Non-oncotic properties of albumin. A multidisciplinary vision about the implications for critically ill patients

Effective resuscitation with human albumin solutions is achieved with less fluid than with crystalloid solutions. However, the role of albumin in today's critical care unit is also linked to its multiple pharmacological effects. Areas covered: The potential clinical benefits of albumin in select populations of critically ill patients like sepsis seem related to immunomodulatory and anti-inflammatory effects, antibiotic transportation and endothelial stabilization. Albumin transports many drugs used in critically ill patients. Such binding to albumin is frequently lessened in critically ill patients with hypoalbuminemia. These changes could result in sub-optimal treatment. Albumin has immunomodulatory capacity by binding several bacterial products. Albumin also influences vascular integrity, contributing to the maintenance of the normal capillary permeability. Moreover, the albumin molecule encompasses several antioxidant properties, thereby significantly reducing re-oxygenation injury, which is especially important in sepsis. In fact, most studies of albumin administration are a combination of a degree of resuscitation with a degree of maintenance or supplementation of albumin. Expert commentary: The potential clinical benefits of the use of albumin in selected critically ill patients such as sepsis seem related to its immunomodulatory and anti-inflammatory effects, antioxidant properties, antibiotic transportation and endothelial stabilization. Additional studies are warranted to further elucidate the underlying physiologic and molecular rationale

European Society of Anaesthesiology evidence-based and consensus-based guideline on postoperative delirium

The purpose of this guideline is to present evidence-based and consensus-based recommendations for the prevention and treatment of postoperative delirium. The cornerstones of the guideline are the preoperative identification and handling of patients at risk, adequate intraoperative care, postoperative detection of delirium and management of delirious patients. The scope of this guideline is not to cover ICU delirium. Considering that many medical disciplines are involved in the treatment of surgical patients, a team-based approach should be implemented into daily practice. This guideline is aimed to promote knowledge and education in the preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative setting not only among anaesthesiologists but also among all other healthcare professionals involved in the care of surgical patients

European Society of Anaesthesiology evidence-based and consensus-based guideline on postoperative delirium.

The purpose of this guideline is to present evidence-based and consensus-based recommendations for the prevention and treatment of postoperative delirium. The cornerstones of the guideline are the preoperative identification and handling of patients at risk, adequate intraoperative care, postoperative detection of delirium and management of delirious patients. The scope of this guideline is not to cover ICU delirium. Considering that many medical disciplines are involved in the treatment of surgical patients, a team-based approach should be implemented into daily practice. This guideline is aimed to promote knowledge and education in the preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative setting not only among anaesthesiologists but also among all other healthcare professionals involved in the care of surgical patients

Awake prone positioning does not reduce the risk of intubation in COVID-19 treated with high-flow nasal oxygen therapy: a multicenter, adjusted cohort study

Background: Awake prone positioning (awake-PP) in non-intubated coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients could avoid endotracheal intubation, reduce the use of critical care resources, and improve survival. We aimed to examine whether the combination of high-flow nasal oxygen therapy (HFNO) with awake-PP prevents the need for intubation when compared to HFNO alone. Methods: Prospective, multicenter, adjusted observational cohort study in consecutive COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory failure (ARF) receiving respiratory support with HFNO from 12 March to 9 June 2020. Patients were classified as HFNO with or without awake-PP. Logistic models were fitted to predict treatment at baseline using the following variables: age, sex, obesity, non-respiratory Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score, APACHE-II, C-reactive protein, days from symptoms onset to HFNO initiation, respiratory rate, and peripheral oxyhemoglobin saturation. We compared data on demographics, vital signs, laboratory markers, need for invasive mechanical ventilation, days to intubation, ICU length of stay, and ICU mortality between HFNO patients with and without awake-PP. Results: A total of 1076 patients with COVID-19 ARF were admitted, of which 199 patients received HFNO and were analyzed. Fifty-five (27.6%) were pronated during HFNO; 60 (41/100) and 22 (40/100) patients from the HFNO and HFNO + awake-PP groups were intubated. The use of awake-PP as an adjunctive therapy to HFNO did not reduce the risk of intubation [RR 0.87 (95/100 CI 0.53–1.43), p equal 0.60]. Patients treated with HFNO + awake-PP showed a trend for delay in intubation compared to HFNO alone [median 1 (interquartile range, IQR 1.0–2.5) vs 2 IQR 1.0–3.0] days (p equal 0.055), but awake-PP did not affect 28-day mortality [RR 1.04 (95/100 CI 0.40–2.72), p equal 0.92].Conclusion: In patients with COVID-19 ARF treated with HFNO, the use of awake-PP did not reduce the need for intubation or affect mortality

Awake prone positioning does not reduce the risk of intubation in COVID-19 treated with high-flow nasal oxygen therapy: a multicenter, adjusted cohort study

Background: Awake prone positioning (awake-PP) in non-intubated coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients could avoid endotracheal intubation, reduce the use of critical care resources, and improve survival. We aimed to examine whether the combination of high-flow nasal oxygen therapy (HFNO) with awake-PP prevents the need for intubation when compared to HFNO alone. Methods: Prospective, multicenter, adjusted observational cohort study in consecutive COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory failure (ARF) receiving respiratory support with HFNO from 12 March to 9 June 2020. Patients were classified as HFNO with or without awake-PP. Logistic models were fitted to predict treatment at baseline using the following variables: age, sex, obesity, non-respiratory Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score, APACHE-II, C-reactive protein, days from symptoms onset to HFNO initiation, respiratory rate, and peripheral oxyhemoglobin saturation. We compared data on demographics, vital signs, laboratory markers, need for invasive mechanical ventilation, days to intubation, ICU length of stay, and ICU mortality between HFNO patients with and without awake-PP. Results: A total of 1076 patients with COVID-19 ARF were admitted, of which 199 patients received HFNO and were analyzed. Fifty-five (27.6%) were pronated during HFNO; 60 (41%) and 22 (40%) patients from the HFNO and HFNO + awake-PP groups were intubated. The use of awake-PP as an adjunctive therapy to HFNO did not reduce the risk of intubation [RR 0.87 (95% CI 0.53-1.43), p = 0.60]. Patients treated with HFNO + awake-PP showed a trend for delay in intubation compared to HFNO alone [median 1 (interquartile range, IQR 1.0-2.5) vs 2 IQR 1.0-3.0] days (p = 0.055), but awake-PP did not affect 28-day mortality [RR 1.04 (95% CI 0.40-2.72), p = 0.92]. Conclusion: In patients with COVID-19 ARF treated with HFNO, the use of awake-PP did not reduce the need for intubation or affect mortality

Association Between Use of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocol and Postoperative Complications in Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty in the Postoperative Outcomes Within Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocol in Elective Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty Study (POWER2)

[Importance] The Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) care protocol has been shown to improve outcomes compared with traditional care in certain types of surgery.[Objective] To assess the association of use of the ERAS protocols with complications in patients undergoing elective total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA).[Design, Setting, and Participants] This multicenter, prospective cohort study included patients recruited from 131 centers in Spain from October 22 through December 22, 2018. All consecutive adults scheduled for elective THA or TKA were eligible for inclusion. Patients were stratified between those treated in a self-designated ERAS center (ERAS group) and those treated in a non-ERAS center (non-ERAS group). Data were analyzed from June 15 through September 15, 2019.[Exposures] Total hip or knee arthroplasty and perioperative management. Sixteen individual ERAS items were assessed in all included patients, whether they were treated at a center that was part of an established ERAS protocol or not.[Main Outcomes and Measures] The primary outcome was postoperative complications within 30 days after surgery. Secondary outcomes included length of stay and mortality.[Results] During the 2-month recruitment period, 6146 patients were included (3580 women [58.2%]; median age, 71 [interquartile range (IQR), 63-76] years). Of these, 680 patients (11.1%) presented with postoperative complications. No differences were found in the number of patients with overall postoperative complications between ERAS and non-ERAS groups (163 [10.2%] vs 517 [11.4%]; odds ratio [OR], 0.89; 95% CI, 0.74-1.07; P = .22). Fewer patients in the ERAS group had moderate to severe complications (73 [4.6%] vs 279 [6.1%]; OR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.56-0.96; P = .02). The median overall adherence rate with the ERAS protocol was 50.0% (IQR, 43.8%-62.5%), with the rate for ERAS facilities being 68.8% (IQR, 56.2%-81.2%) vs 50.0% (IQR, 37.5%-56.2%) at non-ERAS centers (P < .001). Among the patients with the highest and lowest quartiles of adherence to ERAS components, the patients with the highest adherence had fewer overall postoperative complications (144 [10.6%] vs 270 [13.0%]; OR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.64-0.99; P < .001) and moderate to severe postoperative complications (59 [4.4%] vs 143 [6.9%]; OR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.45-0.84; P < .001) and shorter median length of hospital stay (4 [IQR, 3-5] vs 5 [IQR, 4-6] days; OR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.96-0.99; P < .001).[Conclusions and Relevance] An increase in adherence to the ERAS program was associated with a decrease in postoperative complications, although only a few ERAS items were individually associated with improved outcomes.This study was supported by institutional and/or departmental sources. The Postoperative Outcomes Within Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocol in Elective Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty (POWER2) study was supported by the Spanish Perioperative Audit and Research Network (REDGERM

Association Between Use of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocol and Postoperative Complications in Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty in the Postoperative Outcomes Within Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocol in Elective Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty Study (POWER2).

The Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) care protocol has been shown to improve outcomes compared with traditional care in certain types of surgery. To assess the association of use of the ERAS protocols with complications in patients undergoing elective total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA). This multicenter, prospective cohort study included patients recruited from 131 centers in Spain from October 22 through December 22, 2018. All consecutive adults scheduled for elective THA or TKA were eligible for inclusion. Patients were stratified between those treated in a self-designated ERAS center (ERAS group) and those treated in a non-ERAS center (non-ERAS group). Data were analyzed from June 15 through September 15, 2019. Total hip or knee arthroplasty and perioperative management. Sixteen individual ERAS items were assessed in all included patients, whether they were treated at a center that was part of an established ERAS protocol or not. The primary outcome was postoperative complications within 30 days after surgery. Secondary outcomes included length of stay and mortality. During the 2-month recruitment period, 6146 patients were included (3580 women [58.2%]; median age, 71 [interquartile range (IQR), 63-76] years). Of these, 680 patients (11.1%) presented with postoperative complications. No differences were found in the number of patients with overall postoperative complications between ERAS and non-ERAS groups (163 [10.2%] vs 517 [11.4%]; odds ratio [OR], 0.89; 95% CI, 0.74-1.07; P = .22). Fewer patients in the ERAS group had moderate to severe complications (73 [4.6%] vs 279 [6.1%]; OR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.56-0.96; P = .02). The median overall adherence rate with the ERAS protocol was 50.0% (IQR, 43.8%-62.5%), with the rate for ERAS facilities being 68.8% (IQR, 56.2%-81.2%) vs 50.0% (IQR, 37.5%-56.2%) at non-ERAS centers (P  An increase in adherence to the ERAS program was associated with a decrease in postoperative complications, although only a few ERAS items were individually associated with improved outcomes