230 research outputs found

    Clinical review: Drotrecogin alfa (activated) as adjunctive therapy for severe sepsis – practical aspects at the bedside and patient identification

    Get PDF
    Administration of drotrecogin alfa (activated) has been demonstrated to reduce mortality in patients with severe sepsis who are at high risk for death or who have multiple organ dysfunction. This benefit was associated with an increased incidence of bleeding events, but the latter were mainly procedure related. Drug infusion interruptions should be instituted, in accordance with recent recommendations. Monitoring coagulation parameters may help in identifying patients at higher risk for bleeding but it is not indicated to adjust drug dosage. Acute renal failure and hemodialysis are not contraindications to this therapy, and no drug dosage adjustment is indicated. Finally, the type and source of infection, and its anticipated natural history, may determine whether drotrecogin alfa (activated) is indicated as well as the timing of its administration

    Use of an integrated clinical trial database to evaluate the effect of timing of drotrecogin alfa (activated) treatment in severe sepsis

    Get PDF
    INTRODUCTION: Several studies have indicated that early identification and treatment of patients with severe sepsis using standard supportive care improves outcomes. Earlier treatment with drotrecogin alfa (activated) (DrotAA) may also improve outcomes in severe sepsis. Using a recently constructed integrated severe sepsis database, our objectives in this study were to describe the influence of baseline clinical characteristics on timing of DrotAA treatment in patients with severe sepsis, to evaluate the efficacy of DrotAA with respect to timing of administration, and to examine the association between early intervention with DrotAA and patient outcomes, using adjustments for imbalances. METHODS: The database comprises data from 4,459 patients with severe sepsis (DrotAA, n = 3,228; placebo, n = 1,231) included in five clinical trials conducted in tertiary care institutions in 28 countries. Placebo data came only from randomized trials, whereas data for the DrotAA group came from randomized (PROWESS) and open-label/observational (ENHANCE) trials. RESULTS: Increased time-to-treatment with DrotAA was significantly associated with more organ dysfunction, greater need of mechanical ventilation, vasopressor use, or recent surgery. Earlier treatment was associated with higher baseline Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE II) scores. Adjusted and unadjusted survival analyses suggested that compared with placebo, DrotAA treatment provided a potential survival benefit, regardless of time to treatment. Survival curves of DrotAA patients treated early compared with those treated late began to separate at 14 days. By 28 days, patients treated earlier had higher survival than those treated later (76.4% versus 73.5%, p = 0.03). Sepsis-induced multiorgan dysfunction was the most common cause of death followed by refractory shock and respiratory failure. Modeling of the treatment effect, as a function of time to treatment, suggested increased benefit with earlier treatment. CONCLUSION: Using an integrated database of five severe sepsis trials and appropriate statistical adjustments to reduce sources of potential bias, earlier treatment with DrotAA seemed to be associated with a lower risk-adjusted mortality than later treatment. These data suggest that earlier treatment with DrotAA may provide most benefit for appropriate patients

    Teamwork enables high level of early mobilization in critically ill patients

    Get PDF
    Additional file 2. Physiological responses of physiotherapy session. Values expressed as mean ± standard deviation; IB = In bed, IC = In chair, * different from baseline, ≈ different from 0 min

    Revisiting the loading dose of amikacin for patients with severe sepsis and septic shock

    Get PDF
    It has been proposed that doses of amikacin of >15 mg/kg should be used in conditions associated with an increased volume of distribution (Vd), such as severe sepsis and septic shock. The primary aim of this study was to determine whether 25 mg/kg (total body weight) of amikacin is an adequate loading dose for these patients.Clinical TrialJournal ArticleMulticenter StudyResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov'tSCOPUS: ar.jinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishe

    Comparison of European ICU patients in 2012 (ICON) versus 2002 (SOAP)

    Get PDF
    Purpose: To evaluate differences in the characteristics and outcomes of intensive care unit (ICU) patients over time. Methods: We reviewed all epidemiological data, including comorbidities, types and severity of organ failure, interventions, lengths of stay and outcome, for patients from the Sepsis Occurrence in Acutely ill Patients (SOAP) study, an observational study conducted in European intensive care units in 2002, and the Intensive Care Over Nations (ICON) audit, a survey of intensive care unit patients conducted in 2012. Results: We compared the 3147 patients from the SOAP study with the 4852 patients from the ICON audit admitted to intensive care units in the same countries as those in the SOAP study. The ICON patients were older (62.5 +/- 17.0 vs. 60.6 +/- 17.4 years) and had higher severity scores than the SOAP patients. The proportion of patients with sepsis at any time during the intensive care unit stay was slightly higher in the ICON study (31.9 vs. 29.6%, p = 0.03). In multilevel analysis, the adjusted odds of ICU mortality were significantly lower for ICON patients than for SOAP patients, particularly in patients with sepsis [OR 0.45 (0.35-0.59), p < 0.001]. Conclusions: Over the 10-year period between 2002 and 2012, the proportion of patients with sepsis admitted to European ICUs remained relatively stable, but the severity of disease increased. In multilevel analysis, the odds of ICU mortality were lower in our 2012 cohort compared to our 2002 cohort, particularly in patients with sepsis

    Noninvasive Ventilation of Patients with Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: Insights from the LUNG SAFE Study

    Get PDF
    Abstract RATIONALE: Noninvasive ventilation (NIV) is increasingly used in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The evidence supporting NIV use in patients with ARDS remains relatively sparse. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether, during NIV, the categorization of ARDS severity based on the PaO2/FiO2 Berlin criteria is useful. METHODS: The LUNG SAFE (Large Observational Study to Understand the Global Impact of Severe Acute Respiratory Failure) study described the management of patients with ARDS. This substudy examines the current practice of NIV use in ARDS, the utility of the PaO2/FiO2 ratio in classifying patients receiving NIV, and the impact of NIV on outcome. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Of 2,813 patients with ARDS, 436 (15.5%) were managed with NIV on Days 1 and 2 following fulfillment of diagnostic criteria. Classification of ARDS severity based on PaO2/FiO2 ratio was associated with an increase in intensity of ventilatory support, NIV failure, and intensive care unit (ICU) mortality. NIV failure occurred in 22.2% of mild, 42.3% of moderate, and 47.1% of patients with severe ARDS. Hospital mortality in patients with NIV success and failure was 16.1% and 45.4%, respectively. NIV use was independently associated with increased ICU (hazard ratio, 1.446 [95% confidence interval, 1.159-1.805]), but not hospital, mortality. In a propensity matched analysis, ICU mortality was higher in NIV than invasively ventilated patients with a PaO2/FiO2 lower than 150 mm Hg. CONCLUSIONS: NIV was used in 15% of patients with ARDS, irrespective of severity category. NIV seems to be associated with higher ICU mortality in patients with a PaO2/FiO2 lower than 150 mm Hg. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT 02010073)

    Epidemiology and patterns of tracheostomy practice in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome in ICUs across 50 countries

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND:To better understand the epidemiology and patterns of tracheostomy practice for patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), we investigated the current usage of tracheostomy in patients with ARDS recruited into the Large Observational Study to Understand the Global Impact of Severe Acute Respiratory Failure (LUNG-SAFE) study. METHODS:This is a secondary analysis of LUNG-SAFE, an international, multicenter, prospective cohort study of patients receiving invasive or noninvasive ventilation in 50 countries spanning 5 continents. The study was carried out over 4 weeks consecutively in the winter of 2014, and 459 ICUs participated. We evaluated the clinical characteristics, management and outcomes of patients that received tracheostomy, in the cohort of patients that developed ARDS on day 1-2 of acute hypoxemic respiratory failure, and in a subsequent propensity-matched cohort. RESULTS:Of the 2377 patients with ARDS that fulfilled the inclusion criteria, 309 (13.0%) underwent tracheostomy during their ICU stay. Patients from high-income European countries (n = 198/1263) more frequently underwent tracheostomy compared to patients from non-European high-income countries (n = 63/649) or patients from middle-income countries (n = 48/465). Only 86/309 (27.8%) underwent tracheostomy on or before day 7, while the median timing of tracheostomy was 14 (Q1-Q3, 7-21) days after onset of ARDS. In the subsample matched by propensity score, ICU and hospital stay were longer in patients with tracheostomy. While patients with tracheostomy had the highest survival probability, there was no difference in 60-day or 90-day mortality in either the patient subgroup that survived for at least 5 days in ICU, or in the propensity-matched subsample. CONCLUSIONS:Most patients that receive tracheostomy do so after the first week of critical illness. Tracheostomy may prolong patient survival but does not reduce 60-day or 90-day mortality

    Soluble ST2 plasma concentrations predict mortality in severe sepsis

    Get PDF
    Patients with sepsis-after surviving the initial hyperinflammatory phase-display features consistent with immunosuppression, including hyporesponsiveness of immunocompetent cells to bacterial agents. Immunosuppression is thought to be facilitated by negative regulators of toll-like receptors, including membrane-bound ST2. We investigated the release of soluble ST2 (sST2), a decoy receptor that inhibits membrane-bound ST2 signaling, during sepsis. The study population comprised 95 patients with severe sepsis admitted to one of two intensive care units (ICUs) at the day the diagnosis of severe sepsis was made. Blood was obtained daily from admission (day 0) until day 7 and finally at day 14. Twenty-four healthy subjects served as controls. sST2 and cytokines were measured in serum. Mortality among patients was 34% in the ICU and 45% in the hospital. On admission, sepsis patients had higher sST2 levels [10,989 (7,871-15,342) pg/ml, geometric mean (95% confidence interval, CI)] than controls [55 (20-145) pg/ml, P < 0.0001]. Serum sST2 remained elevated in patients from day 0 to 14 and correlated with disease severity scores (P < 0.001) and cytokine levels on day 0 and during course of disease (P < 0.0001). Nonsurvivors displayed elevated sST2 levels compared with survivors of the intensive care unit (P < 0.0001). Sepsis results in sustained elevation of serum sST2 levels, which correlates with disease severity and mortalit

    Effect of anti-interleukin drugs in patients with COVID-19 and signs of cytokine release syndrome (COV-AID): a factorial, randomised, controlled trial.

    Full text link
    BACKGROUND: Infections with SARS-CoV-2 continue to cause significant morbidity and mortality. Interleukin (IL)-1 and IL-6 blockade have been proposed as therapeutic strategies in COVID-19, but study outcomes have been conflicting. We sought to study whether blockade of the IL-6 or IL-1 pathway shortened the time to clinical improvement in patients with COVID-19, hypoxic respiratory failure, and signs of systemic cytokine release syndrome. METHODS: We did a prospective, multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled trial, in hospitalised patients with COVID-19, hypoxia, and signs of a cytokine release syndrome across 16 hospitals in Belgium. Eligible patients had a proven diagnosis of COVID-19 with symptoms between 6 and 16 days, a ratio of the partial pressure of oxygen to the fraction of inspired oxygen (PaO(2):FiO(2)) of less than 350 mm Hg on room air or less than 280 mm Hg on supplemental oxygen, and signs of a cytokine release syndrome in their serum (either a single ferritin measurement of more than 2000 μg/L and immediately requiring high flow oxygen or mechanical ventilation, or a ferritin concentration of more than 1000 μg/L, which had been increasing over the previous 24 h, or lymphopenia below 800/mL with two of the following criteria: an increasing ferritin concentration of more than 700 μg/L, an increasing lactate dehydrogenase concentration of more than 300 international units per L, an increasing C-reactive protein concentration of more than 70 mg/L, or an increasing D-dimers concentration of more than 1000 ng/mL). The COV-AID trial has a 2 × 2 factorial design to evaluate IL-1 blockade versus no IL-1 blockade and IL-6 blockade versus no IL-6 blockade. Patients were randomly assigned by means of permuted block randomisation with varying block size and stratification by centre. In a first randomisation, patients were assigned to receive subcutaneous anakinra once daily (100 mg) for 28 days or until discharge, or to receive no IL-1 blockade (1:2). In a second randomisation step, patients were allocated to receive a single dose of siltuximab (11 mg/kg) intravenously, or a single dose of tocilizumab (8 mg/kg) intravenously, or to receive no IL-6 blockade (1:1:1). The primary outcome was the time to clinical improvement, defined as time from randomisation to an increase of at least two points on a 6-category ordinal scale or to discharge from hospital alive. The primary and supportive efficacy endpoints were assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in the safety population. This study is registered online with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04330638) and EudraCT (2020-001500-41) and is complete. FINDINGS: Between April 4, and Dec 6, 2020, 342 patients were randomly assigned to IL-1 blockade (n=112) or no IL-1 blockade (n=230) and simultaneously randomly assigned to IL-6 blockade (n=227; 114 for tocilizumab and 113 for siltuximab) or no IL-6 blockade (n=115). Most patients were male (265 [77%] of 342), median age was 65 years (IQR 54-73), and median Systematic Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score at randomisation was 3 (2-4). All 342 patients were included in the primary intention-to-treat analysis. The estimated median time to clinical improvement was 12 days (95% CI 10-16) in the IL-1 blockade group versus 12 days (10-15) in the no IL-1 blockade group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·94 [95% CI 0·73-1·21]). For the IL-6 blockade group, the estimated median time to clinical improvement was 11 days (95% CI 10-16) versus 12 days (11-16) in the no IL-6 blockade group (HR 1·00 [0·78-1·29]). 55 patients died during the study, but no evidence for differences in mortality between treatment groups was found. The incidence of serious adverse events and serious infections was similar across study groups. INTERPRETATION: Drugs targeting IL-1 or IL-6 did not shorten the time to clinical improvement in this sample of patients with COVID-19, hypoxic respiratory failure, low SOFA score, and low baseline mortality risk. FUNDING: Belgian Health Care Knowledge Center and VIB Grand Challenges program

    Hyperoxemia and excess oxygen use in early acute respiratory distress syndrome : Insights from the LUNG SAFE study

    Get PDF
    Publisher Copyright: © 2020 The Author(s). Copyright: Copyright 2020 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.Background: Concerns exist regarding the prevalence and impact of unnecessary oxygen use in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). We examined this issue in patients with ARDS enrolled in the Large observational study to UNderstand the Global impact of Severe Acute respiratory FailurE (LUNG SAFE) study. Methods: In this secondary analysis of the LUNG SAFE study, we wished to determine the prevalence and the outcomes associated with hyperoxemia on day 1, sustained hyperoxemia, and excessive oxygen use in patients with early ARDS. Patients who fulfilled criteria of ARDS on day 1 and day 2 of acute hypoxemic respiratory failure were categorized based on the presence of hyperoxemia (PaO2 > 100 mmHg) on day 1, sustained (i.e., present on day 1 and day 2) hyperoxemia, or excessive oxygen use (FIO2 ≥ 0.60 during hyperoxemia). Results: Of 2005 patients that met the inclusion criteria, 131 (6.5%) were hypoxemic (PaO2 < 55 mmHg), 607 (30%) had hyperoxemia on day 1, and 250 (12%) had sustained hyperoxemia. Excess FIO2 use occurred in 400 (66%) out of 607 patients with hyperoxemia. Excess FIO2 use decreased from day 1 to day 2 of ARDS, with most hyperoxemic patients on day 2 receiving relatively low FIO2. Multivariate analyses found no independent relationship between day 1 hyperoxemia, sustained hyperoxemia, or excess FIO2 use and adverse clinical outcomes. Mortality was 42% in patients with excess FIO2 use, compared to 39% in a propensity-matched sample of normoxemic (PaO2 55-100 mmHg) patients (P = 0.47). Conclusions: Hyperoxemia and excess oxygen use are both prevalent in early ARDS but are most often non-sustained. No relationship was found between hyperoxemia or excessive oxygen use and patient outcome in this cohort. Trial registration: LUNG-SAFE is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02010073publishersversionPeer reviewe
    corecore