4 research outputs found

    Targeted temperature management in patients with intracerebral haemorrhage, subarachnoid haemorrhage, or acute ischaemic stroke: updated consensus guideline recommendations by the Neuroprotective Therapy Consensus Review (NTCR) group

    Get PDF
    Background: There is a lack of consistent, evidence-based guidelines for the management of patients with fever after brain injury. The aim was to update previously published consensus recommendations on targeted temperature management after intracerebral haemorrhage, aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage, and acute ischaemic stroke in patients who require admission to critical care. Methods: A modified Delphi consensus, the Neuroprotective Therapy Consensus Review (NTCR), included 19 international neuro-intensive care experts with a subspecialty interest in the acute management of intracerebral haemorrhage, aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage, and acute ischaemic stroke. An online, anonymised survey was completed ahead of the meeting before the group came together to consolidate consensus and finalise recommendations on targeted temperature management. A threshold of ≥80% for consensus was set for all statements. Results: Recommendations were formulated based on existing evidence, literature review, and consensus. After intracerebral haemorrhage, aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage, and acute ischaemic stroke in patients who require critical care admission, core temperature should ideally be monitored continuously and maintained between 36.0°C and 37.5°C using automated feedback-controlled devices, where possible. Targeted temperature management should be commenced within 1 h of first fever identification with appropriate diagnosis and treatment of infection, maintained for as long as the brain remains at risk of secondary injury, and rewarming should be controlled. Shivering should be monitored and managed to limit risk of secondary injury. Following a single protocol for targeted temperature management across intracerebral haemorrhage, aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage, and acute ischaemic stroke is desirable. Conclusions: Based on a modified Delphi expert consensus process, these guidelines aim to improve the quality of targeted temperature management for patients after intracerebral haemorrhage, aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage, and acute ischaemic stroke in critical care, highlighting the need for further research to improve clinical guidelines in this setting

    Tracheostomy in special groups of critically ill patients: Who, when, and where?

    No full text
    Tracheostomy is one of the most common procedures undertaken in critically ill patients. It offers many theoretical advantages over translaryngeal intubation. Recent evidence in a heterogeneous group of critically ill patients, however, has not demonstrated a benefit for tracheostomy, in terms of mortality, length of stay in Intensive Care Unit (ICU), or incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia. It may be a beneficial intervention in articular subsets of ICU patients. In this article, we will focus on the evidence for the timing of tracheostomy and its effect on various subgroups of patients in critical care

    Systematic review of statins in sepsis: There is no evidence of dose response

    No full text
    OBJECTIVES: Sepsis is a common cause of morbidity and mortality and is associated with significant costs to the healthcare organizations. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess whether high or low-dose statin therapy improved mortality in patients with sepsis. METHODS: The trials analyzed in this study were multicenter or single center randomized control studies using statins for sepsis in a hospital setting. The patients included were adults with suspected or confirmed infection. INTERVENTIONS: This study found eight randomized controlled trials where participants were given either a statin or placebo daily for 14–28 days, the duration of their illness, or until their death or discharge, which ever occurred first. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES MEASURED: This meta-analysis measured the effect of statin therapy on in hospital and 28 days mortality. RESULTS: In unselected patients, there was no demonstrable difference in the 28 days mortality (relative risk [RR] 0.88 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.70–1.12 and P = 0.16). There was also no significant difference between statin versus placebo for in-hospital mortality (RR 0.98 95% CI, 0.85–1.14 P = 0.36). When the studies where divided into low-dose and high-dose groups, there were no statistically significant differences for in-hospital mortality between low-dose statin versus placebo for (RR 0.81 CI 0.44–1.49 P = 0.27) or high-dose statin versus placebo (RR 0.99 95% CI 0.85–1.16, P = 0.28). There was no significant difference in adverse effects between the high- and low-dose groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this meta-analysis, we found that the use of statins did not significantly improve either in-hospital mortality or 28-day mortality in patients with sepsis. In the low-dose group, there were fewer quality multicenter studies; hence, conclusions based on the results of this subgroup are limited
    corecore