Sex difference and intra-operative tidal volume: Insights from the LAS VEGAS study

BACKGROUND: One key element of lung-protective ventilation is the use of a low tidal volume (VT). A sex difference in use of low tidal volume ventilation (LTVV) has been described in critically ill ICU patients.OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine whether a sex difference in use of LTVV also exists in operating room patients, and if present what factors drive this difference.DESIGN, PATIENTS AND SETTING: This is a posthoc analysis of LAS VEGAS, a 1-week worldwide observational study in adults requiring intra-operative ventilation during general anaesthesia for surgery in 146 hospitals in 29 countries.MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Women and men were compared with respect to use of LTVV, defined as VT of 8 ml kg-1 or less predicted bodyweight (PBW). A VT was deemed 'default' if the set VT was a round number. A mediation analysis assessed which factors may explain the sex difference in use of LTVV during intra-operative ventilation.RESULTS: This analysis includes 9864 patients, of whom 5425 (55%) were women. A default VT was often set, both in women and men; mode VT was 500 ml. Median [IQR] VT was higher in women than in men (8.6 [7.7 to 9.6] vs. 7.6 [6.8 to 8.4] ml kg-1 PBW, P < 0.001). Compared with men, women were twice as likely not to receive LTVV [68.8 vs. 36.0%; relative risk ratio 2.1 (95% CI 1.9 to 2.1), P < 0.001]. In the mediation analysis, patients' height and actual body weight (ABW) explained 81 and 18% of the sex difference in use of LTVV, respectively; it was not explained by the use of a default VT.CONCLUSION: In this worldwide cohort of patients receiving intra-operative ventilation during general anaesthesia for surgery, women received a higher VT than men during intra-operative ventilation. The risk for a female not to receive LTVV during surgery was double that of males. Height and ABW were the two mediators of the sex difference in use of LTVV.TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered at Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01601223

The role of clinical hypnosis and self-hypnosis to relief pain and anxiety in severe chronic diseases in palliative care: a 2-year long- term follow-up of treatment in a nonrandomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND: Patients with severe chronic diseases and advanced cancer receiving palliative care, have a complex range of pain and anxiety that can arise early in the course of illness. We studied two groups of patients with severe chronic diseases who participated in a nonrandomized clinical trial of early integration of clinical hypnosis in palliative care versus standard pharmacological care. The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate whether a long-term intervention of 2 years with clinical hypnosis and self-hypnosis as an adjuvant therapy in chronic pain and anxiety, is more effective than pharmacological therapy alone. METHODS: The study was performed at the Center of Anesthesiology, Intensive Care and Pain Therapy at the University of Verona, Italy. The study population consisted of 50 patients, 25 in the hypnosis group and 25 in the control group. Fourteen men and 36 women participated in the study. Evaluations with Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for pain and Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A) for anxiety and the evaluation of the use of opioids and analgesic medicines were conducted at baseline and for a long-term follow-up (after 1 and 2 years). RESULTS: The two groups were homogeneous in the distribution of sex, age, type and subtypes of diseases and use of opioids and analgesic medicines at baseline. The patients suffered from 3 main types of severe chronic diseases: rheumatic (n=21), neurologic (n=16) and oncologic (n=13). The VAS score at baseline was similar in both the hypnosis group and control group (mean \ub1 standard deviation, SD: 78\ub116 and 77\ub114, respectively). The average VAS value for the hypnosis group decreased from 81.9\ub114.6 at baseline to 45.9\ub113.8 at 1-year follow-up, to 38.9\ub112.4 at 2-year follow-up. The average VAS value for the control group decreased from 78.5\ub114.8 at baseline, to 62.1\ub115.4 at 1-year follow-up, to 57.1\ub115.9 at 2-year follow-up. The variance analysis indicated that the decrease in perceived pain was more significant in the hypnosis group patients than in the control group, after 1- and 2-year follow-up (P=0.0001). The average HAM-A Hamilton anxiety score decreased from 32.6 at baseline to 22.9 and 17.1 respectively at 1-year and 2-year follow-up for the hypnosis group, but it remained almost the same in the control group (29.8, 26.1 and 28.5 at baseline, first and second year respectively). ANOVA showed that the difference between the two groups was statistically significant (P<0.0001). Univariate analysis showed a 4-times greater risk of increasing analgesic medicines and opioids in the control group (adj.IRR: 4.36; 95% CI: 1.59-12.0) after 2-year follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The patient group receiving hypnosis as an adjuvant therapy showed a statistically significant decrease in pain and anxiety and a significantly lower risk of increasing pharmacological pain treatment in a long term follow-up after 1 and 2 years compared to the control group. Clinical hypnosis can be considered an effective adjuvant therapy for pain and anxiety control in cancer as well as in severe chronic diseases for patients receiving palliative care

Single-injection regional analgesia techniques for mastectomy surgery: A network meta-analysis

Patients undergoing mastectomy surgery experience severe postoperative pain. Several regional techniques have been developed to reduce pain intensity but it is unclear, which of these techniques is most effective

Real-life effectiveness and safety of sofosbuvir/velpatasvir/voxilaprevir in hepatitis C patients with previous DAA failure

Sofosbuvir/velpatasivr/voxilaprevir (SOF/VEL/VOX) is approved for retreatment of patients with HCV and a previous failure on direct-acting antivirals (DAAs), however real-life data are limited. The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness and safety of SOF/VEL/VOX in a real-life setting

Continuous vs Intermittent Meropenem Administration in Critically Ill Patients With Sepsis: The MERCY Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance: Meropenem is a widely prescribed β-lactam antibiotic. Meropenem exhibits maximum pharmacodynamic efficacy when given by continuous infusion to deliver constant drug levels above the minimal inhibitory concentration. Compared with intermittent administration, continuous administration of meropenem may improve clinical outcomes. Objective: To determine whether continuous administration of meropenem reduces a composite of mortality and emergence of pandrug-resistant or extensively drug-resistant bacteria compared with intermittent administration in critically ill patients with sepsis. Design, setting, and participants: A double-blind, randomized clinical trial enrolling critically ill patients with sepsis or septic shock who had been prescribed meropenem by their treating clinicians at 31 intensive care units of 26 hospitals in 4 countries (Croatia, Italy, Kazakhstan, and Russia). Patients were enrolled between June 5, 2018, and August 9, 2022, and the final 90-day follow-up was completed in November 2022. Interventions: Patients were randomized to receive an equal dose of the antibiotic meropenem by either continuous administration (n = 303) or intermittent administration (n = 304). Main outcomes and measures: The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality and emergence of pandrug-resistant or extensively drug-resistant bacteria at day 28. There were 4 secondary outcomes, including days alive and free from antibiotics at day 28, days alive and free from the intensive care unit at day 28, and all-cause mortality at day 90. Seizures, allergic reactions, and mortality were recorded as adverse events. Results: All 607 patients (mean age, 64 [SD, 15] years; 203 were women [33%]) were included in the measurement of the 28-day primary outcome and completed the 90-day mortality follow-up. The majority (369 patients, 61%) had septic shock. The median time from hospital admission to randomization was 9 days (IQR, 3-17 days) and the median duration of meropenem therapy was 11 days (IQR, 6-17 days). Only 1 crossover event was recorded. The primary outcome occurred in 142 patients (47%) in the continuous administration group and in 149 patients (49%) in the intermittent administration group (relative risk, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.81-1.13], P = .60). Of the 4 secondary outcomes, none was statistically significant. No adverse events of seizures or allergic reactions related to the study drug were reported. At 90 days, mortality was 42% both in the continuous administration group (127 of 303 patients) and in the intermittent administration group (127 of 304 patients). Conclusions and relevance: In critically ill patients with sepsis, compared with intermittent administration, the continuous administration of meropenem did not improve the composite outcome of mortality and emergence of pandrug-resistant or extensively drug-resistant bacteria at day 28. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03452839

The management of acute venous thromboembolism in clinical practice - study rationale and protocol of the European PREFER in VTE Registry

Background: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a major health problem, with over one million events every year in Europe. However, there is a paucity of data on the current management in real life, including factors influencing treatment pathways, patient satisfaction, quality of life (QoL), and utilization of health care resources and the corresponding costs. The PREFER in VTE registry has been designed to address this and to understand medical care and needs as well as potential gaps for improvement. Methods/design: The PREFER in VTE registry was a prospective, observational, multicenter study conducted in seven European countries including Austria, France Germany, Italy, Spain, Switzerland, and the UK to assess the characteristics and the management of patients with VTE, the use of health care resources, and to provide data to estimate the costs for 12 months treatment following a first-time and/or recurrent VTE diagnosed in hospitals or specialized or primary care centers. In addition, existing anticoagulant treatment patterns, patient pathways, clinical outcomes, treatment satisfaction, and health related QoL were documented. The centers were chosen to reflect the care environment in which patients with VTE are managed in each of the participating countries. Patients were eligible to be enrolled into the registry if they were at least 18 years old, had a symptomatic, objectively confirmed first time or recurrent acute VTE defined as either distal or proximal deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism or both. After the baseline visit at the time of the acute VTE event, further follow-up documentations occurred at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months. Follow-up data was collected by either routinely scheduled visits or by telephone calls. Results: Overall, 381 centers participated, which enrolled 3,545 patients during an observational period of 1 year. Conclusion: The PREFER in VTE registry will provide valuable insights into the characteristics of patients with VTE and their acute and mid-term management, as well as into drug utilization and the use of health care resources in acute first-time and/or recurrent VTE across Europe in clinical practice. Trial registration: Registered in DRKS register, ID number: DRKS0000479

Intraoperative ventilator settings and their association with postoperative pulmonary complications in neurosurgical patients: post-hoc analysis of LAS VEGAS study

Background: Limited information is available regarding intraoperative ventilator settings and the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) in patients undergoing neurosurgical procedures. The aim of this post-hoc analysis of the 'Multicentre Local ASsessment of VEntilatory management during General Anaesthesia for Surgery' (LAS VEGAS) study was to examine the ventilator settings of patients undergoing neurosurgical procedures, and to explore the association between perioperative variables and the development of PPCs in neurosurgical patients. Methods: Post-hoc analysis of LAS VEGAS study, restricted to patients undergoing neurosurgery. Patients were stratified into groups based on the type of surgery (brain and spine), the occurrence of PPCs and the assess respiratory risk in surgical patients in Catalonia (ARISCAT) score risk for PPCs. Results: Seven hundred eighty-four patients were included in the analysis; 408 patients (52%) underwent spine surgery and 376 patients (48%) brain surgery. Median tidal volume (VT) was 8 ml [Interquartile Range, IQR = 7.3-9] per predicted body weight; median positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) was 5 [3 to 5] cmH20. Planned recruitment manoeuvres were used in the 6.9% of patients. No differences in ventilator settings were found among the sub-groups. PPCs occurred in 81 patients (10.3%). Duration of anaesthesia (odds ratio, 1.295 [95% confidence interval 1.067 to 1.572]; p = 0.009) and higher age for the brain group (odds ratio, 0.000 [0.000 to 0.189]; p = 0.031), but not intraoperative ventilator settings were independently associated with development of PPCs. Conclusions: Neurosurgical patients are ventilated with low VT and low PEEP, while recruitment manoeuvres are seldom applied. Intraoperative ventilator settings are not associated with PPCs

Association between night-time surgery and occurrence of intraoperative adverse events and postoperative pulmonary complications

Background: The aim of this post hoc analysis of a large cohort study was to evaluate the association between night-time surgery and the occurrence of intraoperative adverse events (AEs) and postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs). Methods: LAS VEGAS (Local Assessment of Ventilatory Management During General Anesthesia for Surgery) was a prospective international 1-week study that enrolled adult patients undergoing surgical procedures with general anaesthesia and mechanical ventilation in 146 hospitals across 29 countries. Surgeries were defined as occurring during 'daytime' when induction of anaesthesia was between 8: 00 AM and 7: 59 PM, and as 'night-time' when induction was between 8: 00 PM and 7: 59 AM. Results: Of 9861 included patients, 555 (5.6%) underwent surgery during night-time. The proportion of patients who developed intraoperative AEs was higher during night-time surgery in unmatched (43.6% vs 34.1%; P<0.001) and propensity-matched analyses (43.7% vs 36.8%; P = 0.029). PPCs also occurred more often in patients who underwent night-time surgery (14% vs 10%; P = 0.004) in an unmatched cohort analysis, although not in a propensity-matched analysis (13.8% vs 11.8%; P = 0.39). In a multivariable regression model, including patient characteristics and types of surgery and anaesthesia, night-time surgery was independently associated with a higher incidence of intraoperative AEs (odds ratio: 1.44; 95% confidence interval: 1.09-1.90; P = 0.01), but not with a higher incidence of PPCs (odds ratio: 1.32; 95% confidence interval: 0.89-1.90; P = 0.15). Conclusions: Intraoperative adverse events and postoperative pulmonary complications occurred more often in patients undergoing night-time surgery. Imbalances in patients' clinical characteristics, types of surgery, and intraoperative management at night-time partially explained the higher incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications, but not the higher incidence of adverse events

Intraoperative ventilator settings and their association with postoperative pulmonary complications in neurosurgical patients: Post-hoc analysis of LAS VEGAS study

Background: Limited information is available regarding intraoperative ventilator settings and the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) in patients undergoing neurosurgical procedures. The aim of this post-hoc analysis of the 'Multicentre Local ASsessment of VEntilatory management during General Anaesthesia for Surgery' (LAS VEGAS) study was to examine the ventilator settings of patients undergoing neurosurgical procedures, and to explore the association between perioperative variables and the development of PPCs in neurosurgical patients. Methods: Post-hoc analysis of LAS VEGAS study, restricted to patients undergoing neurosurgery. Patients were stratified into groups based on the type of surgery (brain and spine), the occurrence of PPCs and the assess respiratory risk in surgical patients in Catalonia (ARISCAT) score risk for PPCs. Results: Seven hundred eighty-four patients were included in the analysis; 408 patients (52%) underwent spine surgery and 376 patients (48%) brain surgery. Median tidal volume (VT) was 8 ml [Interquartile Range, IQR = 7.3-9] per predicted body weight; median positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) was 5 [3 to 5] cmH20. Planned recruitment manoeuvres were used in the 6.9% of patients. No differences in ventilator settings were found among the sub-groups. PPCs occurred in 81 patients (10.3%). Duration of anaesthesia (odds ratio, 1.295 [95% confidence interval 1.067 to 1.572]; p = 0.009) and higher age for the brain group (odds ratio, 0.000 [0.000 to 0.189]; p = 0.031), but not intraoperative ventilator settings were independently associated with development of PPCs. Conclusions: Neurosurgical patients are ventilated with low VT and low PEEP, while recruitment manoeuvres are seldom applied. Intraoperative ventilator settings are not associated with PPCs

Association between night-time surgery and occurrence of intraoperative adverse events and postoperative pulmonary complications

Background: The aim of this post hoc analysis of a large cohort study was to evaluate the association between night-time surgery and the occurrence of intraoperative adverse events (AEs) and postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs)