Long-term effects of restriction of intravenous fluid in adult ICU patients with septic shock

PURPOSE To assess long-term outcomes of restrictive versus standard intravenous (IV) fluid therapy in adult intensive care unit (ICU) patients with septic shock included in the European Conservative versus Liberal Approach to Fluid Therapy in Septic Shock in Intensive Care (CLASSIC) trial. METHODS We conducted the pre-planned analyses of mortality, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) using EuroQol (EQ)-5D-5L index values and EQ visual analogue scale (VAS), and cognitive function using Mini Montreal Cognitive Assessment (Mini MoCA) test at 1 year. Deceased patients were assigned numerical zero for HRQoL as a state equal to death and zero for cognitive function outcomes as worst possible score, and we used multiple imputation for missing data on HRQoL and cognitive function. RESULTS Among 1554 randomized patients, we obtained 1-year data on mortality in 97.9% of patients, HRQoL in 91.3%, and cognitive function in 86.3%. One-year mortality was 385/746 (51.3%) in the restrictive-fluid group versus 383/767 (49.9%) in the standard-fluid group, absolute risk difference 1.5%-points [99% confidence interval (CI) - 4.8 to 7.8]. Mean differences were 0.00 (99% CI - 0.06 to 0.05) for EQ-5D-5L index values, - 0.65 for EQ VAS (- 5.40 to 4.08), and - 0.14 for Mini MoCA (- 1.59 to 1.14) for the restrictive-fluid group versus the standard-fluid group. The results for survivors only were similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS Among adult ICU patients with septic shock, restrictive versus standard IV fluid therapy resulted in similar survival, HRQoL, and cognitive function at 1 year, but clinically important differences could not be ruled out

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