Intra-Abdominal Candidiasis

Intra-abdominal candidiasis (IAC) is the second most common form of invasive candidiasis after candidaemia. IAC is a broad term and can be classified on the basis of anatomical site (Candida peritonitis, pancreatic candidiasis, biliary tract candidiasis, gastrointestinal candidiasis, and hepatosplenic candidiasis) as well as clinical setting (community acquired versus nosocomial). The risk factors linked with IAC are candida colonisation, anastomotic leak, multiple instrumentation, long-term broad spectrum antibiotic use, total parenteral nutrition, and immunocompromised state. Clinically, IAC is not different from intraabdominal bacterial infection. Patients generally present with signs and symptoms of intra-abdominal sepsis after not responding to antibiotic therapy and with a background history of multiple surgical interventions or history of delayed source control. Radiological investigations, like ultrasonography and computed tomography scan, not only aid in diagnosis but also assist in differentiating medical from surgical cases. Microbiological diagnosis requires isolation of candida from an intra-abdominal specimen. Differentiation between colonisation and infection is difficult. Generally, progressive and persistent colonisation is associated with high risk of infection. Blood cultures have poor sensitivity for IAC. Non-culture based techniques used for diagnosis are mannan/anti-mannan assay, beta-D glucan assay, and validated polymerase chain reaction. Four types of antifungal strategies described in the literature are prophylaxis (risk factor driven), pre-emptive (colonisation or biomarker driven), empirical (fever driven), and targeted therapy (microbiology driven). Over recent years, global epidemiology has shown a shift from Candida albicans to non-albicans. Local epidemiology plays an important role in selection of the appropriate empirical therapy. The purpose of this review is to discuss different types of IAC based on their classification, risk factors, and management

Utilization of mechanical power and associations with clinical outcomes in brain injured patients: a secondary analysis of the extubation strategies in neuro-intensive care unit patients and associations with outcome (ENIO) trial

Background: There is insufficient evidence to guide ventilatory targets in acute brain injury (ABI). Recent studies have shown associations between mechanical power (MP) and mortality in critical care populations. We aimed to describe MP in ventilated patients with ABI, and evaluate associations between MP and clinical outcomes. Methods: In this preplanned, secondary analysis of a prospective, multi-center, observational cohort study (ENIO, NCT03400904), we included adult patients with ABI (Glasgow Coma Scale ≤ 12 before intubation) who required mechanical ventilation (MV) ≥ 24 h. Using multivariable log binomial regressions, we separately assessed associations between MP on hospital day (HD)1, HD3, HD7 and clinical outcomes: hospital mortality, need for reintubation, tracheostomy placement, and development of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Results: We included 1217 patients (mean age 51.2 years [SD 18.1], 66% male, mean body mass index [BMI] 26.3 [SD 5.18]) hospitalized at 62 intensive care units in 18 countries. Hospital mortality was 11% (n = 139), 44% (n = 536) were extubated by HD7 of which 20% (107/536) required reintubation, 28% (n = 340) underwent tracheostomy placement, and 9% (n = 114) developed ARDS. The median MP on HD1, HD3, and HD7 was 11.9 J/min [IQR 9.2-15.1], 13 J/min [IQR 10-17], and 14 J/min [IQR 11-20], respectively. MP was overall higher in patients with ARDS, especially those with higher ARDS severity. After controlling for same-day pressure of arterial oxygen/fraction of inspired oxygen (P/F ratio), BMI, and neurological severity, MP at HD1, HD3, and HD7 was independently associated with hospital mortality, reintubation and tracheostomy placement. The adjusted relative risk (aRR) was greater at higher MP, and strongest for: mortality on HD1 (compared to the HD1 median MP 11.9 J/min, aRR at 17 J/min was 1.22, 95% CI 1.14-1.30) and HD3 (1.38, 95% CI 1.23-1.53), reintubation on HD1 (1.64; 95% CI 1.57-1.72), and tracheostomy on HD7 (1.53; 95%CI 1.18-1.99). MP was associated with the development of moderate-severe ARDS on HD1 (2.07; 95% CI 1.56-2.78) and HD3 (1.76; 95% CI 1.41-2.22). Conclusions: Exposure to high MP during the first week of MV is associated with poor clinical outcomes in ABI, independent of P/F ratio and neurological severity. Potential benefits of optimizing ventilator settings to limit MP warrant further investigation

Hyperoxemia and excess oxygen use in early acute respiratory distress syndrome : Insights from the LUNG SAFE study

Publisher Copyright: © 2020 The Author(s). Copyright: Copyright 2020 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.Background: Concerns exist regarding the prevalence and impact of unnecessary oxygen use in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). We examined this issue in patients with ARDS enrolled in the Large observational study to UNderstand the Global impact of Severe Acute respiratory FailurE (LUNG SAFE) study. Methods: In this secondary analysis of the LUNG SAFE study, we wished to determine the prevalence and the outcomes associated with hyperoxemia on day 1, sustained hyperoxemia, and excessive oxygen use in patients with early ARDS. Patients who fulfilled criteria of ARDS on day 1 and day 2 of acute hypoxemic respiratory failure were categorized based on the presence of hyperoxemia (PaO2 > 100 mmHg) on day 1, sustained (i.e., present on day 1 and day 2) hyperoxemia, or excessive oxygen use (FIO2 ≥ 0.60 during hyperoxemia). Results: Of 2005 patients that met the inclusion criteria, 131 (6.5%) were hypoxemic (PaO2 < 55 mmHg), 607 (30%) had hyperoxemia on day 1, and 250 (12%) had sustained hyperoxemia. Excess FIO2 use occurred in 400 (66%) out of 607 patients with hyperoxemia. Excess FIO2 use decreased from day 1 to day 2 of ARDS, with most hyperoxemic patients on day 2 receiving relatively low FIO2. Multivariate analyses found no independent relationship between day 1 hyperoxemia, sustained hyperoxemia, or excess FIO2 use and adverse clinical outcomes. Mortality was 42% in patients with excess FIO2 use, compared to 39% in a propensity-matched sample of normoxemic (PaO2 55-100 mmHg) patients (P = 0.47). Conclusions: Hyperoxemia and excess oxygen use are both prevalent in early ARDS but are most often non-sustained. No relationship was found between hyperoxemia or excessive oxygen use and patient outcome in this cohort. Trial registration: LUNG-SAFE is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02010073publishersversionPeer reviewe

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

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

The practice of tracheostomy decannulation—a systematic review

Abstract Decannulation is an essential step towards liberating tracheostomized patients from mechanical ventilation. However, despite its perceived importance, there is no universally accepted protocol for this vital transition. Presence of an intact sensorium coordinated swallowing and protective coughing are often the minimum requirements for a successful decannulation. Objective criteria for each of these may help better the clinical judgement of decannulation. In this systematic review on decannulation, we focus attention to this important aspect of tracheostomy care