PReVENT - protective ventilation in patients without ARDS at start of ventilation: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background It is uncertain whether lung-protective mechanical ventilation using low tidal volumes should be used in all critically ill patients, irrespective of the presence of the acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). A low tidal volume strategy includes use of higher respiratory rates, which could be associated with increased sedation needs, a higher incidence of delirium, and an increased risk of patient-ventilator asynchrony and ICU-acquired weakness. Another alleged side-effect of low tidal volume ventilation is the risk of atelectasis. All of these could offset the beneficial effects of low tidal volume ventilation as found in patients with ARDS. Methods/Design PReVENT is a national multicenter randomized controlled trial in invasively ventilated ICU patients without ARDS with an anticipated duration of ventilation of longer than 24 hours in 5 ICUs in The Netherlands. Consecutive patients are randomly assigned to a low tidal volume strategy using tidal volumes from 4 to 6 ml/kg predicted body weight (PBW) or a high tidal volume ventilation strategy using tidal volumes from 8 to 10 ml/kg PBW. The primary endpoint is the number of ventilator-free days and alive at day 28. Secondary endpoints include ICU and hospital length of stay (LOS), ICU and hospital mortality, the incidence of pulmonary complications, including ARDS, pneumonia, atelectasis, and pneumothorax, the cumulative use and duration of sedatives and neuromuscular blocking agents, incidence of ICU delirium, and the need for decreasing of instrumental dead space. Discussion PReVENT is the first randomized controlled trial comparing a low tidal volume strategy with a high tidal volume strategy, in patients without ARDS at onset of ventilation, that recruits a sufficient number of patients to test the hypothesis that a low tidal volume strategy benefits patients without ARDS with regard to a clinically relevant endpoin

Femoral venous oxygen saturation is no surrogate for central venous oxygen saturation

Objective:  The purpose of our study was to determine if central venous oxygen saturation and femoral venous oxygen saturation can be used interchangeably during surgery and in critically ill patients. Design:  Prospective observational controlled study. Setting:  Nonacademic university-affiliated teaching hospital in The Netherlands. Patients:  One hundred cardiac outpatients, 30 high-risk surgical patients, and 30 critically ill patients. Interventions: None. Methods and Main Results:  We concurrently determined femoral venous oxygen saturation and central venous oxygen saturation in a group of 100 stable cardiac patients, which served as control group. Furthermore, we determined simultaneously femoral venous oxygen saturation and central venous oxygen saturation in 30 surgical patients and in 30 critically ill patients and evaluated changes over time. Correlation and agreement of femoral venous oxygen saturation and central venous oxygen saturation were assessed, including the difference between femoral venous oxygen saturation and central venous oxygen saturation. Despite significant correlation between obtained values of femoral venous oxygen saturation and central venous oxygen saturation (r(s) = 0.55; p <.001), the limits of agreement were wide in the control group (mean bias 2.7% +/- 7.9%; 95% limits of agreement -12.9% to 18.2%). In both the surgical and critically ill patients, limits of agreement (mean bias of -1.9% +/- 9.3%; 95% limits of agreement -20.0% to 16.3%, and mean bias of 4.6% +/- 14.3%; 95% limits of agreement -23.5% to 32.6%, respectively) were wide. Results for changes of femoral venous oxygen saturation and central venous oxygen saturation were similar. During initial treatment of critically ill patients, the difference between femoral venous oxygen saturation and central venous oxygen saturation including its range of variation diminished. Conclusion:  There is lack of agreement between femoral venous oxygen saturation and central venous oxygen saturation in both stable and unstable medical conditions. Thus, femoral venous oxygen saturation should not be used as surrogate for central venous oxygen saturation. (Crit Care Med 2012; 40:3196-3201

Effect of a Low vs Intermediate Tidal Volume Strategy on Ventilator-Free Days in Intensive Care Unit Patients Without ARDS: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance: It remains uncertain whether invasive ventilation should use low tidal volumes in critically ill patients without acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Objective: To determine whether a low tidal volume ventilation strategy is more effective than an intermediate tidal volume strategy. Design, Setting, and Participants: A randomized clinical trial, conducted from September 1, 2014, through August 20, 2017, including patients without ARDS expected to not be extubated within 24 hours after start of ventilation from 6 intensive care units in the Netherlands. Interventions: Invasive ventilation using low tidal volumes (n = 477) or intermediate tidal volumes (n = 484). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the number of ventilator-free days and alive at day 28. Secondary outcomes included length of ICU and hospital stay; ICU, hospital, and 28- and 90-day mortality; and development of ARDS, pneumonia, severe atelectasis, or pneumothorax. Results: In total, 961 patients (65% male), with a median age of 68 years (interquartile range [IQR], 59-76), were enrolled. At day 28, 475 patients in the low tidal volume group had a median of 21 ventilator-free days (IQR, 0-26), and 480 patients in the intermediate tidal volume group had a median of 21 ventilator-free days (IQR, 0-26) (mean difference, -0.27 [95% CI, -1.74 to 1.19]; P =.71). There was no significant difference in ICU (median, 6 vs 6 days; 0.39 [-1.09 to 1.89]; P =.58) and hospital (median, 14 vs 15 days; -0.60 [-3.52 to 2.31]; P =.68) length of stay or 28-day (34.9% vs 32.1%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.12 [0.90 to 1.40]; P =.30) and 90-day (39.1% vs 37.8%; HR, 1.07 [0.87 to 1.31]; P =.54) mortality. There was no significant difference in the percentage of patients developing the following adverse events: ARDS (3.8% vs 5.0%; risk ratio [RR], 0.86 [0.59 to 1.24]; P =.38), pneumonia (4.2% vs 3.7%; RR, 1.07 [0.78 to 1.47]; P =.67), severe atelectasis (11.4% vs 11.2%; RR, 1.00 [0.81 to 1.23]; P =.94), and pneumothorax (1.8% vs 1.3%; RR, 1.16 [0.73 to 1.84]; P =.55). Conclusions and Relevance: In patients in the ICU without ARDS who were expected not to be extubated within 24 hours of randomization, a low tidal volume strategy did not result in a greater number of ventilator-free days than an intermediate tidal volume strategy. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02153294

Respiratory Viruses in Invasively Ventilated Critically Ill Patients-A Prospective Multicenter Observational Study

Objectives: The presence of respiratory viruses and the association with outcomes were assessed in invasively ventilated ICU patients, stratified by admission diagnosis. Design: Prospective observational study. Setting: Five ICUs in the Netherlands. Patients: Between September 1, 2013, and April 30, 2014, 1,407 acutely admitted and invasively ventilated patients were included. Interventions: None. Measurements and Main Results: Nasopharyngeal swabs and tracheobronchial aspirates were collected upon intubation and tested for 14 respiratory viruses. Out of 1,407 patients, 156 were admitted because of a severe acute respiratory infection and 1,251 for other reasons (non-severe acute respiratory infection). Respiratory viruses were detected in 28.8% of severe acute respiratory infection patients and 17.0% in non-severe acute respiratory infection (p < 0.001). In one third, viruses were exclusively detected in tracheobronchial aspirates. Rhinovirus and human metapneumovirus were more prevalent in severe acute respiratory infection patients (9.6% and 2.6% vs 4.5 and 0.2%; p = 0.006 and p < 0.001). In both groups, there were no associations between the presence of viruses and the number of ICU-free days at day 28, crude mortality, and mortality in multivariate regression analyses. Conclusions: Respiratory viruses are frequently detected in acutely admitted and invasively ventilated patients. Rhinovirus and human metapneumovirus are more frequently found in severe acute respiratory infection patients. Detection of respiratory viruses is not associated with worse clinically relevant outcomes in the studied cohort of patients

Respiratory Viruses in Invasively Ventilated Critically Ill Patients-A Prospective Multicenter Observational Study

OBJECTIVES: The presence of respiratory viruses and the association with outcomes were assessed in invasively ventilated ICU patients, stratified by admission diagnosis. DESIGN: Prospective observational study. SETTING: Five ICUs in the Netherlands. PATIENTS: Between September 1, 2013, and April 30, 2014, 1,407 acutely admitted and invasively ventilated patients were included. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Nasopharyngeal swabs and tracheobronchial aspirates were collected upon intubation and tested for 14 respiratory viruses. Out of 1,407 patients, 156 were admitted because of a severe acute respiratory infection and 1,251 for other reasons (non-severe acute respiratory infection). Respiratory viruses were detected in 28.8% of severe acute respiratory infection patients and 17.0% in non-severe acute respiratory infection (p < 0.001). In one third, viruses were exclusively detected in tracheobronchial aspirates. Rhinovirus and human metapneumovirus were more prevalent in severe acute respiratory infection patients (9.6% and 2.6% vs 4.5 and 0.2%; p = 0.006 and p < 0.001). In both groups, there were no associations between the presence of viruses and the number of ICU-free days at day 28, crude mortality, and mortality in multivariate regression analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Respiratory viruses are frequently detected in acutely admitted and invasively ventilated patients. Rhinovirus and human metapneumovirus are more frequently found in severe acute respiratory infection patients. Detection of respiratory viruses is not associated with worse clinically relevant outcomes in the studied cohort of patients