Intensive care discharge delay is associated with increased hospital length of stay: A multicentre prospective observational study

Background Some patients experience a delayed discharge from the intensive care unit (ICU) where the intended and actual discharge times do not coincide. The clinical implications of this remain unclear. Objective To determine the incidence and duration of delayed ICU discharge, identify the reasons for delay and evaluate the clinical consequences. Methods Prospective multi-centre observational study involving five ICUs over a 3-month period. Delay in discharge was defined as >6 hours from the planned discharge time. The primary outcome measure was hospital length stay after ICU discharge decision. Secondary outcome measures included ICU discharge after-hours, incidence of delirium, survival to hospital discharge, discharge destination, the incidence of ICU acquired infections, revocation of ICU discharge decision, unplanned readmissions to ICU within 72 hours, review of patients admitting team after ICU discharge decision. Results A total of 955 out of 1118 patients discharged were included in analysis. 49.9% of the patients discharge was delayed. The most common reason (74%) for delay in discharge was non-availability of ward bed. The median duration of the delay was 24 hours. On univariable analysis, the duration of hospital stay from the time of ICU discharge decision was significantly higher in patients who had ICU discharge delay (Median days-5 vs 6; p = 0.003). After-hours discharge was higher in patients whose discharge was delayed (34% Vs 10%; p<0.001). There was no statistically significant difference in the other secondary outcomes analysed. Multivariable analysis adjusting for known confounders revealed delayed ICU discharge was independently associated with increased hospital length of stay. Conclusion Half of all ICU patients experienced a delay in ICU discharge. Delayed discharge was associated with increased hospital length of stay.This study was funded by the Australia and New Zealand Intensive Care Society (ANZICS) Safety and Quality Outcomes grant

Long term follow up results of sequential left internal thoracic artery grafts on severe left anterior descending artery disease

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Purpose</p> <p>Several alternative procedures have been proposed to achieve complete revascularization in the presence of diffuse left anterior descending coronary artery (LAD) disease. With the extensive use of internal thoracic artery grafts in coronary artery bypass procedures, sequential anastomosis of the left internal thoracic artery (LITA) to LAD has gained popularity in these challenging cases. The long term results of sequential LITA to LAD anstomosis were examined in this study.</p> <p>Patients and Methods</p> <p>In order to determine the long term results of the sequential revascularization of LAD by LITA graft, 41 out of 49 patients operated between January 2001 and December 2005 were selected for control coronary arteriography. The median period for control coronary arteriography was 64 months.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Seventy five anastomoses were found to be fully patent (91,46%) among the 82 sequential LITA anastomoses (41 LITA grafts) on the LAD at a median follow-up period of 64 months (53 to 123 months). Among the 41 LITA grafts used for this purpose, 36 were found intact (complete patency of the proximal and distal anastomoses) (87,8%). Two LITA grafts (4 anastomoses) were found to be totally occluded (4,87%). The proximal anastomosis of the LITA graft was observed to be 90% stenotic in one patient (1,21%). In one patient tight stenosis of the distal anastomosis line was observed (1,21%), while in another patient 70% narrowing of LITA lumen after the proximal anastomosis was detected (1,21%).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>We strongly beleive that sequential LITA grafting of LAD is a safe alternative in the presence of severe LAD disease to achieve complete revascularization of the anterior myocardium with patency rates not much differing from conventional single LITA to LAD anastomosis.</p

Early results of coronary artery bypass grafting with coronary endarterectomy for severe coronary artery disease

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Despite the existence of controversial debates on the efficiency of coronary endarterectomy (CE), it is still used as an adjunct to coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). This is particularly true in patients with endstage coronary artery disease. Given the improvements in cardiac surgery and postoperative care, as well as the rising number of elderly patient with numerous co-morbidities, re-evaluating the pros and cons of this technique is needed.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Patient demographic information, operative details and outcome data of 104 patients with diffuse calcified coronary artery disease were retrospectively analyzed with respect to functional capacity (NYHA), angina pectoris (CCS) and mortality. Actuarial survival was reported using a Kaplan-Meyer analysis.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Between August 2001 and March 2005, 104 patients underwent coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) with adjunctive coronary endarterectomy (CE) in the Department of Thoracic-, Cardiac- and Vascular Surgery, University of Goettingen. Four patients were lost during follow-up. Data were gained from 88 male and 12 female patients; mean age was 65.5 ± 9 years. A total of 396 vessels were bypassed (4 ± 0.9 vessels per patient). In 98% left internal thoracic artery (LITA) was used as arterial bypass graft and a total of 114 vessels were endarterectomized. CE was performed on right coronary artery (RCA) (n = 55), on left anterior descending artery (LAD) (n = 52) and circumflex artery (RCX) (n = 7). Ninety-five patients suffered from 3-vessel-disease, 3 from 2-vessel- and 2 from 1-vessel-disease. Closed technique was used in 18%, open technique in 79% and in 3% a combination of both. The most frequent endarterectomized localization was right coronary artery (RCA = 55%). Despite the severity of endstage atherosclerosis, hospital mortality was only 5% (n = 5). During follow-up (24.5 ± 13.4 months), which is 96% complete (4 patients were lost caused by unknown address) 8 patients died (cardiac failure: 3; stroke: 1; cancer: 1; unknown reasons: 3). NYHA-classification significantly improved after CABG with CE from 2.2 ± 0.9 preoperative to 1.7 ± 0.9 postoperative. CCS also changed from 2.4 ± 1.0 to 1.5 ± 0.8</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Early results of coronary endarterectomy are acceptable with respect to mortality, NYHA & CCS. This technique offers a valuable surgical option for patients with endstage coronary artery disease in whom complete revascularization otherwise can not be obtained. Careful patient selection will be necessary to assure the long-term benefit of this procedure.</p

Expert consensus statements for the management of COVID-19-related acute respiratory failure using a Delphi method.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused unprecedented pressure on healthcare system globally. Lack of high-quality evidence on the respiratory management of COVID-19-related acute respiratory failure (C-ARF) has resulted in wide variation in clinical practice. Using a Delphi process, an international panel of 39 experts developed clinical practice statements on the respiratory management of C-ARF in areas where evidence is absent or limited. Agreement was defined as achieved when &gt; 70% experts voted for a given option on the Likert scale statement or &gt; 80% voted for a particular option in multiple-choice questions. Stability was assessed between the two concluding rounds for each statement, using the non-parametric Chi-square (χ &lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt; ) test (p &lt; 0·05 was considered as unstable). Agreement was achieved for 27 (73%) management strategies which were then used to develop expert clinical practice statements. Experts agreed that COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is clinically similar to other forms of ARDS. The Delphi process yielded strong suggestions for use of systemic corticosteroids for critical COVID-19; awake self-proning to improve oxygenation and high flow nasal oxygen to potentially reduce tracheal intubation; non-invasive ventilation for patients with mixed hypoxemic-hypercapnic respiratory failure; tracheal intubation for poor mentation, hemodynamic instability or severe hypoxemia; closed suction systems; lung protective ventilation; prone ventilation (for 16-24 h per day) to improve oxygenation; neuromuscular blocking agents for patient-ventilator dyssynchrony; avoiding delay in extubation for the risk of reintubation; and similar timing of tracheostomy as in non-COVID-19 patients. There was no agreement on positive end expiratory pressure titration or the choice of personal protective equipment. Using a Delphi method, an agreement among experts was reached for 27 statements from which 20 expert clinical practice statements were derived on the respiratory management of C-ARF, addressing important decisions for patient management in areas where evidence is either absent or limited. The study was registered with Clinical trials.gov Identifier: NCT04534569