17 research outputs found
Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19
IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19.
Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022).
INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes.
RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes.
TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570
Emergency step-by-step specific immunotherapy in severe digoxin poisoning: an observational cohort study
Advanced respiratory mechanics assessment in mechanically ventilated obese and non-obese patients with or without acute respiratory distress syndrome
Abstract Background Respiratory mechanics is a key element to monitor mechanically ventilated patients and guide ventilator settings. Besides the usual basic assessments, some more complex explorations may allow to better characterize patients’ respiratory mechanics and individualize ventilation strategies. These advanced respiratory mechanics assessments including esophageal pressure measurements and complete airway closure detection may be particularly relevant in critically ill obese patients. This study aimed to comprehensively assess respiratory mechanics in obese and non-obese ICU patients with or without ARDS and evaluate the contribution of advanced respiratory mechanics assessments compared to basic assessments in these patients. Methods All intubated patients admitted in two ICUs for any cause were prospectively included. Gas exchange and respiratory mechanics including esophageal pressure and end-expiratory lung volume (EELV) measurements and low-flow insufflation to detect complete airway closure were assessed in standardized conditions (tidal volume of 6 mL kg−1 predicted body weight (PBW), positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) of 5 cmH2O) within 24 h after intubation. Results Among the 149 analyzed patients, 52 (34.9%) were obese and 90 (60.4%) had ARDS (65.4% and 57.8% of obese and non-obese patients, respectively, p = 0.385). A complete airway closure was found in 23.5% of the patients. It was more frequent in obese than in non-obese patients (40.4% vs 14.4%, p < 0.001) and in ARDS than in non-ARDS patients (30% vs. 13.6%, p = 0.029). Respiratory system and lung compliances and EELV/PBW were similarly decreased in obese patients without ARDS and obese or non-obese patients with ARDS. Chest wall compliance was not impacted by obesity or ARDS, but end-expiratory esophageal pressure was higher in obese than in non-obese patients. Chest wall contribution to respiratory system compliance differed widely between patients but was not predictable by their general characteristics. Conclusions Most respiratory mechanics features are similar in obese non-ARDS and non-obese ARDS patients, but end-expiratory esophageal pressure is higher in obese patients. A complete airway closure can be found in around 25% of critically ill patients ventilated with a PEEP of 5 cmH2O. Advanced explorations may allow to better characterize individual respiratory mechanics and adjust ventilation strategies in some patients. Trial registration NCT03420417 ClinicalTrials.gov (February 5, 2018)
Pressure control plus spontaneous ventilation versus volume assist-control ventilation in acute respiratory distress syndrome. A randomised clinical trial
International audiencePurposeThe aim of this study was to compare the effect of a pressure-controlled strategy allowing non-synchronised unassisted spontaneous ventilation (PC-SV) to a conventional volume assist-control strategy (ACV) on the outcome of patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS).MethodsOpen-label randomised clinical trial in 22 intensive care units (ICU) in France. Seven hundred adults with moderate or severe ARDS (PaO2/FiO2 < 200 mmHg) were enrolled from February 2013 to October 2018. Patients were randomly assigned to PC-SV (n = 348) or ACV (n = 352) with similar objectives of tidal volume (6 mL/kg predicted body weight) and positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP). Paralysis was stopped after 24 h and sedation adapted to favour patients’ spontaneous ventilation. The primary endpoint was in-hospital death from any cause at day 60.ResultsHospital mortality [34.6% vs 33.5%, p = 0.77, risk ratio (RR) = 1.03 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.84–1.27)], 28-day mortality, as well as the number of ventilator-free days and organ failure-free days at day 28 did not differ between PC-SV and ACV groups. Patients in the PC-SV group received significantly less sedation and neuro-muscular blocking agents than in the ACV group. A lower proportion of patients required adjunctive therapy of hypoxemia (including prone positioning) in the PC-SV group than in the ACV group [33.1% vs 41.3%, p = 0.03, RR = 0.80 (95% CI 0.66–0.98)]. The incidences of pneumothorax and refractory hypoxemia did not differ between the groups.ConclusionsA strategy based on PC-SV mode that favours spontaneous ventilation reduced the need for sedation and adjunctive therapies of hypoxemia but did not significantly reduce mortality compared to ACV with similar tidal volume and PEEP levels
Additional file 1 of Advanced respiratory mechanics assessment in mechanically ventilated obese and non-obese patients with or without acute respiratory distress syndrome
Additional file 1: Table S1. Main characteristics of the patients according to the presence or not of ARDS and obesity. Table S2. Gas exchange and respiratory mechanics of the patients according to the presence or not of ARDS and obesity. Table S3. Main characteristics of the patients according to the ratio of lung to respiratory system elastance (EL/ERS). Table S4. Gas exchange and respiratory mechanics of the patients according to the ratio of lung to respiratory system elastance (EL/ERS). Fig. S1. Correlations between the ratio of partial pressure of arterial oxygen over fraction of inspired oxygen (PaO2/FiO2, A) and ventilatory ratio (VR, B), and body mass index (BMI) in patients with or without acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Fig. S2. Distribution of respiratory system compliance (CRS/PBW, A), lung compliances (CL/PBW, B) and end-expiratory lung volume (EELV/PBW, C) normalized to predicted body weight in patients categorized according to the presence or not of obesity and the presence or not of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Boxplots display medians, 10th, 25th, 75th, and 90th percentiles. p-values represent the comparisons between obese and non-obese patients and between ARDS and non-ARDS patients. Fig. S3. Distribution of respiratory system compliances considering airway opening pressure normalized to predicted body weight (CRS-AOP/PBW). A. Patients categorized according to the presence or not of obesity and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). p-value represents the overall comparison between the four groups of patients. *, p < 0.05; 0**, p < 0.01; ***, p < 0.001 (pairwise comparisons with Bonferroni correction). B Patients categorized according to the presence or not of obesity and the presence or not of ARDS. p-values represent the comparisons between obese and non-obese patients and between ARDS and non-ARDS patients. Boxplots display medians, 10th, 25th, 75th, and 90th percentiles. Fig. S4. Correlations between respiratory system compliance (CRS/PBW, A) and end-expiratory lung volume normalized to predicted body weight (EELV/PBW, B) and body mass index (BMI) in patients with or without acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Fig. S5. Correlations between respiratory system compliance (CRS) and end-expiratory lung volume (EELV) at positive end-expiratory pressure of 5 cmH2O in obese and non-obese patients with or without acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Fig. S6. Distribution of chest wall compliance (CCW, A) and end-expiratory esophageal pressure (Peso expi, B) in patients categorized according to the presence or not of obesity and the presence or not of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Boxplots display medians, 10th, 25th, 75th, and 90th percentiles. p-values represent the comparisons between obese and non-obese patients and between ARDS and non-ARDS patients. Fig. S7. Correlations between chest wall compliance (Ccw, A) and expiratory esophageal pressure (Peso expi, B) and body mass index (BMI) in patients with or without acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Fig. S8. Distribution of lung to respiratory system elastance ratio (EL/ERS). A Patients categorized according to the presence or not of obesity and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). p-value represents the overall comparison between the four groups of patients. B Patients categorized according to the presence or not of obesity and the presence or not of ARDS. p-values represent the comparisons between obese and non-obese patients and between ARDS and non-ARDS patients. Boxplots display medians, 10th, 25th, 75th, and 90th percentiles
Impact on antimicrobial consumption of procalcitonin-guided antibiotic therapy for pneumonia/pneumonitis associated with aspiration in comatose mechanically ventilated patients: a multicenter, randomized controlled study
Abstract
Background
In comatose patients receiving oro-tracheal intubation for mechanical ventilation (MV), the risk of aspiration is increased. Aspiration can lead to chemical pneumonitis (inflammatory reaction to the gastric contents), or aspiration pneumonia (infection caused by inhalation of microorganisms). Distinguishing between the two types is challenging. We tested the interest of using a decisional algorithm based on procalcitonin (PCT) values to guide initiation and discontinuation of antibiotic therapies in intubated patients.
Methods
The PROPASPI (PROcalcitonin Pneumonia/pneumonitis Associated with ASPIration) trial is a multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled, single-blind, superiority study comparing two strategies: (1) an intervention group where threshold PCT values were used to guide initiation and discontinuation of antibiotics (PCT group); and (2) a control group, where antibiotic therapy was managed at the physician’s discretion. Patients aged 18 years or over, intubated for coma (Glasgow score ≤ 8), with MV initiated within 48 h after admission, were eligible. The primary endpoint was the duration of antibiotic treatment during the first 15 days after admission to the ICU.
Results
From 24/2/2015 to 28/8/2019, 1712 patients were intubated for coma in the 5 participating centers, of whom 166 were included in the study. Data from 159 were available for intention-to-treat analysis: 81 in the PCT group, and 78 in the control group. Overall, 67 patients (43%) received antibiotics in the intensive care unit (ICU); there was no significant difference between groups (37 (46%) vs 30 (40%) for PCT vs control, p = 0.432). The mean duration of antibiotic treatment during the first 15 days in the ICU was 2.7 ± 3.8 days; there was no significant difference between groups (3.0 ± 4.1 days vs 2.3 ± 3.4 days for PCT vs control, p = 0.311). The mean number of days under MV was significantly higher in the PCT group (3.7 ± 3.6 days) than in controls (2.7 ± 2.5 days, p = 0.033). The duration of ICU stay was also significantly longer in the PCT group: 6.4 ± 6.5 days vs 4.6 ± 3.5 days in the control group (p = 0.043). After adjustment for SAPS II score, the difference in length of stay and duration of mechanical ventilation between groups was no longer significant.
Conclusion
The use of PCT values to guide therapy, in comparison to the use of clinical, biological (apart from PCT) and radiological criteria, does not modify exposure to antibiotics in patients intubated for coma.
Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier NCT02862314.
</jats:sec
Randomized Clinical Study of Temporary Transvenous Phrenic Nerve Stimulation in Difficult-to-Wean Patients
Randomized Clinical Study of Temporary Transvenous Phrenic Nerve Stimulation in Difficult-to-Wean Patients
Rationale: Diaphragm dysfunction is frequently observed in critically ill patients with difficult weaning from mechanical ventilation. Objectives: To evaluate the effects of temporary transvenous diaphragm neurostimulation on weaning outcome and maximal inspiratory pressure. Methods: Multicenter, open-label, randomized, controlled study. Patients aged >= 18 years on invasive mechanical ventilation for >= 4 days and having failed at least two weaning attempts received temporary transvenous diaphragm neurostimulation using a multielectrode stimulating central venous catheter (bilateral phrenic stimulation) and standard of care (treatment) (n = 57) or standard of care (control) (n= 55). In seven patients, the catheter could not be inserted, and in seven others, pacing therapy could not be delivered; consequently, data were available for 43 patients. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients successfully weaned. Other endpoints were mechanical ventilation duration, 30-day survival, maximal inspiratory pressure, diaphragm-thickening fraction, adverse events, and stimulation-related pain. Measurements and Main Results: The incidences of successful weaning were 82% (treatment) and 74% (control) (absolute difference [95% confidence interval (CI)], 7% [-10 to 25]), P = 0.59. Mechanical ventilation duration (mean +/- SD) was 12.7 +/- 9.9 days and 14.1 +/- 10.8 days, respectively, P = 0.50; maximal inspiratory pressure increased by 16.6 cm H2O and 4.8 cm H2O, respectively (difference [95% CI], 11.8 [5 to 19]), P = 0.001; and right hemidiaphragm thickening fraction during unassisted spontaneous breathing was +17% and -14%, respectively, P = 0.006, without correlation with changes in maximal inspiratory pressure. Serious adverse event frequency was similar in both groups. Median stimulation-related pain in the treatment group was 0 (no pain). Conclusions: Temporary transvenous diaphragm neurostimulation did not increase the proportion of successful weaning from mechanical ventilation. It was associated with a significant increase in maximal inspiratory pressure, suggesting reversal of the course of diaphragm dysfunction
Hydrocortisone plus fludrocortisone for community acquired pneumonia-related septic shock: a subgroup analysis of the APROCCHSS phase 3 randomised trial
International audienceBackground: Glucocorticoids probably improve outcomes in patients hospitalised for community acquired pneumonia (CAP). In this a priori planned exploratory subgroup analysis of the phase 3 randomised controlled Activated Protein C and Corticosteroids for Human Septic Shock (APROCCHSS) trial, we aimed to investigate responses to hydrocortisone plus fludrocortisone between CAP and non-CAP related septic shock.Methods: APROCCHSS was a randomised controlled trial that investigated the effects of hydrocortisone plus fludrocortisone, drotrecogin-alfa (activated), or both on mortality in septic shock in a two-by-two factorial design; after drotrecogin-alfa was withdrawn on October 2011, from the market, the trial continued on two parallel groups. It was conducted in 34 centres in France. In this subgroup study, patients with CAP were a preselected subgroup for an exploratory secondary analysis of the APROCCHSS trial of hydrocortisone plus fludrocortisone in septic shock. Adults with septic shock were randomised 1:1 to receive, in a double-blind manner, a 7-day treatment with daily administration of intravenous hydrocortisone 50 mg bolus every 6h and a tablet of 50 μg of fludrocortisone via the nasogastric tube, or their placebos. The primary outcome was 90-day all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality at intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital discharge, 28-day and 180-day mortality, the number of days alive and free of vasopressors, mechanical ventilation, or organ failure, and ICU and hospital free-days to 90-days. Analysis was done in the intention-to-treat population. The trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00625209).Findings: Of 1241 patients included in the APROCCHSS trial, CAP could not be ruled in or out in 31 patients, 562 had a diagnosis of CAP (279 in the placebo group and 283 in the corticosteroid group), and 648 patients did not have CAP (329 in the placebo group and 319 in the corticosteroid group). In patients with CAP, there were 109 (39%) deaths of 283 patients at day 90 with hydrocortisone plus fludrocortisone and 143 (51%) of 279 patients receiving placebo (odds ratio [OR] 0·60, 95% CI 0·43-0·83). In patients without CAP, there were 148 (46%) deaths of 319 patients at day 90 in the hydrocortisone and fludrocortisone group and 157 (48%) of 329 patients in the placebo group (OR 0·95, 95% CI 0·70-1·29). There was significant heterogeneity in corticosteroid effects on 90-day mortality across subgroups with CAP and without CAP (p=0·046 for both multiplicative and additive interaction tests; moderate credibility). Of 1241 patients included in the APROCCHSS trial, 648 (52%) had ARDS (328 in the placebo group and 320 in the corticosteroid group). There were 155 (48%) deaths of 320 patients at day 90 in the corticosteroid group and 186 (57%) of 328 patients in the placebo group. The OR for death at day 90 was 0·72 (95% CI 0·53-0·98) in patients with ARDS and 0·85 (0·61-1·20) in patients without ARDS (p=0·45 for multiplicative interaction and p=0·42 for additive interaction). The OR for observing at least one serious adverse event (corticosteroid group vs placebo) within 180 days post randomisation was 0·64 (95% CI 0·46-0·89) in the CAP subgroup and 1·02 (0·75-1·39) in the non-CAP subgroup (p=0·044 for multiplicative interaction and p=0·042 for additive interaction).Interpretation: In a pre-specified subgroup analysis of the APROCCHSS trial of patients with CAP and septic shock, hydrocortisone plus fludrocortisone reduced mortality as compared with placebo. Although a large proportion of patients with CAP also met criteria for ARDS, the subgroup analysis was underpowered to fully discriminate between ARDS and CAP modifying effects on mortality reduction with corticosteroids. There was no evidence of a significant treatment effect of corticosteroids in the non-CAP subgroup.Funding: Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique of the French Ministry of Health, by Programme d'Investissements d'Avenir, France 2030, and IAHU-ANR-0004
