11 research outputs found

    Epidemiology, practice of ventilation and outcome for patients at increased risk of postoperative pulmonary complications

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND Limited information exists about the epidemiology and outcome of surgical patients at increased risk of postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs), and how intraoperative ventilation was managed in these patients. OBJECTIVES To determine the incidence of surgical patients at increased risk of PPCs, and to compare the intraoperative ventilation management and postoperative outcomes with patients at low risk of PPCs. DESIGN This was a prospective international 1-week observational study using the ‘Assess Respiratory Risk in Surgical Patients in Catalonia risk score’ (ARISCAT score) for PPC for risk stratification. PATIENTS AND SETTING Adult patients requiring intraoperative ventilation during general anaesthesia for surgery in 146 hospitals across 29 countries. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES The primary outcome was the incidence of patients at increased risk of PPCs based on the ARISCAT score. Secondary outcomes included intraoperative ventilatory management and clinical outcomes. RESULTS A total of 9864 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The incidence of patients at increased risk was 28.4%. The most frequently chosen tidal volume (VT) size was 500 ml, or 7 to 9 ml kg1 predicted body weight, slightly lower in patients at increased risk of PPCs. Levels of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) were slightly higher in patients at increased risk of PPCs, with 14.3% receiving more than 5 cmH2O PEEP compared with 7.6% in patients at low risk of PPCs (P < 0.001). Patients with a predicted preoperative increased risk of PPCs developed PPCs more frequently: 19 versus 7%, relative risk (RR) 3.16 (95% confidence interval 2.76 to 3.61), P < 0.001) and had longer hospital stays. The only ventilatory factor associated with the occurrence of PPCs was the peak pressure. CONCLUSION The incidence of patients with a predicted increased risk of PPCs is high. A large proportion of patients receive high VT and low PEEP levels. PPCs occur frequently in patients at increased risk, with worse clinical outcome

    Epidemiology, practice of ventilation and outcome for patients at increased risk of postoperative pulmonary complications: LAS VEGAS - An observational study in 29 countries

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND Limited information exists about the epidemiology and outcome of surgical patients at increased risk of postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs), and how intraoperative ventilation was managed in these patients. OBJECTIVES To determine the incidence of surgical patients at increased risk of PPCs, and to compare the intraoperative ventilation management and postoperative outcomes with patients at low risk of PPCs. DESIGN This was a prospective international 1-week observational study using the ‘Assess Respiratory Risk in Surgical Patients in Catalonia risk score’ (ARISCAT score) for PPC for risk stratification. PATIENTS AND SETTING Adult patients requiring intraoperative ventilation during general anaesthesia for surgery in 146 hospitals across 29 countries. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES The primary outcome was the incidence of patients at increased risk of PPCs based on the ARISCAT score. Secondary outcomes included intraoperative ventilatory management and clinical outcomes. RESULTS A total of 9864 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The incidence of patients at increased risk was 28.4%. The most frequently chosen tidal volume (V T) size was 500 ml, or 7 to 9 ml kg−1 predicted body weight, slightly lower in patients at increased risk of PPCs. Levels of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) were slightly higher in patients at increased risk of PPCs, with 14.3% receiving more than 5 cmH2O PEEP compared with 7.6% in patients at low risk of PPCs (P ˂ 0.001). Patients with a predicted preoperative increased risk of PPCs developed PPCs more frequently: 19 versus 7%, relative risk (RR) 3.16 (95% confidence interval 2.76 to 3.61), P ˂ 0.001) and had longer hospital stays. The only ventilatory factor associated with the occurrence of PPCs was the peak pressure. CONCLUSION The incidence of patients with a predicted increased risk of PPCs is high. A large proportion of patients receive high V T and low PEEP levels. PPCs occur frequently in patients at increased risk, with worse clinical outcome.</p

    Ventilator settings to avoid nuisance alarms during mouthpiece ventilation

    No full text
    6nononeBACKGROUND: A recent study found that activation of disconnection and low-pressure alarms is common during mouthpiece ventilation and may represent a major limitation to its use. The aim of this bench study was: (1) to investigate the technical aspects that can influence the setting of the ventilator during mouthpiece ventilation and (2) to provide a practical setting strategy to avoid the alarm activation. METHODS: Eight life-support ventilators able to deliver volume controlled ventilation were tested in a bench study using a single-limb non-vented circuit configuration connected to a standard mouthpiece. Disconnection and apnea alarm were turned off or set at the least sensitive setting. The backup frequency was set at the lowest available level. Different tidal volumes (VT) (from 500 to 1,200 mL) were tested with the rectangular and descending flow shape. For each VT, we reported the maximum set inspiratory time (TI) that allowed preventing activation of the low-pressure alarm. The presence of auto-triggering was also surveyed. RESULTS: We found that a correct combination of VT and TI avoided the activation of disconnection and low-pressure alarms in all but 3 ventilators. One ventilator did not allow mouthpiece ventilation independently from the settings used. The inability to turn off the apnea alarm in two other ventilators led to the alarm going off in any tested conditions after 120 s without triggered breaths. Auto-triggering was seldom found and easily worked out, except for in one ventilator. CONCLUSIONS: An appropriate alarm setting and combination of VT and TI would allow the majority of the tested ventilators to be used for mouthpiece ventilation without alarm activation.noneCarlucci A.; Mattei A.; Rossi V.; Paracchini E.; Raineri S.M.; Gregoretti C.Carlucci, A.; Mattei, A.; Rossi, V.; Paracchini, E.; Raineri, S. M.; Gregoretti, C

    Incidence and outcome of invasive candidiasis in intensive care units (icus) in europe: Results of the eucandicu project

    No full text
    Background: The objective of this study was to assess the cumulative incidence of invasive candidiasis (IC) in intensive care units (ICUs) in Europe. Methods: A multinational, multicenter, retrospective study was conducted in 23 ICUs in 9 European countries, representing the first phase of the candidemia/intra-abdominal candidiasis in European ICU project (EUCANDICU). Results: During the study period, 570 episodes of ICU-acquired IC were observed, with a cumulative incidence of 7.07 episodes per 1000 ICU admissions, with important between-center variability. Separated, non-mutually exclusive cumulative incidences of candidemia and IAC were 5.52 and 1.84 episodes per 1000 ICU admissions, respectively. Crude 30-day mortality was 42%. Age (odds ratio [OR] 1.04 per year, 95% CI 1.02-1.06, p &lt; 0.001), severe hepatic failure (OR 3.25, 95% 1.31-8.08, p 0.011), SOFA score at the onset of IC (OR 1.11 per point, 95% CI 1.04-1.17, p 0.001), and septic shock (OR 2.12, 95% CI 1.24-3.63, p 0.006) were associated with increased 30-day mortality in a secondary, exploratory analysis. Conclusions: The cumulative incidence of IC in 23 European ICUs was 7.07 episodes per 1000 ICU admissions. Future in-depth analyses will allow explaining part of the observed between-center variability, with the ultimate aim of helping to improve local infection control and antifungal stewardship projects and interventions. © 2019 The Author(s)

    Risk Factors for Intra-Abdominal Candidiasis in Intensive Care Units: Results from EUCANDICU Study

    No full text
    INTRODUCTION: Intra-abdominal infections represent the second most frequently acquired infection in the intensive care unit (ICU), with mortality rates ranging from 20% to 50%. Candida spp. may be responsible for up to 10-30% of cases. This study assesses risk factors for development of intra-abdominal candidiasis (IAC) among patients admitted to ICU. METHODS: We performed a case-control study in 26 European ICUs during the period January 2015-December 2016. Patients at least 18 years old who developed an episode of microbiologically documented IAC during their stay in the ICU (at least 48 h after admission) served as the case cohort. The control group consisted of adult patients who did not develop episodes of IAC during ICU admission. Matching was performed at a ratio of 1:1 according to time at risk (i.e. controls had to have at least the same length of ICU stay as their matched cases prior to IAC onset), ICU ward and period of study. RESULTS: During the study period, 101 case patients with a diagnosis of IAC were included in the study. On univariate analysis, severe hepatic failure, prior receipt of antibiotics, prior receipt of parenteral nutrition, abdominal drain, prior bacterial infection, anastomotic leakage, recurrent gastrointestinal perforation, prior receipt of antifungal drugs and higher median number of abdominal surgical interventions were associated with IAC development. On multivariate analysis, recurrent gastrointestinal perforation (OR 13.90; 95% CI 2.65-72.82, p = 0.002), anastomotic leakage (OR 6.61; 95% CI 1.98-21.99, p = 0.002), abdominal drain (OR 6.58; 95% CI 1.73-25.06, p = 0.006), prior receipt of antifungal drugs (OR 4.26; 95% CI 1.04-17.46, p = 0.04) or antibiotics (OR 3.78; 95% CI 1.32-10.52, p = 0.01) were independently associated with IAC. CONCLUSIONS: Gastrointestinal perforation, anastomotic leakage, abdominal drain and prior receipt of antifungals or antibiotics may help to identify critically ill patients with higher probability of developing IAC. Prospective studies are needed to identify which patients will benefit from early antifungal treatment

    Pressure support ventilation + sigh in acute hypoxemic respiratory failure patients: Study protocol for a pilot randomized controlled trial, the PROTECTION trial

    No full text
    Background: Adding cyclic short sustained inflations (sigh) to assisted ventilation yields optimizes lung recruitment, decreases heterogeneity and reduces inspiratory effort in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF). These findings suggest that adding sigh to pressure support ventilation (PSV) might decrease the risk of lung injury, shorten weaning and improve clinical outcomes. Thus, we conceived a pilot trial to test the feasibility of adding sigh to PSV (the PROTECTION study). Methods: PROTECTION is an international randomized controlled trial that will be conducted in 23 intensive care units (ICUs). Patients with AHRF who have been intubated from 24 h to 7 days and undergoing PSV from 4 to 24 h will be enrolled. All patients will first undergo a 30-min sigh test by adding sigh to clinical PSV for 30 min to identify early oxygenation responders. Then, patients will be randomized to PSV or PSV + sigh until extubation, ICU discharge, death or day 28. Sigh will be delivered as a 3-s pressure control breath delivered once per minute at 30 cmH2O. Standardized protocols will guide ventilation settings, switch back to controlled ventilation, use of rescue treatments, performance of spontaneous breathing trial, extubation and reintubation. The primary endpoint of the study will be to verify the feasibility of PSV + sigh evaluated through reduction of failure to remain on assisted ventilation during the first 28 days in the PSV + sigh group versus standard PSV (15 vs. 22%). Failure will be defined by switch back to controlled ventilation for more than 24 h or use of rescue treatments or reintubation within 48 h from elective extubation. Setting the power to 80% and first-risk order to 5%, the computed size of the trial is 129 patients per arm. Discussion: PROTECTION is a pilot randomized controlled trial testing the feasibility of adding sigh to PSV. If positive, it will provide physicians with an effective addition to standard PSV for lung protection, able to reduce failure of assisted ventilation. PROTECTION will provide the basis for a future larger trial aimed at verifying the impact of PSV + sigh on 28-day survival and ventilator-free days. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03201263. Registered on 28 June 2017. \ua9 2018 The Author(s)
    corecore