support.

Prone Positioning for Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure and ARDS: A Review

Prone positioning is an immediately accessible, readily implementable intervention that was proposed initially as a method for improvement in gas exchange > 50 years ago. Initially implemented clinically as an empiric therapy for refractory hypoxemia, multiple clinical trials were performed on the use of prone positioning in various respiratory conditions, cumulating in the landmark Proning Severe ARDS Patients trial, which demonstrated mortality benefit in patients with severe ARDS. After this trial and the corresponding meta-analysis, expert consensus and societal guidelines recommended the use of prone positioning for the management of severe ARDS. The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has brought prone positioning to the forefront of medicine, including widespread implementation of prone positioning in awake, spontaneously breathing, nonintubated patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. Multiple clinical trials now have been performed to investigate the safety and effectiveness of prone positioning in these patients and have enhanced our understanding of the effects of the prone position in respiratory failure. In this review, we discuss the physiologic features, clinical outcome data, practical considerations, and lingering questions of prone positioning.

Meeting the Challenges of Sepsis in Severe Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Call to Arms

Sepsis is a life-threatening organ dysfunction that is caused by a dysregulated host response to infection. Sepsis may be caused by bacterial, fungal, or viral pathogens. The clinical manifestations exhibited by patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related sepsis overlap with those exhibited by patients with sepsis from secondary bacterial or fungal infections and can include an altered mental status, dyspnea, reduced urine output, tachycardia, and hypotension. Critically ill patients hospitalized with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infections have increased risk for secondary bacterial and fungal infections. The same risk factors that may predispose to sepsis and poor outcome from bloodstream infections (BSIs) converge in patients with severe COVID-19. Current diagnostic standards for distinguishing between (1) patients who are critically ill, septic, and have COVID-19 and (2) patients with sepsis from other causes leave healthcare providers with 2 suboptimal choices. The first choice is to empirically administer broad-spectrum, antimicrobial therapy for what may or may not be sepsis. Such treatment may not only be ineffective and inappropriate, but it also has the potential to cause harm. The development of better methods to identify and characterize antimicrobial susceptibility will guide more accurate therapeutic interventions and reduce the evolution of new antibiotic-resistant strains. The ideal diagnostic test should (1) be rapid and reliable, (2) have a lower limit of detection than blood culture, and (3) be able to detect a specific organism and drug sensitivity directly from a clinical specimen. Rapid direct detection of antimicrobial-resistant pathogens would allow targeted therapy and result in improved outcomes in patients with severe COVID-19 and sepsis.

Smartphone-Guided Self-prone Positioning vs Usual Care in Nonintubated Hospital Ward Patients With COVID-19: A Pragmatic Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Safe, effective, and easily implementable treatments that reduce the progression of respiratory failure in COVID-19 are urgently needed. Despite the increased adoption of prone positioning during the pandemic, the effectiveness of this technique on progression of respiratory failure among nonintubated patients is unclear.

RESEARCH QUESTION

What is the effectiveness of smartphone-guided self-prone positioning recommendations and instructions compared with usual care in reducing progression of respiratory failure among nonintubated patients with COVID-19?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Awake Prone Position for Early Hypoxemia in COVID-19 (APPEX-19) is a multicenter randomized clinical trial that randomized nonintubated adults with COVID-19 on < 6 L/min of supplemental oxygen to receive a smartphone-guided self-prone positioning intervention or usual care. The primary outcome was the composite of respiratory deterioration (an increase in supplemental oxygen requirement) or ICU transfer. Using a Bayesian statistical approach, the posterior probability of superiority within each treatment arm (superiority threshold 95%) was calculated.

RESULTS

The trial was stopped early for slow enrollment. A total of 293 participants were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis (159 self-prone positioning intervention and 134 usual care). Among participants who self-reported body positioning (n = 139 [70 intervention, 69 usual care]), 71.4% in the intervention arm and 59.4% in the usual care arm attempted prone positioning. Thirty-one participants (posterior mean, 24.7%; 95% credible interval, 18.6-31.4) receiving usual care and 32 participants (posterior mean, 22.1%; 95% credible interval, 16.6-28.1) receiving the self-prone positioning intervention experienced the primary outcome; the posterior probability of superiority for the self-prone positioning intervention was 72.1%, less than the 95% threshold for superiority. Adverse events occurred in 26.9% of participants in the usual care arm and in 11.9% of participants in the intervention arm.

INTERPRETATION

Among nonintubated patients with COVID-19, smartphone-guided self-prone positioning recommendations and instructions did not promote strong adherence to prone positioning.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT04344587; URL: www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov.

Prevalence and Outcomes of Previously Healthy Adults Among Patients Hospitalized With Community-Onset Sepsis

BACKGROUND

Devastating cases of sepsis in previously healthy patients have received widespread attention and have helped to catalyze state and national mandates to improve sepsis detection and care. However, it is unclear what proportion of patients hospitalized with sepsis previously were healthy and how their outcomes compare with those of patients with comorbidities.

RESEARCH QUESTION

Among adults hospitalized with community-onset sepsis, how many previously were healthy and how do their outcomes compare with those of patients with comorbidities?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

We retrospectively identified all adults with community-onset sepsis hospitalized in 373 US hospitals from 2009 through 2015 using clinical indicators of presumed infection and organ dysfunction (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Adult Sepsis Event criteria). Comorbidities were identified using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification codes. We applied generalized linear mixed models to measure the associations between the presence or absence of comorbidities and short-term mortality (in-hospital death or discharge to hospice), adjusting for severity of illness on admission.

RESULTS

Of 6,715,286 hospitalized patients, 337,983 (5.0%) were hospitalized with community-onset sepsis. Most patients with sepsis (329,052 [97.4%]) had received a diagnosis of at least one comorbidity; only 2.6% previously were healthy. Patients with sepsis who previously were healthy were younger than those with comorbidities (mean age, 58.0 ± 19.8 years vs 67.0 ± 16.5 years), were less likely to require ICU care on admission (37.9% vs 50.5%), and were more likely to be discharged home (57.9% vs 45.6%), rather than to subacute facilities (16.3% vs 30.8%), but showed higher short-term mortality rates (22.8% vs 20.8%; P < .001 for all). The association between previously healthy status and higher short-term mortality persisted after risk adjustment (adjusted OR, 1.99; 95% CI, 1.87-2.13).

INTERPRETATION

The vast majority of patients hospitalized with community-onset sepsis harbor pre-existing comorbidities. However, previously healthy patients may be more likely to die when they seek treatment at the hospital with sepsis compared with patients with comorbidities. These findings underscore the importance of early sepsis recognition and treatment for all patients.

Development and Validation of a Personalized Model With Transfer Learning for Acute Kidney Injury Risk Estimation Using Electronic Health Records

IMPORTANCE

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a heterogeneous syndrome prevalent among hospitalized patients. Personalized risk estimation and risk factor identification may allow effective intervention and improved outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To develop and validate personalized AKI risk estimation models using electronic health records (EHRs), examine whether personalized models were beneficial in comparison with global and subgroup models, and assess the heterogeneity of risk factors and their outcomes in different subpopulations.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This diagnostic study analyzed EHR data from 1 tertiary care hospital and used machine learning and logistic regression to develop and validate global, subgroup, and personalized risk estimation models. Transfer learning was implemented to enhance the personalized model. Predictor outcomes across subpopulations were analyzed, and metaregression was used to explore predictor interactions. Adults who were hospitalized for 2 or more days from November 1, 2007, to December 31, 2016, were included in the analysis. Patients with moderate or severe kidney dysfunction at admission were excluded. Data were analyzed between August 28, 2019, and May 8, 2022.

EXPOSURES

Clinical and laboratory variables in the EHR.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The main outcome was AKI of any severity, and AKI was defined using the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes serum creatinine criteria. Performance of the models was measured with area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), area under the precision-recall curve, and calibration.

RESULTS

The study cohort comprised 76 957 inpatient encounters. Patients had a mean (SD) age of 55.5 (17.4) years and included 42 159 men (54.8%). The personalized model with transfer learning outperformed the global model for AKI estimation in terms of AUROC among general inpatients (0.78 [95% CI, 0.77-0.79] vs 0.76 [95% CI, 0.75-0.76]; P < .001) and across the high-risk subgroups (0.79 [95% CI, 0.78-0.80] vs 0.75 [95% CI, 0.74-0.77]; P < .001) and low-risk subgroups (0.74 [95% CI, 0.73-0.75] vs 0.71 [95% CI, 0.70-0.72]; P < .001). The AUROC improvement reached 0.13 for the high-risk subgroups, such as those undergoing liver transplant and cardiac surgery. Moreover, the personalized model with transfer learning performed better than or comparably with the best published models in well-studied AKI subgroups. Predictor outcomes varied significantly between patients, and interaction analysis uncovered modifiers of the predictor outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Results of this study demonstrated that a personalized modeling with transfer learning is an improved AKI risk estimation approach that can be used across diverse patient subgroups. Risk factor heterogeneity and interactions at the individual level highlighted the need for agile, personalized care.

Awake prone positioning for non-intubated patients with COVID-19-related acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Awake prone positioning has been broadly utilised for non-intubated patients with COVID-19-related acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure, but the results from published randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in the past year are contradictory. We aimed to systematically synthesise the outcomes associated with awake prone positioning, and evaluate these outcomes in relevant subpopulations.

Methods

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, two independent groups of researchers searched MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, MedRxiv, BioRxiv, and ClinicalTrials.gov for RCTs and observational studies (with a control group) of awake prone positioning in patients with COVID-19-related acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure published in English from Jan 1, 2020, to Nov 8, 2021. We excluded trials that included patients intubated before or at enrolment, paediatric patients (ie, younger than 18 years), or trials that did not include the supine position in the control group. The same two independent groups screened studies, extracted the summary data from published reports, and assessed the risk of bias. We used a random-effects meta-analysis to pool individual studies. We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach to assess the certainty and quality of the evidence. The primary outcome was the reported cumulative intubation risk across RCTs, and effect estimates were calculated as risk ratios (RR;95% CI). The analysis was primarily conducted on RCTs, and observational studies were used for sensitivity analyses. No serious adverse events associated with awake prone positioning were reported. The study protocol was prospectively registered with PROSPERO, CRD42021271285.

Findings

A total of 1243 studies were identified, we assessed 138 full-text articles and received the aggregated results of three unpublished RCTs; therefore, after exclusions, 29 studies were included in the study. Ten were RCTs (1985 patients) and 19 were observational studies (2669 patients). In ten RCTs, awake prone positioning compared with the supine position significantly reduced the need for intubation in the overall population (RR 0·84 [95% CI 0·72–0·97]). A reduced need for intubation was shown among patients who received advanced respiratory support (ie, high-flow nasal cannula or non-invasive ventilation) at enrolment (RR 0·83 [0·71–0·97]) and in intensive care unit (ICU) settings (RR 0·83 [0·71–0·97]) but not in patients receiving conventional oxygen therapy (RR 0·87 [0·45–1·69]) or in non-ICU settings (RR 0·88 [0·44–1·76]). No obvious risk of bias and publication bias was found among the included RCTs for the primary outcome.

Interpretation

In patients with COVID-19-related acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure, awake prone positioning reduced the need for intubation, particularly among those requiring advanced respiratory support and those in ICU settings. Awake prone positioning should be used in patients who have acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19 and require advanced respiratory support or are treated in the ICU.

Funding

OpenAI, Rice Foundation, National Institute for Health Research, and Oxford Biomedical Research Centre.

Antibiotic Timing and Progression to Septic Shock Among Patients in the ED With Suspected Infection

BACKGROUND

Recent medical society opinions have questioned the use of early antimicrobials in patients with sepsis, but without septic shock.

RESEARCH QUESTION

Is time from ED presentation to administration of antibiotics associated with progression to septic shock among patients with suspected infection?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study from March 2007 through March 2020. All adults with suspected infection and first antimicrobial administered within 24 h of triage were included. Patients with shock on presentation were excluded. We performed univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses predicting progression to septic shock.

RESULTS

Seventy-four thousand one hundred fourteen patient encounters were included in the study. Five thousand five hundred ten patients (7.4%) progressed to septic shock. Of the patients who progressed to septic shock, 88% had received antimicrobials within the first 5 h from triage. In the multivariate logistic model, time (in hours) to first antimicrobial administration showed an OR of 1.03 (95% CI, 1.02-1.04; P < .001) for progression to septic shock and 1.02 (95% CI, 0.99-1.04; P = .121) for in-hospital mortality. When adjusted for severity of illness, each hour delayed until initial antimicrobial administration was associated with a 4.0% increase in progression to septic shock for every 1 h up to 24 h from triage. Patients with positive quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) results were given antibiotics at an earlier time point than patients with positive systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) score (0.82 h vs 1.2 h; P < .05). However, median time to septic shock was significantly shorter (P < .05) for patients with positive qSOFA results at triage (11.2 h) compared with patients with positive SIRS score at triage (26 h).

INTERPRETATION

Delays in first antimicrobial administration in patients with suspected infection are associated with rapid increases in likelihood of progression to septic shock. Additionally, qSOFA score has higher specificity than SIRS score for predicting septic shock, but is associated with a worse outcome, even when patients receive early antibiotics.

Variations in end-of-life practices in intensive care units worldwide (Ethicus-2): a prospective observational study

BACKGROUND

End-of-life practices vary among intensive care units (ICUs) worldwide. Differences can result in variable use of disproportionate or non-beneficial life-sustaining interventions across diverse world regions. This study investigated global disparities in end-of-life practices.

METHODS

In this prospective, multinational, observational study, consecutive adult ICU patients who died or had a limitation of life-sustaining treatment (withholding or withdrawing life-sustaining therapy and active shortening of the dying process) during a 6-month period between Sept 1, 2015, and Sept 30, 2016, were recruited from 199 ICUs in 36 countries. The primary outcome was the end-of-life practice as defined by the end-of-life categories: withholding or withdrawing life-sustaining therapy, active shortening of the dying process, or failed cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). Patients with brain death were included in a separate predefined end-of-life category. Data collection included patient characteristics, diagnoses, end-of-life decisions and their timing related to admission and discharge, or death, with comparisons across different regions. Patients were studied until death or 2 months from the first limitation decision.

FINDINGS

Of 87 951 patients admitted to ICU, 12 850 (14·6%) were included in the study population. The number of patients categorised into each of the different end-of-life categories were significantly different for each region (p<0·001). Limitation of life-sustaining treatment occurred in 10 401 patients (11·8% of 87 951 ICU admissions and 80·9% of 12 850 in the study population). The most common limitation was withholding life-sustaining treatment (5661 [44·1%]), followed by withdrawing life-sustaining treatment (4680 [36·4%]). More treatment withdrawing was observed in Northern Europe (1217 [52·8%] of 2305) and Australia/New Zealand (247 [45·7%] of 541) than in Latin America (33 [5·8%] of 571) and Africa (21 [13·0%] of 162). Shortening of the dying process was uncommon across all regions (60 [0·5%]). One in five patients with treatment limitations survived hospitalisation. Death due to failed CPR occurred in 1799 (14%) of the study population, and brain death occurred in 650 (5·1%). Failure of CPR occurred less frequently in Northern Europe (85 [3·7%] of 2305), Australia/New Zealand (23 [4·3%] of 541), and North America (78 [8·5%] of 918) than in Africa (106 [65·4%] of 162), Latin America (160 [28·0%] of 571), and Southern Europe (590 [22·5%] of 2622). Factors associated with treatment limitations were region, age, and diagnoses (acute and chronic), and country end-of-life legislation.

INTERPRETATION

Limitation of life-sustaining therapies is common worldwide with regional variability. Withholding treatment is more common than withdrawing treatment. Variations in type, frequency, and timing of end-of-life decisions were observed. Recognising regional differences and the reasons behind these differences might help improve end-of-life care worldwide.

FUNDING

None.

Developing Treatment Guidelines During a Pandemic Health Crisis: Lessons Learned From COVID-19

The development of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines began in March 2020 in response to a request from the White House Coronavirus Task Force. Within 4 days of the request, the NIH COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel was established and the first meeting took place (virtually-as did subsequent meetings). The Panel comprises 57 individuals representing 6 governmental agencies, 11 professional societies, and 33 medical centers, plus 2 community members, who have worked together to create and frequently update the guidelines on the basis of evidence from the most recent clinical studies available. The initial version of the guidelines was completed within 2 weeks and posted online on 21 April 2020. Initially, sparse evidence was available to guide COVID-19 treatment recommendations. However, treatment data rapidly accrued based on results from clinical studies that used various study designs and evaluated different therapeutic agents and approaches. Data have continued to evolve at a rapid pace, leading to 24 revisions and updates of the guidelines in the first year. This process has provided important lessons for responding to an unprecedented public health emergency: Providers and stakeholders are eager to access credible, current treatment guidelines; governmental agencies, professional societies, and health care leaders can work together effectively and expeditiously; panelists from various disciplines, including biostatistics, are important for quickly developing well-informed recommendations; well-powered randomized clinical trials continue to provide the most compelling evidence to guide treatment recommendations; treatment recommendations need to be developed in a confidential setting free from external pressures; development of a user-friendly, web-based format for communicating with health care providers requires substantial administrative support; and frequent updates are necessary as clinical evidence rapidly emerges.

Excipient-Induced Pulmonary Vascular Disease: An Underrecognized and Deadly Complication of Opioid Addiction

Despite widespread public health concern regarding opioid misuse and overuse, there is a paucity of literature on the acute and chronic pulmonary vascular and cardiac implications of excipient lung disease. This case series describes the clinical presentation of five adult patients who experienced profound pulmonary hypertension and right heart failure in the setting of confirmed or suspected crushed opioid injection at a single academic center between 2012 and 2019. The clinical characteristics and right heart catheterization data presented in these cases demonstrate the acute intravascular effects of the intravenous injection of crushed opioids and potential for hemodynamic collapse. Moreover, these cases suggest that survivors of acute excipient lung disease may develop chronic pulmonary vascular disease. Further studies are needed to explore the epidemiology and outcomes of oral opioid-induced intravascular excipient lung disease to increase awareness of this life-threatening complication among health care professionals and guide treatment and prevention measures.

Clinical factors associated with rapid treatment of sepsis

PURPOSE

To understand what clinical presenting features of sepsis patients are historically associated with rapid treatment involving antibiotics and fluids, as appropriate.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective, observational cohort study using a machine-learning model with an embedded feature selection mechanism (gradient boosting machine).

METHODS

For adult patients (age ≥ 18 years) who were admitted through Emergency Department (ED) meeting clinical criteria of severe sepsis from 11/2007 to 05/2018 at an urban tertiary academic medical center, we developed gradient boosting models (GBMs) using a total of 760 original and derived variables, including demographic variables, laboratory values, vital signs, infection diagnosis present on admission, and historical comorbidities. We identified the most impactful factors having strong association with rapid treatment, and further applied the Shapley Additive exPlanation (SHAP) values to examine the marginal effects for each factor.

RESULTS

For the subgroups with or without fluid bolus treatment component, the models achieved high accuracy of area-under-receiver-operating-curve of 0.91 [95% CI, 0.86-0.95] and 0.84 [95% CI, 0.81-0.86], and sensitivity of 0.81[95% CI, 0.72-0.87] and 0.91 [95% CI, 0.81-0.97], respectively. We identified the 20 most impactful factors associated with rapid treatment for each subgroup. In the non-hypotensive subgroup, initial physiological values were the most impactful to the model, while in the fluid bolus subgroup, value minima and maxima tended to be the most impactful.

CONCLUSION

These machine learning methods identified factors associated with rapid treatment of severe sepsis patients from a large volume of high-dimensional clinical data. The results provide insight into differences in the rapid provision of treatment among patients with sepsis.

Quality of the discussion of asthma on twitter

INTRODUCTION

Patients obtain a large amount of medical information online. Much of this information may not be reliable or of high quality. We investigated what influences the discussion of asthma on Twitter by evaluating the most popular tweets and the quality of the links shared.

METHODS

We used Symplur Signals to extract data from Twitter examining characteristics of the top 100 most shared tweets and the 50 most shared links that included the hashtag #asthma. Information on each site was assessed using an Asthma Content score, and validated DISCERN scores and HONCode criteria.

RESULTS

The top 100 asthma-related tweets were shared 10,169 times and had 16,044 likes. Healthcare organizations posted 49 of the top 100 tweets, non-healthcare individuals posted 20, non-healthcare organizations posted 16 and clinicians posted 14. Of the top 100 tweets, 62 were educational, 11 research-related, 10 political and 15 promotional. The top 50 links were shared 6009 times (median number of shares 92 per link (range 60-710)). Links most commonly (42%) led to educational content while 24% of links led to research articles, 22% to promotional websites, and 12% to political websites. Educational links had higher Asthma Content scores than other links (p < 0.005). Overall, all three scores were low for all types of links. Only 34% of sites met HONCode criteria, and 14% were assessed as high quality by DISCERN score.

CONCLUSION

The top tweets using the hashtag #asthma were commonly educational. The majority of top links on Twitter scored poorly on asthma content, quality, and reliability.

891. Epidemiology and Outcomes of Sepsis in Previously Healthy Patients

Background

Devastating cases of sepsis in previously healthy patients have received widespread attention and helped catalyze state and national mandates to improve sepsis detection and care. It is unclear, however, what proportion of sepsis cases occur in previously healthy people and how their outcomes compare to patients with comorbidities.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective study of adults admitted from 2009 to 2015 to 373 US hospitals from 3 cohorts using detailed electronic health record data. We identified patients with community-onset sepsis using CDC Adult Sepsis Event criteria and reviewed patients’ ICD-9-CM codes to identify major and minor comorbidities. Generalized linear mixed models were used to identify the association between healthy vs. comorbid status and short-term mortality (in-hospital death or discharge to hospice) among sepsis patients, controlling for demographics and clinical characteristics.

Results

The cohort included 6,715,286 adult hospitalizations, of which 337,983 (5%) met community-onset sepsis criteria. Most (329,052; 97.4%) sepsis patients had at least one comorbidity (96.1% major, 1.2% minor, 0.1% pregnant) whereas the minority (8,931; 2.6%) were previously healthy. Hospitalized patients without sepsis, by contrast, tended to be healthier (6.2%, Figure 1). Compared with sepsis patients with comorbidities, previously healthy sepsis patients were younger (mean 48.3 + 20 vs. 66.9 + 16.5 years, P < 0.001) and less likely to require ICU care on admission (30.9% vs. 50.5%, P < 0.001). Previously healthy patients were more likely to be discharged home vs. subacute facilities compared with sepsis patients with comorbidities but had higher short-term mortality rates (22.7% vs. 20.8%, P < 0.001) (Figure 2). The increased risk of short-term death in healthy patients persisted on multivariate analysis (adjusted odds ratios 1.36–1.79, P < 0.001).

Conclusion

The vast majority of patients who develop community-onset sepsis have pre-existing conditions. However, previously healthy patients may be at higher risk for death due to sepsis compared with patients with comorbidities. These findings provide context for high-profile reports about sepsis deaths in previously healthy people and underscore the importance of early sepsis recognition and treatment for all patients.

Disclosures

All Authors: No reported Disclosures.

Serum lactate poorly predicts central venous oxygen saturation in critically ill patients: a retrospective cohort study

Background

Serum lactate and central venous oxygen saturation (ScvO₂) are commonly used and commonly recommended as markers of tissue oxygenation in shock states. Medical literature has both explicitly stated and implied that the two biomarkers are interchangeable in the management of patients with shock. However, there have been relatively few direct comparisons of these tests in clinical circumstances, and the relationship between them is uncertain. The objective of our study was to evaluate whether simultaneous or near-simultaneous measurements of lactate and ScvO₂ reveal a consistent relationship between these two biomarkers.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study was conducted in an urban, academic US hospital. All adults in ICUs between March 2007 and March 2017 who had a lactate measurement and ScvO₂ or mixed venous oxygen saturation (SvO₂) measurement made +/− 1 h from the lactate were included. Linear and non-linear correlations of ScvO₂ and lactate were assessed in a variety of shock states.

Results

Two thousand sixty-two patients were included. Lactate and ScvO₂ correlated poorly (r² = 0.0041, p = 0.0019). This was true for patients with ScvO₂ ≤ 65% (r² = 0.0431, p < 0.001), patients with normal kidney and liver function (r² = 0.0517, p < 0.001), and septic shock patients (r² = 0.0037, p = 0.17). For patients with an O₂ extraction ratio ≥ 50%, lactate and ScvO₂ were strongly correlated (r² = 0.93, p = 0.0019), but these patients represented only 2.8% of patients in whom the ratio could be calculated.

Conclusions

Lactate can predict ScvO₂ when patients are at or below the critical oxygen delivery threshold, but relatively few shock patients meet this criterion. In the overall population of critically ill patients, serum lactate predicts ScvO₂ poorly, even after controlling for factors that may affect lactate production. Lactate and ScvO₂ should not be assumed to be interchangeable markers of tissue oxygenation/perfusion.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s40560-019-0401-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Predictors of 24-h mortality after inter-hospital transfer to a tertiary medical intensive care unit

Purpose

To identify variables associated with 24-h mortality after inter-hospital transfer.

Materials and methods

Single center retrospective study of adult patients transferred to a tertiary care medical ICU between 1 January 2010 and 15 April 2014. Demographic, clinical, physiologic, and laboratory data were collected. The Lasso method was used for logistic regression to identify predictors of 24-h mortality after inter-hospital ICU transfer.

Results

We identified 773 patients. Median age was 58 years (IQR 45-69), 49% were female, 83% Caucasian, and 48% had Medicare. The median length of stay at the transferring facility was 1.0 day (IQR 0-2). Median SOFA score on the day of ICU transfer was 5 (IQR 2-8). Twenty-two (3%) died within 24 h after inter-hospital transfer. SOFA score of 12-16 the day of inter-hospital transfer (odds ratio (OR) 7.77, 95% CI 1.21-66.26, p = 0.037), FiO₂ 0.8-1.0 on ICU arrival, and cardiac arrest prior to transfer (OR 4.94, 95% CI 1.43-15.96, p = 0.009) were associated with an increased risk for 24-h mortality after inter-hospital transfer.

Conclusions

Our study identified biologically plausible and potentially modifiable factors associated with 24-h mortality after inter-hospital medical ICU transfer, which may serve to inform patients and families of readiness and risk for mortality after inter-hospital transfer.

SIRS in the Time of Sepsis-3

Severe sepsis is a common, deadly, and diagnostically vexing condition. Recent recommendations for diagnosing sepsis, referred to as consensus guidelines, provide a definition of sepsis and remove the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) as a component of the diagnostic process. A concise definition of sepsis is welcomed. However, the approach to developing these guidelines, although thorough, had weaknesses. Emphasis is placed on mortality prediction rather than on early diagnosis. Diagnostic criteria are recommended to replace current criteria without evidence of any effect that their use would have on mortality. SIRS is a prevalent feature of patients with sepsis, should remain an important component of the diagnostic process, and remains a valuable term for discussing patients with life-threatening organ dysfunction caused by infection.

Stroke volume guided resuscitation in severe sepsis and septic shock improves outcomes

To determine whether stroke volume (SV) guided fluid resuscitation in patients with severe sepsis and septic shock alters Intensive Care Unit (ICU) fluid balance and secondary outcomes, this retrospective cohort study evaluated consecutive patients admitted to an ICU with the primary diagnosis of severe sepsis or septic shock. Cohorts were based on fluid resuscitation guided by changes in SV or by usual care (UC). The SV group comprised 100 patients, with 91 patients in the UC group. Net fluid balance for the ICU stay was lower in the SV group (1.77L) than in the UC group (5.36L) (p=0.022). ICU length of stay was 2.89days shorter (p=0.03) and duration of vasopressors was 32.8h less (p=0.001) in the SV group. SV group required less mechanical ventilation (RR, 0.51; p=0.0001). The SV group was less likely to require acute hemodialysis (6.25%) compared with the UC group (19.5%) (RR, 0.32; p=0.01). In multivariable analysis, SV was an independent predictor of lower fluid balance, LOS, time on vasopressors, and not needing mechanical ventilation. This study demonstrated that SV guided fluid resuscitation in patients with severe sepsis and septic shock was associated with reduced fluid balance and improved secondary outcomes.

Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2016

OBJECTIVE

To provide an update to "Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2012."

DESIGN

A consensus committee of 55 international experts representing 25 international organizations was convened. Nominal groups were assembled at key international meetings (for those committee members attending the conference). A formal conflict-of-interest (COI) policy was developed at the onset of the process and enforced throughout. A stand-alone meeting was held for all panel members in December 2015. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee served as an integral part of the development.

METHODS

The panel consisted of five sections: hemodynamics, infection, adjunctive therapies, metabolic, and ventilation. Population, intervention, comparison, and outcomes (PICO) questions were reviewed and updated as needed, and evidence profiles were generated. Each subgroup generated a list of questions, searched for best available evidence, and then followed the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system to assess the quality of evidence from high to very low, and to formulate recommendations as strong or weak, or best practice statement when applicable.

RESULTS

The Surviving Sepsis Guideline panel provided 93 statements on early management and resuscitation of patients with sepsis or septic shock. Overall, 32 were strong recommendations, 39 were weak recommendations, and 18 were best-practice statements. No recommendation was provided for four questions.

CONCLUSIONS

Substantial agreement exists among a large cohort of international experts regarding many strong recommendations for the best care of patients with sepsis. Although a significant number of aspects of care have relatively weak support, evidence-based recommendations regarding the acute management of sepsis and septic shock are the foundation of improved outcomes for these critically ill patients with high mortality.

Increased Time to Initial Antimicrobial Administration Is Associated With Progression to Septic Shock in Severe Sepsis Patients

OBJECTIVES

To determine if time to initial antimicrobial is associated with progression of severe sepsis to septic shock.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort.

SETTING

Six hundred fifty-six bed urban academic medical center.

PATIENTS

Emergency department patients greater than or equal to 18 years old with severe sepsis and/or septic shock and antimicrobial administration within 24 hours. Patients with shock on presentation were excluded.

INTERVENTIONS

Not available.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

We identified 3,929 severe sepsis patients, with overall mortality 12.8%. Nine hundred eighty-four patients (25.0%) progressed to septic shock. The median time to antimicrobial was 3.77 hours (interquartile range = 1.96-6.42) in those who progressed versus 2.76 hours (interquartile range = 1.60-4.82) in those who did not (p < 0.001). Multivariate logistic regression demonstrated that male sex (odds ratio = 1.18; 95% CI, 1.01-1.36), Charlson Comorbidity Index (odds ratio = 1.18; 95% CI, 1.11-1.27), number of infections (odds ratio = 1.05; 95% CI, 1.02-1.08), and time to first antimicrobial (odds ratio = 1.08; 95% CI, 1.06-1.10) were associated with progression. Each hour until initial antimicrobial administration was associated with a 8.0% increase in progression to septic shock. Additionally, time to broad-spectrum antimicrobial was associated with progression (odds ratio = 1.06; 95% CI, 1.05-1.08). Time to initial antimicrobial was also associated with in-hospital mortality (odds ratio = 1.05; 95% CI, 1.03-1.07).

CONCLUSIONS

This study emphasizes the importance of early, broad-spectrum antimicrobial administration in severe sepsis patients admitted through the emergency department, as longer time to initial antimicrobial administration is associated with increased progression of severe sepsis to septic shock and increased mortality.

Early management of sepsis with emphasis on early goal directed therapy: AME evidence series 002

Severe sepsis and septic shock are major causes of morbidity and mortality in patients entering the emergency department (ED) or intensive care unit (ICU). Despite substantial efforts to improve patient outcome, treatment of sepsis remains challenging to clinicians. In this context, early goal directed therapy (EGDT) represents an important concept emphasizing both early recognition of sepsis and prompt initiation of a structured treatment algorithm. As part of the AME evidence series on sepsis, we conducted a systematic review of all randomized controlled EGDT trials. Focus was laid on the setting (emergency department versus ICU) where EGDT was carried out. Early recognition of sepsis, through clinical or automated systems for early alert, together with well-timed initiation of the recommended therapy bundles may improve patients' outcome. However, the original "EGDT" protocol by Rivers and coworkers has been largely modified in subsequent trials. Currently, many investigators opt for an "expanded" EGDT (as suggested by the Surviving Sepsis Campaign). Evidence is also presented on the effectiveness of automated systems for early sepsis alert. Early recognition of sepsis and well-timed initiation of the SSC bundle may improve patient outcome.

Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2016

OBJECTIVE

To provide an update to "Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2012".

DESIGN

A consensus committee of 55 international experts representing 25 international organizations was convened. Nominal groups were assembled at key international meetings (for those committee members attending the conference). A formal conflict-of-interest (COI) policy was developed at the onset of the process and enforced throughout. A stand-alone meeting was held for all panel members in December 2015. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee served as an integral part of the development.

METHODS

The panel consisted of five sections: hemodynamics, infection, adjunctive therapies, metabolic, and ventilation. Population, intervention, comparison, and outcomes (PICO) questions were reviewed and updated as needed, and evidence profiles were generated. Each subgroup generated a list of questions, searched for best available evidence, and then followed the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system to assess the quality of evidence from high to very low, and to formulate recommendations as strong or weak, or best practice statement when applicable.

RESULTS

The Surviving Sepsis Guideline panel provided 93 statements on early management and resuscitation of patients with sepsis or septic shock. Overall, 32 were strong recommendations, 39 were weak recommendations, and 18 were best-practice statements. No recommendation was provided for four questions.

CONCLUSIONS

Substantial agreement exists among a large cohort of international experts regarding many strong recommendations for the best care of patients with sepsis. Although a significant number of aspects of care have relatively weak support, evidence-based recommendations regarding the acute management of sepsis and septic shock are the foundation of improved outcomes for these critically ill patients with high mortality.

Early goal-directed therapy in severe sepsis and septic shock: insights and comparisons to ProCESS, ProMISe, and ARISE

Prior to 2001 there was no standard for early management of severe sepsis and septic shock in the emergency department. In the presence of standard or usual care, the prevailing mortality was over 40-50 %. In response, a systems-based approach, similar to that in acute myocardial infarction, stroke and trauma, called early goal-directed therapy was compared to standard care and this clinical trial resulted in a significant mortality reduction. Since the publication of that trial, similar outcome benefits have been reported in over 70 observational and randomized controlled studies comprising over 70,000 patients. As a result, early goal-directed therapy was largely incorporated into the first 6 hours of sepsis management (resuscitation bundle) adopted by the Surviving Sepsis Campaign and disseminated internationally as the standard of care for early sepsis management. Recently a trio of trials (ProCESS, ARISE, and ProMISe), while reporting an all-time low sepsis mortality, question the continued need for all of the elements of early goal-directed therapy or the need for protocolized care for patients with severe and septic shock. A review of the early hemodynamic pathogenesis, historical development, and definition of early goal-directed therapy, comparing trial conduction methodology and the changing landscape of sepsis mortality, are essential for an appropriate interpretation of these trials and their conclusions.

The Surviving Sepsis Campaign bundles and outcome: results from the International Multicentre Prevalence Study on Sepsis (the IMPreSS study)

INTRODUCTION

Despite evidence demonstrating the value of performance initiatives, marked differences remain between hospitals in the delivery of care for patients with sepsis. The aims of this study were to improve our understanding of how compliance with the 3-h and 6-h Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC) bundles are used in different geographic areas, and how this relates to outcome.

METHODS

This was a global, prospective, observational, quality improvement study of compliance with the SSC bundles in patients with either severe sepsis or septic shock.

RESULTS

A total of 1794 patients from 62 countries were enrolled in the study with either severe sepsis or septic shock. Overall compliance with all the 3-h bundle metrics was 19%. This was associated with lower hospital mortality than non-compliance (20 vs. 31%, p < 0.001). Overall compliance with all the 6-h bundle metrics was 36%. This was associated with lower hospital mortality than non-compliance (22 vs. 32%, p < 0.001). After adjusting the crude mortality differences for ICU admission, sepsis status (severe sepsis or septic shock), location of diagnosis, APACHE II score and country, compliance remained independently associated with improvements in hospital mortality for both the 3-h bundle (OR = 0.64 (95% CI 0.47-0.87), p = 0.004)) and 6-h bundle (OR = 0.71 (95% CI 0.56-0.90), p = 0.005)).

DISCUSSION

Compliance with all of the evidence-based bundle metrics was not high. Patients whose care included compliance with all of these metrics had a 40% reduction in the odds of dying in hospital with the 3-h bundle and 36% for the 6-h bundle.

Identifying severe sepsis via electronic surveillance

An electronic sepsis surveillance system (ESSV) was developed to identify severe sepsis and determine its time of onset. ESSV sensitivity and specificity were evaluated during an 11-day prospective pilot and a 30-day retrospective trial. ESSV diagnostic alerts were compared with care team diagnoses and with administrative records, using expert adjudication as the standard for comparison. ESSV was 100% sensitive for detecting severe sepsis but only 62.0% specific. During the pilot, the software identified 477 patients, compared with 18 by adjudication. In the 30-day trial, adjudication identified 164 severe sepsis patients, whereas ESSV detected 996. ESSV was more sensitive but less specific than care team or administrative data. ESSV-identified time of severe sepsis onset was a median of 0.00 hours later than adjudication (interquartile range = 0.05). The system can be a useful tool when implemented appropriately but lacks specificity, largely because of its reliance on discreet data fields.

Pulmonary manifestations of the pre-engraftment syndrome after umbilical cord blood transplantation

Pre-engraftment syndrome (PES) is a condition occurring after umbilical cord blood transplantation (UCBT) characterized by fever and erythematous skin rash prior to neutrophil engraftment. We sought to determine the incidence and characterize the pulmonary manifestations of PES. A retrospective review of patients who underwent UCBT at the University of Kansas Medical Center over a 5-year period was performed. Data collected included patient baseline characteristics, presence of PES, pulmonary findings, treatments, and survival. Forty-four patients underwent UCBT with 22 of those patients developing PES. Full-intensity myeloablative conditioning regimen was found to be a risk factor for development of PES. Of those 22 patients, 13 had resting hypoxemia. The most common radiographic findings included diffuse ground glass opacities with pleural effusions. Fifteen patients with PES received corticosteroids, of which 12 had improvement in fevers and rash. These patients had a trend toward worse mortality than those not receiving corticosteroids. There was a nonsignificant trend toward worse survival in patients with PES and hypoxemia compared to those without hypoxemia. PES is a common complication following cord blood transplantation, with hypoxemia being present in over half of patients with PES. Hypoxemia with PES and treatment with corticosteroids may portend a worse prognosis.