Incremental value of high-sensitive troponin T in addition to the revised cardiac index for peri-operative risk stratification in non-cardiac surgery

Aims We aimed to evaluate the incremental value of high-sensitive troponin T (hsTnT) for risk prediction prior to non-cardiac surgery in comparison with the established revised cardiac index. Methods and results In this prospective, international multicentre observational study, 979 patients prior to non-cardiac surgery were enrolled. The endpoints were in-hospital mortality, the combination of death, acute myocardial infarction, cardiac arrest, cardio-pulmonary resuscitation, and acute decompensated heart failure. Twenty-five patients (2.6%) deceased and 36 (3.7%) of the patients experienced the combined endpoint. Cardiac markers were elevated in those patients who died when compared with survivors (hsTnT: 21 ng/L vs. 7 ng/L; P < 0.001; NT-proBNP: 576 pg/mL vs. 166 pg/mL; P < 0.001). Applying a cut-off for hsTnT of 14 ng/L and for NT-proBNP of 300 pg/mL, those patients with elevated hsTnT had a mortality of 6.9 vs. 1.2% (P < 0.001) and with elevated NT-proBNP 4.8 vs. 1.4% (P = 0.002). The highest AUC of the ROC curve was found for hsTnT as a predictor for mortality of 0.809. In a multivariate Cox regression analyses, hsTnT was the strongest independent predictor for the combined endpoint [HR 2.6 (95% CI: 1.3-5.3); P = 0.01]. Conclusion High-sensitive troponin T provides strong prognostic information in patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery incremental to the widely accepted revised cardiac inde

Treating patients across European Union borders : an international survey in light of the coronavirus disease-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND In light of the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, how resources are managed and the critically ill are allocated must be reviewed. Although ethical recommendations have been published, strategies for dealing with overcapacity of critical care resources have so far not been addressed. OBJECTIVES Assess expert opinion for allocation preferences regarding the growing imbalance between supply and demand for medical resources. DESIGN A 10-item questionnaire was developed and sent to the most prominent members of the European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care (ESAIC). SETTING Survey via a web-based platform. PATIENTS Respondents were members of the National Anaesthesiologists Societies Committee and Council Members of the ESAIC; 74 of 80 (92.5%), responded to the survey. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS Responses were analysed thematically. The majority of respondents (83.8%), indicated that resources for COVID-19 were available at the time of the survey. Of the representatives of the ESAIC governing bodies, 58.9% favoured an allocation of excess critical care capacity: 69% wished to make them available to supraregional patients, whereas 30.9% preferred to keep the resources available for the local population. Regarding the type of distribution of resources, 35.3% preferred to make critical care available, 32.4% favoured the allocation of medical equipment and 32.4% wished to support both options. The majority (59.5%) supported the implementation of a central European institution to manage such resource allocation. CONCLUSION Experts in critical care support the allocation of resources from centres with overcapacity. The results indicate the need for centrally administered allocation mechanisms that are not based on ethically disputable triage systems. It seems, therefore, that there is wide acceptance and solidarity among the European anaesthesiological community that local medical and human pressure should be relieved during a pandemic by implementing national and international re-allocation strategies among healthcare providers and healthcare systems

Prevalence, associated factors and outcomes of pressure injuries in adult intensive care unit patients: the DecubICUs study

Purpose: Intensive care unit (ICU) patients are particularly susceptible to developing pressure injuries. Epidemiologic data is however unavailable. We aimed to provide an international picture of the extent of pressure injuries and factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries in adult ICU patients. Methods: International 1-day point-prevalence study; follow-up for outcome assessment until hospital discharge (maximum 12 weeks). Factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injury and hospital mortality were assessed by generalised linear mixed-effects regression analysis. Results: Data from 13,254 patients in 1117 ICUs (90 countries) revealed 6747 pressure injuries; 3997 (59.2%) were ICU-acquired. Overall prevalence was 26.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 25.9-27.3). ICU-acquired prevalence was 16.2% (95% CI 15.6-16.8). Sacrum (37%) and heels (19.5%) were most affected. Factors independently associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries were older age, male sex, being underweight, emergency surgery, higher Simplified Acute Physiology Score II, Braden score 3 days, comorbidities (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, immunodeficiency), organ support (renal replacement, mechanical ventilation on ICU admission), and being in a low or lower-middle income-economy. Gradually increasing associations with mortality were identified for increasing severity of pressure injury: stage I (odds ratio [OR] 1.5; 95% CI 1.2-1.8), stage II (OR 1.6; 95% CI 1.4-1.9), and stage III or worse (OR 2.8; 95% CI 2.3-3.3). Conclusion: Pressure injuries are common in adult ICU patients. ICU-acquired pressure injuries are associated with mainly intrinsic factors and mortality. Optimal care standards, increased awareness, appropriate resource allocation, and further research into optimal prevention are pivotal to tackle this important patient safety threat

Prospective, randomized, controlled, double-blind, multi-center, multinational study on the safety and efficacy of 6% Hydroxyethyl starch (HES) sOlution versus an Electrolyte solutioN In patients undergoing eleCtive abdominal Surgery:study protocol for the PHOENICS study

BACKGROUND: Hydroxyethyl starch (HES) solutions are used for volume therapy to treat hypovolemia due to acute blood loss and to maintain hemodynamic stability. This study was requested by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) to provide more evidence on the long-term safety and efficacy of HES solutions in the perioperative setting. METHODS: PHOENICS is a randomized, controlled, double-blind, multi-center, multinational phase IV (IIIb) study with two parallel groups to investigate non-inferiority regarding the safety of a 6% HES 130 solution (Volulyte 6%, Fresenius Kabi, Germany) compared with a crystalloid solution (Ionolyte, Fresenius Kabi, Germany) for infusion in patients with acute blood loss during elective abdominal surgery. A total of 2280 eligible patients (male and female patients willing to participate, with expected blood loss ≥ 500 ml, aged > 40 and ≤ 85 years, and ASA Physical status II–III) are randomly assigned to receive either HES or crystalloid solution for the treatment of hypovolemia due to surgery-induced acute blood loss in hospitals in up to 11 European countries. The dosing of investigational products (IP) is individualized to patients’ volume needs and guided by a volume algorithm. Patients are treated with IP for maximally 24 h or until the maximum daily dose of 30 ml/kg body weight is reached. The primary endpoint is the treatment group mean difference in the change from the pre-operative baseline value in cystatin-C-based estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), to the eGFR value calculated from the highest cystatin-C level measured during post-operative days 1-3. Further safety and efficacy parameters include, e.g., combined mortality/major post-operative complications until day 90, renal function, coagulation, inflammation, hemodynamic variables, hospital length of stay, major post-operative complications, and 28-day, 90-day, and 1-year mortality. DISCUSSION: The study will provide important information on the long-term safety and efficacy of HES 130/0.4 when administered according to the approved European product information. The results will be relevant for volume therapy of surgical patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT 2016-002162-30. ClinicalTrials.govNCT0327854

Correction to: Prevalence, associated factors and outcomes of pressure injuries in adult intensive care unit patients: the DecubICUs study.

Funder: European Society of Intensive Care Medicine; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100013347Funder: Flemish Society for Critical Care NursesAbstract: Purpose: Intensive care unit (ICU) patients are particularly susceptible to developing pressure injuries. Epidemiologic data is however unavailable. We aimed to provide an international picture of the extent of pressure injuries and factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries in adult ICU patients. Methods: International 1-day point-prevalence study; follow-up for outcome assessment until hospital discharge (maximum 12 weeks). Factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injury and hospital mortality were assessed by generalised linear mixed-effects regression analysis. Results: Data from 13,254 patients in 1117 ICUs (90 countries) revealed 6747 pressure injuries; 3997 (59.2%) were ICU-acquired. Overall prevalence was 26.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 25.9–27.3). ICU-acquired prevalence was 16.2% (95% CI 15.6–16.8). Sacrum (37%) and heels (19.5%) were most affected. Factors independently associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries were older age, male sex, being underweight, emergency surgery, higher Simplified Acute Physiology Score II, Braden score 3 days, comorbidities (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, immunodeficiency), organ support (renal replacement, mechanical ventilation on ICU admission), and being in a low or lower-middle income-economy. Gradually increasing associations with mortality were identified for increasing severity of pressure injury: stage I (odds ratio [OR] 1.5; 95% CI 1.2–1.8), stage II (OR 1.6; 95% CI 1.4–1.9), and stage III or worse (OR 2.8; 95% CI 2.3–3.3). Conclusion: Pressure injuries are common in adult ICU patients. ICU-acquired pressure injuries are associated with mainly intrinsic factors and mortality. Optimal care standards, increased awareness, appropriate resource allocation, and further research into optimal prevention are pivotal to tackle this important patient safety threat

Prevalence, associated factors and outcomes of pressure injuries in adult intensive care unit patients: the DecubICUs study

Funder: European Society of Intensive Care Medicine; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100013347Funder: Flemish Society for Critical Care NursesAbstract: Purpose: Intensive care unit (ICU) patients are particularly susceptible to developing pressure injuries. Epidemiologic data is however unavailable. We aimed to provide an international picture of the extent of pressure injuries and factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries in adult ICU patients. Methods: International 1-day point-prevalence study; follow-up for outcome assessment until hospital discharge (maximum 12 weeks). Factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injury and hospital mortality were assessed by generalised linear mixed-effects regression analysis. Results: Data from 13,254 patients in 1117 ICUs (90 countries) revealed 6747 pressure injuries; 3997 (59.2%) were ICU-acquired. Overall prevalence was 26.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 25.9–27.3). ICU-acquired prevalence was 16.2% (95% CI 15.6–16.8). Sacrum (37%) and heels (19.5%) were most affected. Factors independently associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries were older age, male sex, being underweight, emergency surgery, higher Simplified Acute Physiology Score II, Braden score 3 days, comorbidities (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, immunodeficiency), organ support (renal replacement, mechanical ventilation on ICU admission), and being in a low or lower-middle income-economy. Gradually increasing associations with mortality were identified for increasing severity of pressure injury: stage I (odds ratio [OR] 1.5; 95% CI 1.2–1.8), stage II (OR 1.6; 95% CI 1.4–1.9), and stage III or worse (OR 2.8; 95% CI 2.3–3.3). Conclusion: Pressure injuries are common in adult ICU patients. ICU-acquired pressure injuries are associated with mainly intrinsic factors and mortality. Optimal care standards, increased awareness, appropriate resource allocation, and further research into optimal prevention are pivotal to tackle this important patient safety threat

Correction to: Prevalence, associated factors and outcomes of pressure injuries in adult intensive care unit patients: the DecubICUs study

The original version of this article unfortunately contained a mistake

Basic Features and Clinical Applicability of ‘Preliminary Universal Surgical Invasiveness Score’ (pUSIS): A Multi-Centre Pilot Study

OBJECTIVE: There is still a lack of a universally applicable and comprehensive scoring system for documenting the invasiveness of surgical procedures. The proposed preliminary ‘Universal Surgical Invasiveness Score’ (pUSIS) is intended to fill this gap. METHODS: We used the recently developed pUSIS to obtain values from 8 types of surgery and 80 individual interventions. The results were analysed using descriptive statistical methods. The degree of difficulty on a scale from 0 (very easy) to 10 (extremely difficult) and time expenditures for assessing pUSIS were documented. RESULTS: Individual pUSIS values ranged from 8 in a laparoscopic cholecystectomy case to 36 in a total hip replacement case. The lowest median pUSIS value of 11.5 was found for laparoscopic cholecystectomy and the highest value of 24.5 was found for open thoracic surgery. The correlation between pUSIS values and the duration of surgery resulted in a tight linear regression (R2=0.6419). The lowest mean (±SD) difficulty level to obtain pUSIS values was 1.6±0.6 for sleeve gastrectomy and the highest one was 2.9±0.6 for knee replacement. The duration to finalise the calculations was 4.1±1.1 min for video-assisted thoracoscopy (VATS) and 9.4±1.3 min for sleeve gastrectomy. CONCLUSION: We concluded that pUSIS has the potential to be a useful, simply obtainable and universal assessment tool for quantification of the magnitude and invasiveness of individual surgical operations and can serve as a means to quantify surgical interventions for outcome research and evaluate surgical performance