Ketamine-based sedation use in mechanically ventilated critically ill patients with COVID-19: A multicenter cohort study

Backgrounds: Ketamine possesses analgesia, anti-inflammation, anticonvulsant, and neuroprotection properties. However, the evidence that supports its use in mechanically ventilated critically ill patients with COVID-19 is insufficient. The study's goal was to assess ketamine's effectiveness and safety in critically ill, mechanically ventilated (MV) patients with COVID-19. Methods: Adult critically ill patients with COVID-19 were included in a multicenter retrospective-prospective cohort study. Patients admitted between March 1, 2020, and July 31, 2021, to five ICUs in Saudi Arabia were included. Eligible patients who required MV within 24 hours of ICU admission were divided into two sub-cohort groups based on their use of ketamine (Control vs. Ketamine). The primary outcome was the length of stay (LOS) in the hospital. P/F ratio differences, lactic acid normalization, MV duration, and mortality were considered secondary outcomes. Propensity score (PS) matching was used (1:2 ratio) based on the selected criteria. Results: In total, 1,130 patients met the eligibility criteria. Among these, 1036 patients (91.7 %) were in the control group, whereas 94 patients (8.3 %) received ketamine. The total number of patients after PS matching, was 264 patients, including 88 patients (33.3 %) who received ketamine. The ketamine group's LOS was significantly lower (beta coefficient (95 % CI): −0.26 (−0.45, −0.07), P = 0.008). Furthermore, the PaO2/FiO2 ratio significantly improved 24 hours after the start of ketamine treatment compared to the pre-treatment period (6 hours) (124.9 (92.1, 184.5) vs. 106 (73.1, 129.3; P = 0.002). Additionally, the ketamine group had a substantially shorter mean time for lactic acid normalization (beta coefficient (95 % CI): −1.55 (−2.42, −0.69), P 0.01). However, there were no significant differences in the duration of MV or mortality. Conclusions: Ketamine-based sedation was associated with lower hospital LOS and faster lactic acid normalization but no mortality benefits in critically ill patients with COVID-19. Thus, larger prospective studies are recommended to assess the safety and effectiveness of ketamine as a sedative in critically ill adult patients

Evaluation of inhaled nitric oxide (iNO) treatment for moderate-to-severe ARDS in critically ill patients with COVID-19: A multicenter cohort study

Background: Inhaled nitric oxide (iNO) is used as rescue therapy in patients with refractory hypoxemia due to severe COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) despite the recommendation against the use of this treatment. To date, the effect of iNO on the clinical outcomes of critically ill COVID-19 patients with moderate-to-severe ARDS remains arguable. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the use of iNO in critically ill COVID-19 patients with moderate-to-severe ARDS. Methods: This multicenter, retrospective cohort study included critically ill adult patients with confirmed COVID-19 treated from March 01, 2020, until July 31, 2021. Eligible patients with moderate-to-severe ARDS were subsequently categorized into two groups based on inhaled nitric oxide (iNO) use throughout their ICU stay. The primary endpoint was the improvement in oxygenation parameters 24 h after iNO use. Other outcomes were considered secondary. Propensity score matching (1:2) was used based on the predefined criteria. Results: A total of 1598 patients were screened, and 815 were included based on the eligibility criteria. Among them, 210 patients were matched based on predefined criteria. Oxygenation parameters (PaO2, FiO2 requirement, P/F ratio, oxygenation index) were significantly improved 24 h after iNO administration within a median of six days of ICU admission. However, the risk of 30-day and in-hospital mortality were found to be similar between the two groups (HR: 1.18; 95% CI: 0.77, 1.82; p = 0.45 and HR: 1.40; 95% CI: 0.94, 2.11; p= 0.10, respectively). On the other hand, ventilator-free days (VFDs) were significantly fewer, and ICU and hospital LOS were significantly longer in the iNO group. In addition, patients who received iNO had higher odds of acute kidney injury (AKI) (OR (95% CI): 2.35 (1.30, 4.26), p value = 0.005) and hospital/ventilator-acquired pneumonia (OR (95% CI): 3.2 (1.76, 5.83), p value = 0.001). Conclusion: In critically ill COVID-19 patients with moderate-to-severe ARDS, iNO rescue therapy is associated with improved oxygenation parameters but no mortality benefits. Moreover, iNO use is associated with higher odds of AKI, pneumonia, longer LOS, and fewer VFDs

Vitamin D serum level predicts stroke clinical severity, functional independence, and disability—A retrospective cohort study

BackgroundStroke is a leading cause of mortality and disability and one of the most common neurological conditions globally. Many studies focused on vitamin D as a stroke risk factor, but only a few focused on its serum level as a predictor of stroke initial clinical severity and recovery with inconsistent results. The purpose of this study was to assess the relationship between serum vitamin D levels and stroke clinical severity at admission and functional independence and disability at discharge in Saudi Arabia.MethodologyA retrospective cohort study of adult ischemic stroke patients who had their vitamin D tested and admitted within 7 days of exhibiting stroke symptoms at King Abdulaziz Medical City (KAMC) Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Based on vitamin D level, the patients were categorized into normal [25(OH)D serum level ≥ 75 nmol/L], insufficient [25(OH)D serum level is 50–75 nmol/L], and deficient [25(OH)D serum level ≤ 50 nmol/L]. The primary outcome was to assess the vitamin D serum level of ischemic stroke patients’ clinical severity at admission and functional independence at discharge. The National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) was used to assess the clinical severity, whereas the modified Rankin scale (mRS) was used to assess functional independence and disability.ResultsThe study included 294 stroke patients, out of 774, who were selected based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The mean age of the participants was 68.2 ± 13.4 years, and 49.3% were male. The patients’ distribution among the three groups based on their vitamin D levels is: normal (n = 35, 11.9%), insufficient (n = 66, 22.5%), and deficient (n = 196, 65.6%). After adjusting for potential covariates, regression analysis found a significant inverse relationship of NIHSS based on 25(OH)D serum level (beta coefficient: −0.04, SE: 0.01, p = 0.003). Patients with deficient serum vitamin D level also had significantly higher odds of worse functional independence in mRS score [OR: 2.41, 95%CI: (1.13–5.16), p = 0.023] when compared to participants with normal vitamin D level.ConclusionLow vitamin D levels were associated with higher severity of stroke at admission and poor functional independence and disability at discharge in patients with acute ischemic stroke. Further randomized clinical and interventional studies are required to confirm our findings

Survival implications vs. complications: unraveling the impact of vitamin D adjunctive use in critically ill patients with COVID-19—A multicenter cohort study

BackgroundDespite insufficient evidence, vitamin D has been used as adjunctive therapy in critically ill patients with COVID-19. This study evaluates the effectiveness and safety of vitamin D as an adjunctive therapy in critically ill COVID-19 patients.MethodsA multicenter retrospective cohort study that included all adult COVID-19 patients admitted to the intensive care units (ICUs) between March 2020 and July 2021. Patients were categorized into two groups based on their vitamin D use throughout their ICU stay (control vs. vitamin D). The primary endpoint was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were the length of stay (LOS), mechanical ventilation (MV) duration, and ICU-acquired complications. Propensity score (PS) matching (1:1) was used based on the predefined criteria. Multivariable logistic, Cox proportional hazards, and negative binomial regression analyses were employed as appropriate.ResultsA total of 1,435 patients were included in the study. Vitamin D was initiated in 177 patients (12.3%), whereas 1,258 patients did not receive it. A total of 288 patients were matched (1:1) using PS. The in-hospital mortality showed no difference between patients who received vitamin D and the control group (HR 1.22, 95% CI 0.87–1.71; p = 0.26). However, MV duration and ICU LOS were longer in the vitamin D group (beta coefficient 0.24 (95% CI 0.00–0.47), p = 0.05 and beta coefficient 0.16 (95% CI −0.01 to 0.33), p = 0.07, respectively). As an exploratory outcome, patients who received vitamin D were more likely to develop major bleeding than those who did not [OR 3.48 (95% CI 1.10, 10.94), p = 0.03].ConclusionThe use of vitamin D as adjunctive therapy in COVID-19 critically ill patients was not associated with survival benefits but was linked with longer MV duration, ICU LOS, and higher odds of major bleeding

The Saudi Critical Care Society practice guidelines on the management of COVID-19 in the ICU: Therapy section

BACKGROUND: The rapid increase in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases during the subsequent waves in Saudi Arabia and other countries prompted the Saudi Critical Care Society (SCCS) to put together a panel of experts to issue evidence-based recommendations for the management of COVID-19 in the intensive care unit (ICU). METHODS: The SCCS COVID-19 panel included 51 experts with expertise in critical care, respirology, infectious disease, epidemiology, emergency medicine, clinical pharmacy, nursing, respiratory therapy, methodology, and health policy. All members completed an electronic conflict of interest disclosure form. The panel addressed 9 questions that are related to the therapy of COVID-19 in the ICU. We identified relevant systematic reviews and clinical trials, then used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach as well as the evidence-to-decision framework (EtD) to assess the quality of evidence and generate recommendations. RESULTS: The SCCS COVID-19 panel issued 12 recommendations on pharmacotherapeutic interventions (immunomodulators, antiviral agents, and anticoagulants) for severe and critical COVID-19, of which 3 were strong recommendations and 9 were weak recommendations. CONCLUSION: The SCCS COVID-19 panel used the GRADE approach to formulate recommendations on therapy for COVID-19 in the ICU. The EtD framework allows adaptation of these recommendations in different contexts. The SCCS guideline committee will update recommendations as new evidence becomes available

Early mobilisation in critically ill COVID-19 patients: a subanalysis of the ESICM-initiated UNITE-COVID observational study

Background Early mobilisation (EM) is an intervention that may improve the outcome of critically ill patients. There is limited data on EM in COVID-19 patients and its use during the first pandemic wave. Methods This is a pre-planned subanalysis of the ESICM UNITE-COVID, an international multicenter observational study involving critically ill COVID-19 patients in the ICU between February 15th and May 15th, 2020. We analysed variables associated with the initiation of EM (within 72 h of ICU admission) and explored the impact of EM on mortality, ICU and hospital length of stay, as well as discharge location. Statistical analyses were done using (generalised) linear mixed-effect models and ANOVAs. Results Mobilisation data from 4190 patients from 280 ICUs in 45 countries were analysed. 1114 (26.6%) of these patients received mobilisation within 72 h after ICU admission; 3076 (73.4%) did not. In our analysis of factors associated with EM, mechanical ventilation at admission (OR 0.29; 95% CI 0.25, 0.35; p = 0.001), higher age (OR 0.99; 95% CI 0.98, 1.00; p ≤ 0.001), pre-existing asthma (OR 0.84; 95% CI 0.73, 0.98; p = 0.028), and pre-existing kidney disease (OR 0.84; 95% CI 0.71, 0.99; p = 0.036) were negatively associated with the initiation of EM. EM was associated with a higher chance of being discharged home (OR 1.31; 95% CI 1.08, 1.58; p = 0.007) but was not associated with length of stay in ICU (adj. difference 0.91 days; 95% CI − 0.47, 1.37, p = 0.34) and hospital (adj. difference 1.4 days; 95% CI − 0.62, 2.35, p = 0.24) or mortality (OR 0.88; 95% CI 0.7, 1.09, p = 0.24) when adjusted for covariates. Conclusions Our findings demonstrate that a quarter of COVID-19 patients received EM. There was no association found between EM in COVID-19 patients' ICU and hospital length of stay or mortality. However, EM in COVID-19 patients was associated with increased odds of being discharged home rather than to a care facility. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04836065 (retrospectively registered April 8th 2021)

The Role of Critical Care Pharmacists Beyond Intensive Care Units: A Narrative Review on Medication Management for ICU Survivors

There is a global improvement in critical care services that leads to prolonged survival after ICU stay. This improvement has increased the demand for multidisciplinary critical care services beyond the ICU. Recently, efforts focused on the patient’s quality of life after ICU discharge and family involvement in their care. Most older adults who survive an ICU stay are challenged by complex medication changes following discharge, as are their caregivers. Limited literature addresses the standard of practice for medication management and critical care pharmacists’ involvement in post-ICU services. This narrative review describes the available literature that addresses medication management in post-ICU settings by critical care pharmacists and potential axes for future research. The included articles were articles published in English related to adult ICU survivors and addressed pharmacist involvement or medication management. The main findings summarize the most performed pharmacist services following ICU discharge, including medication reconciliation, full medication review, and adverse drug event preventative measures. This review concluded a lack of consensus about the standard model of post-ICU pharmacy services and the relationship of these services with long-term outcomes

The Role of Critical Care Pharmacists Beyond Intensive Care Units: A Narrative Review on Medication Management for ICU Survivors

Abstract There is a global improvement in critical care services that leads to prolonged survival after ICU stay. This improvement has increased the demand for multidisciplinary critical care services beyond the ICU. Recently, efforts focused on the patient’s quality of life after ICU discharge and family involvement in their care. Most older adults who survive an ICU stay are challenged by complex medication changes following discharge, as are their caregivers. Limited literature addresses the standard of practice for medication management and critical care pharmacists’ involvement in post-ICU services. This narrative review describes the available literature that addresses medication management in post-ICU settings by critical care pharmacists and potential axes for future research. The included articles were articles published in English related to adult ICU survivors and addressed pharmacist involvement or medication management. The main findings summarize the most performed pharmacist services following ICU discharge, including medication reconciliation, full medication review, and adverse drug event preventative measures. This review concluded a lack of consensus about the standard model of post-ICU pharmacy services and the relationship of these services with long-term outcomes

Pain in sickle cell diseases; physicians’ knowledge, attitude, and barriers: a cross sectional study

Objective: To assess the status of acute pain management in sickle cell disease patients, and to explore the association between professional experience and therapeutic preferences among the physicians for the management of sickle cell disease-related acute pain management. Method: The cross-sectional study was conducted from June to September 2018 and comprised physicians from 20 hospitals across Saudi Arabia. Data was collected using a 13-item survey form investigating physicians’ general information and related barriers regarding acute pain management in sickle cell disease patients. Data was analysed using SPSS 25. Results: Of the 300 individuals approached through emails, 201(67%) responded. There were 122(61%) males and 78(39%) females; 126(63%) had experience 10 years; the largest group of physicians belonged to Internal Medicine 46(23%); 41(20.4%) came across sickle cell disease patients ‘very often' and 31(15.4) had never come across such a patient. There was no significant association between professional experience and therapeutic management preferences (p>0.05). Conclusion: Physicians’ knowledge, attitude and practice related to acute pain management in sickle cell disease patients was adequate. More awareness is needed for optimal management of pain in such patients. Key Words: SCD, Sickle cell disease, Opioids, Acute pain, Physicians