Management and outcomes in critically ill nonagenarian versus octogenarian patients

Background

Intensive care unit (ICU) patients age 90 years or older represent a growing subgroup and place a huge financial burden on health care resources despite the benefit being unclear. This leads to ethical problems. The present investigation assessed the differences in outcome between nonagenarian and octogenarian ICU patients.

Methods

We included 7900 acutely admitted older critically ill patients from two large, multinational studies. The primary outcome was 30-day-mortality, and the secondary outcome was ICU-mortality. Baseline characteristics consisted of frailty assessed by the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), ICU-management, and outcomes were compared between octogenarian (80–89.9 years) and nonagenarian (> 90 years) patients. We used multilevel logistic regression to evaluate differences between octogenarians and nonagenarians.

Results

The nonagenarians were 10% of the entire cohort. They experienced a higher percentage of frailty (58% vs 42%; p < 0.001), but lower SOFA scores at admission (6 + 5 vs. 7 + 6; p < 0.001). ICU-management strategies were different. Octogenarians required higher rates of organ support and nonagenarians received higher rates of life-sustaining treatment limitations (40% vs. 33%; p < 0.001). ICU mortality was comparable (27% vs. 27%; p = 0.973) but a higher 30-day-mortality (45% vs. 40%; p = 0.029) was seen in the nonagenarians. After multivariable adjustment nonagenarians had no significantly increased risk for 30-day-mortality (aOR 1.25 (95% CI 0.90–1.74; p = 0.19)).

Conclusion

After adjustment for confounders, nonagenarians demonstrated no higher 30-day mortality than octogenarian patients. In this study, being age 90 years or more is no particular risk factor for an adverse outcome. This should be considered– together with illness severity and pre-existing functional capacity - to effectively guide triage decisions.

Trial registration

NCT03134807 and NCT03370692.

Lung response to a higher positive end-expiratory pressure in mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19

Background

International guidelines suggest using a higher (> 10 cm H₂O) positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) in patients with moderate-to-severe ARDS due to COVID-19. However, even if oxygenation generally improves with a higher PEEP, compliance, and Paco₂ frequently do not, as if recruitment was small.

Research Question

Is the potential for lung recruitment small in patients with early ARDS due to COVID-19?

Study Design and Methods

Forty patients with ARDS due to COVID-19 were studied in the supine position within 3 days of endotracheal intubation. They all underwent a PEEP trial, in which oxygenation, compliance, and Paco₂ were measured with 5, 10, and 15 cm H₂O of PEEP, and all other ventilatory settings unchanged. Twenty underwent a whole-lung static CT scan at 5 and 45 cm H₂O, and the other 20 at 5 and 15 cm H₂O of airway pressure. Recruitment and hyperinflation were defined as a decrease in the volume of the non-aerated (density above −100 HU) and an increase in the volume of the over-aerated (density below −900 HU) lung compartments, respectively.

Results

From 5 to 15 cm H₂O, oxygenation improved in 36 (90%) patients but compliance only in 11 (28%) and Paco₂ only in 14 (35%). From 5 to 45 cm H₂O, recruitment was 351 (161-462) mL and hyperinflation 465 (220-681) mL. From 5 to 15 cm H₂O, recruitment was 168 (110-202) mL and hyperinflation 121 (63-270) mL. Hyperinflation variably developed in all patients and exceeded recruitment in more than half of them.

Interpretation

Patients with early ARDS due to COVID-19, ventilated in the supine position, present with a large potential for lung recruitment. Even so, their compliance and Paco₂ do not generally improve with a higher PEEP, possibly because of hyperinflation.

Clinical Outcomes in the Second versus First Pandemic Wave in Italy: Impact of Hospital Changes and Reorganization

The region of Lombardy was the epicenter of the COVID-19 outbreak in Italy. Emergency Hospital 19 (EH19) was built in the Milan metropolitan area during the pandemic’s second wave as a facility of Humanitas Clinical and Research Center (HCRC). The present study aimed to assess whether the implementation of EH19 was effective in improving the quality of care of COVID-19 patients during the second wave compared with the first one. The demographics, mortality rate, and in-hospital length of stay (LOS) of two groups of patients were compared: the study group involved patients admitted at HCRC and managed in EH19 during the second pandemic wave, while the control group included patients managed exclusively at HCRC throughout the first wave. The study and control group included 903 (56.7%) and 690 (43.3%) patients, respectively. The study group was six years older on average and had more pre-existing comorbidities. EH19 was associated with a decrease in the intensive care unit admission rate (16.9% vs. 8.75%, p < 0.001), and an equal decrease in invasive oxygen therapy (3.8% vs. 0.23%, p < 0.001). Crude mortality was similar but overlap propensity score weighting revealed a trend toward a potential small decrease. The adjusted difference in LOS was not significant. The implementation of an additional COVID-19 hospital facility was effective in improving the overall quality of care of COVID-19 patients during the first wave of the pandemic when compared with the second. Further studies are necessary to validate the suggested approach.

Frailty is associated with long-term outcome in patients with sepsis who are over 80 years old: results from an observational study in 241 European ICUs

BACKGROUND

Sepsis is one of the most frequent reasons for acute intensive care unit (ICU) admission of very old patients and mortality rates are high. However, the impact of pre-existing physical and cognitive function on long-term outcome of ICU patients ≥ 80 years old (very old intensive care patients (VIPs)) with sepsis is unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate both the short- and long-term mortality of VIPs admitted with sepsis and assess the relation of mortality with pre-existing physical and cognitive function.

DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

SETTING

241 ICUs from 22 European countries in a six-month period between May 2018 and May 2019.

SUBJECTS

Acutely admitted ICU patients aged ≥80 years with sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score ≥ 2.

METHODS

Sepsis was defined according to the sepsis 3.0 criteria. Patients with sepsis as an admission diagnosis were compared with other acutely admitted patients. In addition to patients' characteristics, disease severity, information about comorbidity and polypharmacy and pre-existing physical and cognitive function were collected.

RESULTS

Out of 3,596 acutely admitted VIPs with SOFA score ≥ 2, a group of 532 patients with sepsis were compared to other admissions. Predictors for 6-month mortality were age (per 5 years): Hazard ratio (HR, 1.16 (95% confidence interval (CI), 1.09-1.25, P < 0.0001), SOFA (per one-point): HR, 1.16 (95% CI, 1.14-1.17, P < 0.0001) and frailty (CFS > 4): HR, 1.34 (95% CI, 1.18-1.51, P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

There is substantial long-term mortality in VIPs admitted with sepsis. Frailty, age and disease severity were identified as predictors of long-term mortality in VIPs admitted with sepsis.

Compassionate use of anti-IL6 receptor antibodies in critically ill patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome due to SARS-COV-2

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 patients developing the acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) show increased production of pro-inflammatory cytokines, including interleukin-6 (IL-6). The use of humanized monoclonal antibody against interleukin-6 receptor (IL-6R) may represent a potential treatment strategy. We analyzed the effects of compassionate use of Tocilizumab and Sarilumab on clinical outcome of patients affected by ARDS due COVID-19.

METHODS

This single-center, observational, exploratory study was performed during the acute phase of COVID-19 outbreak, between March 7th and April 21st, 2020 in a University Hospital in Rome, Italy. All consecutive adult patients admitted to the intensive care unit with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 and fulfilling ARDS criteria were enrolled. Patients who were treated with anti-IL-6R therapy were compared to those who were not, as per clinical decision. Inverse probability weights were applied to weight individual's contribution to survival curves and in the multivariate regression model.

RESULTS

Among 105 ARDS patients, 65 received compassionate treatment with anti-IL-6R therapy [43 (66%) Tocilizumab and 22 (34%) Sarilumab, respectively], with oxygenation improvement. In the multivariable Cox proportional regression hazards model with propensity score inverse probability weighting, patients who received anti-IL-6R treatment had lower risk of death compared to those who did not, with a hazard ration of 0.34 [95% confidence interval 0.17-0.74], p=0.001.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest that immune modulator therapy based on anti-human IL-6 receptor monoclonal antibodies might lead to improved outcome in patients with ARDS due to COVID-19. These data support the need for confirmatory randomized trials to assess the effect of immune modulator therapies on mortality.

Noninvasive respiratory support outside the intensive care unit for acute respiratory failure related to coronavirus-19 disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Noninvasive respiratory support (NIRS) has been diffusely employed outside the intensive care unit (ICU) to face the high request of ventilatory support due to the massive influx of patients with acute respiratory failure (ARF) caused by coronavirus-19 disease (COVID-19). We sought to summarize the evidence on clinically relevant outcomes in COVID-19 patients supported by NIV outside the ICU.

METHODS

We searched PUBMED®, EMBASE®, and the Cochrane Controlled Clinical trials register, along with medRxiv and bioRxiv repositories for pre-prints, for observational studies and randomized controlled trials, from inception to the end of February 2021. Two authors independently selected the investigations according to the following criteria: (1) observational study or randomized clinical trials enrolling ≥ 50 hospitalized patients undergoing NIRS outside the ICU, (2) laboratory-confirmed COVID-19, and (3) at least the intra-hospital mortality reported. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-analysis guidelines were followed. Data extraction was independently performed by two authors to assess: investigation features, demographics and clinical characteristics, treatments employed, NIRS regulations, and clinical outcomes. Methodological index for nonrandomized studies tool was applied to determine the quality of the enrolled studies. The primary outcome was to assess the overall intra-hospital mortality of patients under NIRS outside the ICU. The secondary outcomes included the proportions intra-hospital mortalities of patients who underwent invasive mechanical ventilation following NIRS failure and of those with 'do-not-intubate' (DNI) orders.

RESULTS

Seventeen investigations (14 peer-reviewed and 3 pre-prints) were included with a low risk of bias and a high heterogeneity, for a total of 3377 patients. The overall intra-hospital mortality of patients receiving NIRS outside the ICU was 36% [30-41%]. 26% [21-30%] of the patients failed NIRS and required intubation, with an intra-hospital mortality rising to 45% [36-54%]. 23% [15-32%] of the patients received DNI orders with an intra-hospital mortality of 72% [65-78%]. Oxygenation on admission was the main source of between-study heterogeneity.

CONCLUSIONS

During COVID-19 outbreak, delivering NIRS outside the ICU revealed as a feasible strategy to cope with the massive demand of ventilatory assistance.

REGISTRATION

PROSPERO, https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/ , CRD42020224788, December 11, 2020.

Relationship between the Clinical Frailty Scale and short-term mortality in patients ≥ 80 years old acutely admitted to the ICU: a prospective cohort study

Background

The Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) is frequently used to measure frailty in critically ill adults. There is wide variation in the approach to analysing the relationship between the CFS score and mortality after admission to the ICU. This study aimed to evaluate the influence of modelling approach on the association between the CFS score and short-term mortality and quantify the prognostic value of frailty in this context.

Methods

We analysed data from two multicentre prospective cohort studies which enrolled intensive care unit patients ≥ 80 years old in 26 countries. The primary outcome was mortality within 30-days from admission to the ICU. Logistic regression models for both ICU and 30-day mortality included the CFS score as either a categorical, continuous or dichotomous variable and were adjusted for patient’s age, sex, reason for admission to the ICU, and admission Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score.

Results

The median age in the sample of 7487 consecutive patients was 84 years (IQR 81–87). The highest fraction of new prognostic information from frailty in the context of 30-day mortality was observed when the CFS score was treated as either a categorical variable using all original levels of frailty or a nonlinear continuous variable and was equal to 9% using these modelling approaches (p < 0.001). The relationship between the CFS score and mortality was nonlinear (p < 0.01).

Conclusion

Knowledge about a patient’s frailty status adds a substantial amount of new prognostic information at the moment of admission to the ICU. Arbitrary simplification of the CFS score into fewer groups than originally intended leads to a loss of information and should be avoided.

Trial registration NCT03134807 (VIP1), NCT03370692 (VIP2)

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13054-021-03632-3.

Steroid use in elderly critically ill COVID-19 patients

More than a year after the onset of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic, treating patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remains a challenge. In contrast to the rapid development of effective vaccines against SARS-CoV-2, the development of specific and effective therapeutics against COVID-19 remains largely unresolved.

This secondary analysis of the COVIP study shows a higher 30-day mortality in critically ill elderly COVID-19 patients who received steroids as part of their treatment @cjungMDhttps://bit.ly/3xdyEur

The cardiac arrest centre for the treatment of sudden cardiac arrest due to presumed cardiac cause - aims, function and structure: Position paper of the Association for Acute CardioVascular Care of the European Society of Cardiology (AVCV), European Association of Percutaneous Coronary Interventions (EAPCI), European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA), European Resuscitation Council (ERC), European Society for Emergency Medicine (EUSEM) and European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM)

Approximately 10% of patients resuscitated from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest survive to hospital discharge. Improved management to improve outcomes is required, and it is proposed that such patients should be preferentially treated in cardiac arrest centres. The minimum requirements of therapy modalities for the cardiac arrest centre are 24/7 availability of an on-site coronary angiography laboratory, an emergency department, an intensive care unit, imaging facilities such as echocardiography, computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging, and a protocol outlining transfer of selected patients to cardiac arrest centres with additional resources (out-of-hospital cardiac arrest hub hospitals). These hub hospitals are regularly treating a high volume of patients and offer further treatment modalities. This consensus document describes the aims, the minimal requirements for therapeutic modalities and expertise, and the structure, of a cardiac arrest centre. It represents a consensus among the major European medical associations and societies involved in the treatment of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients.

Early Effects of Passive Leg-Raising Test, Fluid Challenge, and Norepinephrine on Cerebral Autoregulation and Oxygenation in COVID-19 Critically Ill Patients

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients are at high risk of neurological complications consequent to several factors including persistent hypotension. There is a paucity of data on the effects of therapeutic interventions designed to optimize systemic hemodynamics on cerebral autoregulation (CA) in this group of patients. Methods: Single-center, observational prospective study conducted at San Martino Policlinico Hospital, Genoa, Italy, from October 1 to December 15, 2020. Mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients, who had at least one episode of hypotension and received a passive leg raising (PLR) test, were included. They were then treated with fluid challenge (FC) and/or norepinephrine (NE), according to patients' clinical conditions, at different moments. The primary outcome was to assess the early effects of PLR test and of FC and NE [when clinically indicated to maintain adequate mean arterial pressure (MAP)] on CA (CA index) measured by transcranial Doppler (TCD). Secondary outcomes were to evaluate the effects of PLR test, FC, and NE on systemic hemodynamic variables, cerebral oxygenation (rSo₂), and non-invasive intracranial pressure (nICP). Results: Twenty-three patients were included and underwent PLR test. Of these, 22 patients received FC and 14 were treated with NE. The median age was 62 years (interquartile range = 57-68.5 years), and 78% were male. PLR test led to a low CA index [58% (44-76.3%)]. FC and NE administration resulted in a CA index of 90.8% (74.2-100%) and 100% (100-100%), respectively. After PLR test, nICP based on pulsatility index and nICP based on flow velocity diastolic formula was increased [18.6 (17.7-19.6) vs. 19.3 (18.2-19.8) mm Hg, p = 0.009, and 12.9 (8.5-18) vs. 15 (10.5-19.7) mm Hg, p = 0.001, respectively]. PLR test, FC, and NE resulted in a significant increase in MAP and rSo₂. Conclusions: In mechanically ventilated severe COVID-19 patients, PLR test adversely affects CA. An individualized strategy aimed at assessing both the hemodynamic and cerebral needs is warranted in patients at high risk of neurological complications.

Perioperative liberal versus restrictive fluid strategies and postoperative outcomes: a systematic review and metanalysis on randomised-controlled trials in major abdominal elective surgery

Background

Postoperative complications impact on early and long-term patients’ outcome. Appropriate perioperative fluid management is pivotal in this context; however, the most effective perioperative fluid management is still unclear. The enhanced recovery after surgery pathways recommend a perioperative zero-balance, whereas recent findings suggest a more liberal approach could be beneficial. We conducted this trial to address the impact of restrictive vs. liberal fluid approaches on overall postoperative complications and mortality.

Methods

Systematic review and meta-analysis, including randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We performed a systematic literature search using MEDLINE (via Ovid), EMBASE (via Ovid) and the Cochrane Controlled Clinical trials register databases, published from 1 January 2000 to 31 December 2019. We included RCTs enrolling adult patients undergoing elective abdominal surgery and comparing the use of restrictive/liberal approaches enrolling at least 15 patients in each subgroup. Studies involving cardiac, non-elective surgery, paediatric or obstetric surgeries were excluded.

Results

After full-text examination, the metanalysis finally included 18 studies and 5567 patients randomised to restrictive (2786 patients; 50.0%) or liberal approaches (2780 patients; 50.0%). We found no difference in the occurrence of severe postoperative complications between restrictive and liberal subgroups [risk difference (95% CI) = 0.009 (− 0.02; 0.04); p value = 0.62; I₂ (95% CI) = 38.6% (0–66.9%)]. This result was confirmed also in the subgroup of five studies having a low overall risk of bias. The liberal approach was associated with lower overall renal major events, as compared to the restrictive [risk difference (95% CI) = 0.06 (0.02–0.09); p value  = 0.001]. We found no difference in either early (p value  = 0.33) or late (p value  = 0.22) postoperative mortality between restrictive and liberal subgroups

Conclusions

In major abdominal elective surgery perioperative, the choice between liberal or restrictive approach did not affect overall major postoperative complications or mortality. In a subgroup analysis, a liberal as compared to a restrictive perioperative fluid policy was associated with lower overall complication renal major events, as compared to the restrictive.

Trial Registration

CRD42020218059; Registration: February 2020, https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=218059.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13054-021-03629-y.

Short-term health-related quality of life, physical function and psychological consequences of severe COVID-19

BACKGROUND

Survivors of severe COVID-19 are at risk of impaired health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and persistent physical and psychological disability after ICU and hospital discharge. The subsequent social burden is a major concern. We aimed to assess the short-term HRQoL, physical function and prevalence of post-traumatic stress symptoms of invasively mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients treated in our ICU.

METHODS

Prospective, observational cohort study in a follow-up clinic. Patients completed a 6-min walking test (6MWT) to assess their cardio-pulmonary function around 2 months (early follow-up) from hospital discharge, the EQ-5D-5L questionnaire for quality of life assessment around 2 months and at 6 months from hospital discharge and an anonymous web-based Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R) questionnaire for Post-Traumatic Stress symptoms at 2 months.

RESULTS

47 patients attended our follow-up program, mean age 59 ± 10 years, median pre-morbid Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) 2 [2-3]. The median distance walked in 6 min was 470 [406-516] m, 83 [67-99]% of the predicted value. Overall 1 out 3 patients and 4/18 (22%) among those with a good functional baseline prior to COVID-19 (CFS of 1 or 2) had lower (84%) than predicted 6MWT. EQ-5D-5L quality of life VAS was 80 [70-90] out of 100 at early follow-up with a slight improvement to 85 [77.5-90] at 6 months. Mobility, self-care and usual activities improved between the two timepoints, while pain/discomfort and depression/anxiety did not improve or got worse. The IES-R total score was greater than the threshold for concern of 1.6 in 27/41(66%) respondents.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients recovering from severe COVID-19 requiring invasive mechanical ventilation surviving hospital discharge present with early mild to moderate functional impairment, mildly reduced quality of life from hospital discharge with an overall improvement of mobility, self-care and the ability of performing usual activities, while a worsening of pain and depression/anxiety symptoms at 6 months and a large proportion of symptoms of post-traumatic distress soon after hospital discharge.

Provision of critical care for the elderly in Europe: a retrospective comparison of national healthcare frameworks in intensive care units

OBJECTIVES

In Europe, there is a distinction between two different healthcare organisation systems, the tax-based healthcare system (THS) and the social health insurance system (SHI). Our aim was to investigate whether the characteristics, treatment and mortality of older, critically ill patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) differed between THS and SHI.

SETTING

ICUs in 16 European countries.

PARTICIPANTS

In total, 7817 critically ill older (≥80 years) patients were included in this study, 4941 in THS and 2876 in the SHI systems.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES MEASURES

We chose generalised estimation equations with robust standard errors to produce population average adjusted OR (aOR). We adjusted for patient-specific variables, health economic data, including gross domestic product (GDP) and human development index (HDI), and treatment strategies.

RESULTS

In SHI systems, there were higher rates of frail patients (Clinical Frailty Scale>4; 46% vs 41%; p<0.001), longer length of ICU stays (90±162 vs 72±134 hours; p<0.001) and increased levels of organ support. The ICU mortality (aOR 1.50, 95% CI 1.09 to 2.06; p=0.01) was consistently higher in the SHI; however, the 30-day mortality (aOR 0.89, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.21; p=0.47) was similar between THS and SHI. In a sensitivity analysis stratifying for the health economic data, the 30-day mortality was higher in SHI, in low GDP per capita (aOR 2.17, 95% CI 1.42 to 3.58) and low HDI (aOR 1.22, 95% CI 1.64 to 2.20) settings.

CONCLUSIONS

The 30-day mortality was similar in both systems. Patients in SHI were older, sicker and frailer at baseline, which could be interpreted as a sign for a more liberal admission policy in SHI. We believe that the observed trend towards ICU excess mortality in SHI results mainly from a more liberal admission policy and an increase in treatment limitations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS

NCT03134807 and NCT03370692.

Why and how to open intensive care units to family visits during the pandemic

Since the lockdown because of the pandemic, family members have been prohibited from visiting their loved ones in hospital. While it is clearly complicated to implement protocols for the admission of family members, we believe precise strategic goals are essential and operational guidance is needed on how to achieve them. Even during the pandemic, we consider it a priority to share strategies adapted to every local setting to allow family members to enter intensive care units and all the other hospital wards.

Sharing ICU Patient Data Responsibly Under the Society of Critical Care Medicine/European Society of Intensive Care Medicine Joint Data Science Collaboration: The Amsterdam University Medical Centers Database (AmsterdamUMCdb) Example

OBJECTIVES

Critical care medicine is a natural environment for machine learning approaches to improve outcomes for critically ill patients as admissions to ICUs generate vast amounts of data. However, technical, legal, ethical, and privacy concerns have so far limited the critical care medicine community from making these data readily available. The Society of Critical Care Medicine and the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine have identified ICU patient data sharing as one of the priorities under their Joint Data Science Collaboration. To encourage ICUs worldwide to share their patient data responsibly, we now describe the development and release of Amsterdam University Medical Centers Database (AmsterdamUMCdb), the first freely available critical care database in full compliance with privacy laws from both the United States and Europe, as an example of the feasibility of sharing complex critical care data.

SETTING

University hospital ICU.

SUBJECTS

Data from ICU patients admitted between 2003 and 2016.

INTERVENTIONS

We used a risk-based deidentification strategy to maintain data utility while preserving privacy. In addition, we implemented contractual and governance processes, and a communication strategy. Patient organizations, supporting hospitals, and experts on ethics and privacy audited these processes and the database.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

AmsterdamUMCdb contains approximately 1 billion clinical data points from 23,106 admissions of 20,109 patients. The privacy audit concluded that reidentification is not reasonably likely, and AmsterdamUMCdb can therefore be considered as anonymous information, both in the context of the U.S. Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act and the European General Data Protection Regulation. The ethics audit concluded that responsible data sharing imposes minimal burden, whereas the potential benefit is tremendous.

CONCLUSIONS

Technical, legal, ethical, and privacy challenges related to responsible data sharing can be addressed using a multidisciplinary approach. A risk-based deidentification strategy, that complies with both U.S. and European privacy regulations, should be the preferred approach to releasing ICU patient data. This supports the shared Society of Critical Care Medicine and European Society of Intensive Care Medicine vision to improve critical care outcomes through scientific inquiry of vast and combined ICU datasets.

Critical Care Outreach Team During COVID-19: Ventilatory Support in the Ward and Outcomes

BACKGROUND

During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak, a critical care outreach team was implemented in our hospital to guarantee multidisciplinary patient assessment at admission and prompt ICU support in medical wards. In this paper, we report the activity plan results and describe the baseline characteristics of the referred subjects.

METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated data from 125 subjects referred to the critical care outreach team from March 22 to April 22, 2020. We considered subjects with a ceiling of care decision, with those deemed eligible assigned to level 3 care (ward subgroup), and those deemed ineligible admitted to the ICU (ICU subgroup). Quality indicators of the outreach team plan delivery included number of cardiac arrest calls, number of intubations in level 2 areas, and ineffective palliative support.

RESULTS

We enrolled 125 consecutive adult subjects with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19. We did not report any emergency endotracheal intubations in the clinical ward. In the care ceiling subgroup, we had 2 (3.3%) emergency calls for cardiac arrest, whereas signs of ineffective palliative support were reported in 5 subjects (12.5%). Noninvasive forms of respiratory assistance were delivered to 40.0% of subjects in the ward subgroup (median 3 d [interquartile range (IQR) 2-5]), to 45.9% of subjects in the care ceiling subgroup (median 5 d [IQR 3-7]), and to 64.7% of subjects in the ICU subgroup (median 2.5 d [IQR 1-3]). Thirty of the 31 ward subjects (96.7%), 26 of the 34 ICU subjects, (76.4%), and 19 of the 61 ceiling of care subjects (31.1%) were discharged.

CONCLUSIONS

In the context of a hospital and ICU surge, a multidisciplinary daily plan supported by a dedicated critical care outreach team was associated with a low rate of cardiac arrest calls, no emergency intubations in the ward, and appropriate palliative care support for subjects with a ceiling of care decision.

The effect of COVID-19 epidemic on vital signs in hospitalized patients: a pre-post heat-map study from a large teaching hospital

The Lombardy SARS-CoV-2 outbreak in February 2020 represented the beginning of COVID-19 epidemic in Italy. Hospitals were flooded by thousands of patients with bilateral pneumonia and severe respiratory, and vital sign derangements compared to the standard hospital population. We propose a new visual analysis technique using heat maps to describe the impact of COVID-19 epidemic on vital sign anomalies in hospitalized patients. We conducted an electronic health record study, including all confirmed COVID-19 patients hospitalized from February 21st, 2020 to April 21st, 2020 as cases, and all non-COVID-19 patients hospitalized in the same wards from January 1st, 2018 to December 31st, 2018. All data on temperature, peripheral oxygen saturation, respiratory rate, arterial blood pressure, and heart rate were retrieved. Derangement of vital signs was defined according to predefined thresholds. 470 COVID-19 patients and 9241 controls were included. Cases were older than controls, with a median age of 79 vs 76 years in non survivors (p =  < 0.002). Gender was not associated with mortality. Overall mortality in COVID-19 hospitalized patients was 18%, ranging from 1.4% in patients below 65 years to about 30% in patients over 65 years. Heat maps analysis demonstrated that COVID-19 patients had an increased frequency in episodes of compromised respiratory rate, acute desaturation, and fever. COVID-19 epidemic profoundly affected the incidence of severe derangements in vital signs in a large academic hospital. We validated heat maps as a method to analyze the clinical stability of hospitalized patients. This method may help to improve resource allocation according to patient characteristics.

Perioperative Management of Complex Hepatectomy for Colorectal Liver Metastases: The Alliance between the Surgeon and the Anesthetist

Simple Summary

Major high-risk surgery (HRS) exposes patients to potential perioperative adverse events. Hepatic resection of colorectal metastases can surely be included into the HRS class of operations. Limiting such risks is the main target of the perioperative medicine. In this context the collaboration between the anesthetist and the surgeon and the sharing of management protocols is of utmost importance and represents the key issue for a successful outcome. In our institution, we have been adopting consolidated protocols for patients undergoing this type of surgery for decades; this made our mixed team (surgeons and anesthetists) capable of achieving a safe outcome for the majority of our surgical population. In this narrative review, we report the most recent state of the art of perioperative management of hepatic resection of colorectal metastases along with our experience in this field, trying to point out the main issues.

Abstract

Hepatic resection has been widely accepted as the first choice for the treatment of colorectal metastases. Liver surgery has been recognized as a major abdominal procedure; it exposes patients to a high risk of perioperative adverse events. Decision sharing and the multimodal approach to the patients’ management are the two key items for a safe outcome, even in such a high-risk surgery. This review aims at addressing the main perioperative issues (preoperative evaluation; general anesthesia and intraoperative fluid management and hemodynamic monitoring; intraoperative metabolism; administration policy for blood-derivative products; postoperative pain control; postoperative complications), in particular, from the anesthetist’s point of view; however, only an alliance with the surgery team may be successful in case of adverse events to accomplish a good final outcome.

Successful SARS-CoV-2 vaccine allergy risk-management: The experience of a large Italian University Hospital

BACKGROUND

Novel Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccines have been approved recently, and public concern regarding the risk of anaphylactic reactions arose after a few cases during the first days of mass vaccination. Polyethylene glycol (PEG) has been suggested as the most probable culprit agent for allergic reactions.

OBJECTIVE

We describe the allergy work-up protocol implemented for the vaccination campaign in our Center, aiming to allow the greatest number of people to be vaccinated safely.

METHODS

The protocol included the self-report of a history of suspected drug or vaccine allergies, and subsequent teleconsultation and allergometric tests for PEG and Polysorbate 80 (PS80). A desensitizing protocol of vaccine administration was applied to patients sensitized only to PS80, and to those with a suspect allergic reaction after the first vaccine dose.

RESULTS

10.2% (414 out of 4042) of the entire vaccine population have been screened: only one patient resulted allergic to PEG and therefore excluded from the vaccination. Another patient was sensitized to PS80 only and safely vaccinated applying the desensitizing protocol. Seven subjects without a previous history of allergic disease experienced suspect hypersensitivity reactions to the first administered dose: one of them resulted allergic to PEG and was excluded from the second dose, while the others safely completed the vaccination with the desensitizing protocol.

CONCLUSION

A careful allergological risk-assessment protocol significantly reduces the number of patients who would have avoided SARS-CoV-2 vaccination for their allergies and to effectively identify and manage those rare patients with sensitization to PEGs and/or PS80.

Assessing anaesthesiology and intensive care specialty physicians: An Italian language multisource feedback system

BACKGROUND

Physician professionalism, including anaesthesiologists and intensive care doctors, should be continuously assessed during training and subsequent clinical practice. Multi-source feedback (MSF) is an assessment system in which healthcare professionals are assessed on several constructs (e.g., communication, professionalism, etc.) by multiple people (medical colleagues, coworkers, patients, self) in their sphere of influence. MSF has gained widespread acceptance for both formative and summative assessment of professionalism for reflecting on how to improve clinical practice.

METHODS

Instrument development and psychometric analysis (feasibility, reliability, construct validity via exploratory factor analysis) for MSF questionnaires in a postgraduate specialty training in Anaesthesiology and intensive care in Italy. Sixty-four residents at the Università del Piemonte Orientale (Italy) Anesthesiology Residency Program. Main outcomes assessed were: development and psychometric testing of 4 questionnaires: self, medical colleague, coworker and patient assessment.

RESULTS

Overall 605 medical colleague questionnaires (mean of 9.3 ±1.9) and 543 coworker surveys (mean 8.4 ±1.4) were collected providing high mean ratings for all items (> 4.0 /5.0). The self-assessment item mean score ranged from 3.1 to 4.3. Patient questionnaires (n = 308) were returned from 31 residents (40%; mean 9.9 ± 6.2). Three items had high percentages of "unable to assess" (> 15%) in coworker questionnaires. Factor analyses resulted in a two-factor solution: clinical management with leadership and accountability accounting for at least 75% of the total variance for the medical colleague and coworker's survey with high internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's α > 0.9). Patient's questionnaires had a low return rate, a limited exploratory analysis was performed.

CONCLUSIONS

We provide a feasible and reliable Italian language MSF instrument with evidence of construct validity for the self, coworkers and medical colleague. Patient feedback was difficult to collect in our setting.

Hospital-Acquired Infections in Critically Ill Patients With COVID-19

Background

Few small studies have described hospital-acquired infections (HAIs) occurring in patients with COVID-19.

Research Question

What characteristics in critically ill patients with COVID-19 are associated with HAIs and how are HAIs associated with outcomes in these patients?

Study Design and Methods

Multicenter retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data including adult patients with severe COVID-19 admitted to eight Italian hub hospitals from February 20, 2020, through May 20, 2020. Descriptive statistics and univariate and multivariate Weibull regression models were used to assess incidence, microbial cause, resistance patterns, risk factors (ie, demographics, comorbidities, exposure to medication), and impact on outcomes (ie, ICU discharge, length of ICU and hospital stays, and duration of mechanical ventilation) of microbiologically confirmed HAIs.

Results

Of the 774 included patients, 359 patients (46%) demonstrated 759 HAIs (44.7 infections/1,000 ICU patient-days; 35% multidrug-resistant [MDR] bacteria). Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP; n = 389 [50%]), bloodstream infections (BSIs; n = 183 [34%]), and catheter-related BSIs (n = 74 [10%]) were the most frequent HAIs, with 26.0 (95% CI, 23.6-28.8) VAPs per 1,000 intubation-days, 11.7 (95% CI, 10.1-13.5) BSIs per 1,000 ICU patient-days, and 4.7 (95% CI, 3.8-5.9) catheter-related BSIs per 1,000 ICU patient-days. Gram-negative bacteria (especially Enterobacterales) and Staphylococcus aureus caused 64% and 28% of cases of VAP, respectively. Variables independently associated with infection were age, positive end expiratory pressure, and treatment with broad-spectrum antibiotics at admission. Two hundred thirty-four patients (30%) died in the ICU (15.3 deaths/1,000 ICU patient-days). Patients with HAIs complicated by septic shock showed an almost doubled mortality rate (52% vs 29%), whereas noncomplicated infections did not affect mortality. HAIs prolonged mechanical ventilation (median, 24 days [interquartile range (IQR), 14-39 days] vs 9 days [IQR, 5-13 days]; P < .001), ICU stay (24 days [IQR, 16-41 days] vs 9 days [IQR, 6-14 days]; P = .003), and hospital stay (42 days [IQR, 25-59 days] vs 23 days [IQR, 13-34 days]; P < .001).

Interpretation

Critically ill patients with COVID-19 are at high risk for HAIs, especially VAPs and BSIs resulting from MDR organisms. HAIs prolong mechanical ventilation and hospitalization, and HAIs complicated by septic shock almost double mortality.

Trial Registry

ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT04388670; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov

The impact of frailty on survival in elderly intensive care patients with COVID-19: the COVIP study

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has led highly developed healthcare systems to the brink of collapse due to the large numbers of patients being admitted into hospitals. One of the potential prognostic indicators in patients with COVID-19 is frailty. The degree of frailty could be used to assist both the triage into intensive care, and decisions regarding treatment limitations. Our study sought to determine the interaction of frailty and age in elderly COVID-19 ICU patients.

METHODS

A prospective multicentre study of COVID-19 patients ≥ 70 years admitted to intensive care in 138 ICUs from 28 countries was conducted. The primary endpoint was 30-day mortality. Frailty was assessed using the clinical frailty scale. Additionally, comorbidities, management strategies and treatment limitations were recorded.

RESULTS

The study included 1346 patients (28% female) with a median age of 75 years (IQR 72-78, range 70-96), 16.3% were older than 80 years, and 21% of the patients were frail. The overall survival at 30 days was 59% (95% CI 56-62), with 66% (63-69) in fit, 53% (47-61) in vulnerable and 41% (35-47) in frail patients (p < 0.001). In frail patients, there was no difference in 30-day survival between different age categories. Frailty was linked to an increased use of treatment limitations and less use of mechanical ventilation. In a model controlling for age, disease severity, sex, treatment limitations and comorbidities, frailty was independently associated with lower survival.

CONCLUSION

Frailty provides relevant prognostic information in elderly COVID-19 patients in addition to age and comorbidities. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT04321265 , registered 19 March 2020.