Benzodiazepine versus nonbenzodiazepine-based sedation for mechanically ventilated, critically ill adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials

Editor’s Choice- Sedation in the coronary intensive care unit: An adapted algorithm for critically ill cardiovascular patient

In the current era, cardiovascular intensive care units care for more complex patients who are far sicker than historical post-myocardial infarction patients, and sedation has become a common intervention in these units. Current sedation best practices derive mainly from non-cardiac units which limits their generalization to the critically ill cardiac patient. Thus, a great variability in sedation protocols, especially the selection of sedative agents, is commonly seen in daily practice across cardiac units. We present an updated review on sedation in cardiovascular critical care medicine with emphasis on the hemodynamic impact. The goal of this review is to generate a general sedation algorithm specific for the cardiac patient.

Multiple Organ Dysfunction: The Defining Syndrome of Sepsis

BACKGROUND

Sepsis as a process has been recognized since the time of the Ancient Greeks. The concept has evolved recently to reflect a disease process of a severe, systemic response to infection. Acute, life-threatening but potentially reversible organ dysfunction is its hallmark, and unresolving organ dysfunction is the dominant cause of death in critical illness. Its evolution, persistence, and resolution reflect a complex interplay of factors originating in the initial inciting insult, the innate immune and metabolic response of the host, and the beneficial and harmful consequences of intensive care unit (ICU) supportive care.

DISCUSSION

We describe the common clinical manifestations of the six prototypic organ system dysfunction syndromes of severe sepsis and review the associated epidemiology and suspected pathophysiology.

Spontaneous Breathing Trials and Conservative Sedation Practices Reduce Mechanical Ventilation Duration in Subjects With ARDS

BACKGROUND

Spontaneous breathing trials (SBTs) and daily sedation interruptions (DSIs) reduce both the duration of mechanical ventilation and ICU length of stay (LOS). The impact of these practices in patients with ARDS has not previously been reported. We examined whether implementation of SBT/DSI protocols reduce duration of mechanical ventilation and ICU LOS in a retrospective group of subjects with ARDS at a large, urban, level-1 trauma center.

METHODS

All ARDS survivors from 2002 to 2016 (N = 1,053) were partitioned into 2 groups: 397 in the pre-SBT/DSI group (June 2002-December 2007) and 656 in the post-SBT/DSI group (January 2009-April 2016). Patients from 2008, during the protocol implementation period, were excluded. An additional SBT protocol database (2008-2010) was used to assess the efficacy of SBT in transitioning subjects with ARDS to unassisted breathing. Comparisons were assessed by either unpaired t tests or Mann-Whitney tests. Multiple comparisons were made using either one-way analysis of variance or Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn's tests. Linear regression modeling was used to determine variables independently associated with mechanical ventilation duration and ICU LOS; differences were considered statistically significant when P < .05.

RESULTS

Compared to the pre-protocol group, subjects with ARDS managed with SBT/DSI protocols experienced pronounced reductions both in median (IQR) mechanical ventilation duration (14 [6-29] vs 9 [4-17] d, respectively, P < .001) and median ICU LOS (18 [8-33] vs 13 [7-22] d, respectively P < .001). In the final model, only treatment in the SBT/DSI period and higher baseline respiratory system compliance were independently associated with reduced mechanical ventilation duration and ICU LOS. Among subjects with ARDS in the SBT performance database, most achieved unassisted breathing with a median of 2 SBTs.

CONCLUSION

Evidenced-based protocols governing weaning and sedation practices were associated with both reduced mechanical ventilation duration and ICU LOS in subjects with ARDS. However, higher respiratory system compliance in the SBT/DSI cohort also contributed to these improved outcomes.

Delirium in Hospitalized Children with Cancer: Incidence and Associated Risk Factors

OBJECTIVE

To assess the incidence of delirium and its risk factors in hospitalized children with cancer.

STUDY DESIGN

In this cohort study, all consecutive admissions to a pediatric cancer service over a 3-month period were prospectively screened for delirium twice daily throughout their hospitalization. Demographic and treatment-related data were collected from the medical record after discharge.

RESULTS

A total of 319 consecutive admissions, including 186 patients and 2731 hospital days, were included. Delirium was diagnosed in 35 patients, for an incidence of 18.8%. Risk factors independently associated with the development of delirium included age <5 years (OR = 2.6, P = .026), brain tumor (OR = 4.7, P = .026); postoperative status (OR = 3.3, P = .014), and receipt of benzodiazepines (OR = 3.7,P < .001). Delirium was associated with increased hospital length of stay, with median length of stay for delirious patients of 10 days compared with 5 days for patients who were not delirious during their hospitalization (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

In this cohort, delirium was a frequent complication during admissions for childhood cancer, and was associated with increased hospital length of stay. Multi-institutional prospective studies are warranted to further characterize delirium in this high-risk population and identify modifiable risk factors to improve the care provided to hospitalized children with cancer.

Volatile sedation in the intensive care unit: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Volatile sedation in the intensive care unit (ICU) may reduce the number of adverse events and improve patient outcomes compared with intravenous (IV) sedation. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the effects of volatile and IV sedation in adult ICU patients.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register, and Web of Science databases for all randomized trials comparing volatile sedation using an anesthetic-conserving device (ACD) with IV sedation in terms of awakening and extubation times, lengths of ICU and hospital stay, and pharmacologic end-organ effects.

RESULTS

Thirteen trials with a total of 1027 patients were included. Volatile sedation (sevoflurane or isoflurane) administered through an ACD shortened the awakening time [mean difference (MD), -80.0 minutes; 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs), -134.5 to -25.6; P = .004] and extubation time (MD, -196.0 minutes; 95% CIs, -305.2 to -86.8; P < .001) compared with IV sedation (midazolam or propofol). No differences in the lengths of ICU and hospital stay were noted between the 2 groups. In the analysis of cardiac effects of sedation from 5 studies, patients who received volatile sedation showed lower serum troponin levels 6 hours after ICU admission than patients who received IV sedation (P < .05). The effect size of troponin was largest between 12 and 24 hours after ICU admission (MD, -0.27 μg/L; 95% CIs, -0.44 to -0.09; P = .003).

CONCLUSION

Compared with IV sedation, volatile sedation administered through an ACD in the ICU shortened the awakening and extubation times. Considering the difference in serum troponin levels between both arms, volatile anesthetics might have a myocardial protective effect after cardiac surgery even at a subanesthetic dose. Because the included studies used small sample sizes with high heterogeneity, further large, high-quality prospective clinical trials are needed to confirm our findings.

Risk Factors of Delirium in Sequential Sedation Patients in Intensive Care Units

Background

Delirium is a primary adverse event in ventilated patients who receive long-term monosedative treatment. Sequential sedation may reduce these adverse effects. This study evaluated risk factors for delirium in sequential sedation patients.

Methods

A total of 141 patients who underwent sequential sedation were enrolled. Delirium was diagnosed using Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit (CAM-ICU) scale. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards regressions were used to predict risk factors.

Results

Older age (≥51) (RR = 2.432, 95% CL 1.316–4.494, p = 0.005), higher SOFA score (≥14) (RR = 2.022, 95% CL 1.076–3.798, p = 0.029), regular smoking (RR = 2.366, 95% CL 1.277–4.382, p = 0.006), and higher maintenance dose of midazolam (RR = 1.052, 95% CL 1.000–1.107, p = 0.049) and fentanyl (RR = 1.045, 95% CL 1.019–1.072, p = 0.001) when patients met sequential criteria, were independent risk factors of delirium. Sequential sedation with dexmedetomidine (RR = 0.448, 95% CL 0.209–0.963, p = 0.040) was associated with a lower risk of delirium.

Conclusions

Older age, higher SOFA score, regular smoking, and higher maintenance dose of midazolam and fentanyl when patients met sequential criteria were independent risk factors of delirium in sequential sedation patients. Sequential sedation with dexmedetomidine reduced risk of delirium.

Worldwide Survey of the "Assessing Pain, Both Spontaneous Awakening and Breathing Trials, Choice of Drugs, Delirium Monitoring/Management, Early Exercise/Mobility, and Family Empowerment" (ABCDEF) Bundle

OBJECTIVES

To assess the knowledge and use of the Assessment, prevention, and management of pain; spontaneous awakening and breathing trials; Choice of analgesia and sedation; Delirium assessment; Early mobility and exercise; and Family engagement and empowerment (ABCDEF) bundle to implement the Pain, Agitation, Delirium guidelines.

DESIGN

Worldwide online survey.

SETTING

Intensive care.

INTERVENTION

A cross-sectional online survey using the Delphi method was administered to intensivists worldwide, to assess the knowledge and use of all aspects of the ABCDEF bundle.

MEASUREMENT AND MAIN RESULTS

There were 1,521 respondents from 47 countries, 57% had implemented the ABCDEF bundle, with varying degrees of compliance across continents. Most of the respondents (83%) used a scale to evaluate pain. Spontaneous awakening trials and spontaneous breathing trials are performed in 66% and 67% of the responder ICUs, respectively. Sedation scale was used in 89% of ICUs. Delirium monitoring was implemented in 70% of ICUs, but only 42% used a validated delirium tool. Likewise, early mobilization was "prescribed" by most, but 69% had no mobility team and 79% used no formal mobility scale. Only 36% of the respondents assessed ICU-acquired weakness. Family members were actively involved in 67% of ICUs; however, only 33% used dedicated staff to support families and only 35% reported that their unit was open 24 hr/d for family visits.

CONCLUSIONS

The current implementation of the ABCDEF bundle varies across individual components and regions. We identified specific targets for quality improvement and adoption of the ABCDEF bundle. Our data reflect a significant but incomplete shift toward patient- and family-centered ICU care in accordance with the Pain, Agitation, Delirium guidelines.

Delirium and Benzodiazepines Associated With Prolonged ICU Stay in Critically Ill Infants and Young Children

OBJECTIVES

Delirium is prevalent among critically ill children, yet associated outcomes and modifiable risk factors are not well defined. The objective of this study was to determine associations between pediatric delirium and modifiable risk factors such as benzodiazepine exposure and short-term outcomes.

DESIGN

Secondary analysis of collected data from the prospective validation study of the Preschool Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU.

SETTING

Tertiary-level PICU.

PATIENTS

Critically ill patients 6 months to 5 years old.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Daily delirium assessments were completed using the Preschool Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU. Associations between baseline and in-hospital risk factors were analyzed for likelihood of ICU discharge using Cox proportional hazards regression and delirium duration using negative binomial regression. Multinomial logistic regression was used to determine associations between daily risk factors and delirium presence the following day. Our 300-patient cohort had a median (interquartile range) age of 20 months (11-37 mo), and 44% had delirium for at least 1 day (1-2 d). Delirium was significantly associated with a decreased likelihood of ICU discharge in preschool-aged children (age-specific hazard ratios at 60, 36, and 12 mo old were 0.17 [95% CI, 0.05-0.61], 0.50 [0.32-0.80], and 0.98 [0.68-1.41], respectively). Greater benzodiazepine exposure (75-25th percentile) was significantly associated with a lower likelihood of ICU discharge (hazard ratio, 0.65 [0.42-1.00]; p = 0.01), longer delirium duration (incidence rate ratio, 2.47 [1.36-4.49]; p = 0.005), and increased risk for delirium the following day (odds ratio, 2.83 [1.27-6.59]; p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Delirium is associated with a lower likelihood of ICU discharge in preschool-aged children. Benzodiazepine exposure is associated with the development and longer duration of delirium, and lower likelihood of ICU discharge. These findings advocate for future studies targeting modifiable risk factors, such as reduction in benzodiazepine exposure, to mitigate iatrogenic harm in pediatric patients.

Consensus Report by the Pediatric Acute Lung Injury and Sepsis Investigators and Pediatric Blood and Marrow Transplantation Consortium Joint Working Committees on Supportive Care Guidelines for Management of Veno-Occlusive Disease in Children and Adolescents, Part 3: Focus on Cardiorespiratory Dysfunction, Infections, Liver Dysfunction, and Delirium

Some patients with veno-occlusive disease (VOD) have multiorgan dysfunction, and multiple teams are involved in their daily care in the pediatric intensive care unit. Cardiorespiratory dysfunction is critical in these patients, requiring immediate action. The decision of whether to use a noninvasive or an invasive ventilation strategy may be difficult in the setting of mucositis or other comorbidities in patients with VOD. Similarly, monitoring of organ functions may be very challenging in these patients, who may have fulminant hepatic failure with or without hepatic encephalopathy complicated by delirium and/or infections. In this final guideline of our series on supportive care in patients with VOD, we address some of these questions and provide evidence-based recommendations on behalf of the Pediatric Acute Lung Injury and Sepsis Investigators and Pediatric Blood and Marrow Transplantation Consortium Joint Working Committees.

Do sedation and analgesia contribute to long-term cognitive dysfunction in critical care survivors?

Deep sedation during stay in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) may have deleterious effects upon the clinical and cognitive outcomes of critically ill patients undergoing mechanical ventilation. Over the last decade a vast body of literature has been generated regarding different sedation strategies, with the aim of reducing the levels of sedation in critically ill patients. There has also been a growing interest in acute brain dysfunction, or delirium, in the ICU. However, the effect of sedation during ICU stay upon long-term cognitive deficits in ICU survivors remains unclear. Strategies for reducing sedation levels in the ICU do not seem to be associated with worse cognitive and psychological status among ICU survivors. Sedation strategy and management efforts therefore should seek to secure the best possible state in the mechanically ventilated patient and lower the prevalence of delirium, in order to prevent long-term cognitive alterations.

Development and implementation of an early mobility program for mechanically ventilated pediatric patients

PURPOSE

Early mobility (EM) is being used in adult ICUs in an effort to treat and prevent intensive care unit acquired weakness (ICU-AW) and Post-Intensive Care Syndrome (PICS). Data supports children suffer from ICU-AW and PICS as well. Our objective was to create and implement an EM protocol for pediatric patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary EM committee was formed to create and implement an EM protocol in a quarternary care PICU. A quality database was used to prospectively monitor patient tolerance of EM sessions and for serious adverse events, defined as unplanned extubation, hemodynamic instability, loss of central venous line, loss of arterial line, displacement of ECMO cannula, or cardiopulmonary arrest.

RESULTS

Between December 2013 and October 2016, 74 patients received EM for a total of 130 unique sessions. No serious adverse events occurred. Two patients had an oxygen desaturation episode during mobility that resolved with ventilator modifications, and one patient had nasogastric tube displacement during mobility.

CONCLUSIONS

Early mobility is attainable in a quaternary care PICU population without serious adverse events, using a multidisciplinary approach and appropriate staff education. Further research is needed to understand the physical and neurocognitive benefits of EM in children.

Delirium and exposure to psychoactive medications in critically ill adults: A multi-centre observational study

PURPOSE

Investigate the relationship between psychoactive drugs and delirium.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Prospective observational study of 520 critically ill adult patients admitted ≥24h to 6 intensive care units (ICUs). Data were collected on psychoactive drug exposure, use of sedation administration strategies, and incident delirium (Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist score≥4).

RESULTS

Delirium was detected in 260 (50%) patients, median (IQR) duration 2 (1-5) days, and time to onset 3 (2-5) days. Delirious patients received more low-potency anticholinergic (P<0.0001), antipsychotic (P<0.0001), benzodiazepine (P<0.0001) and non-benzodiazepine sedative (P<0.0001), and opioid (P=0.0008) drugs. Primary regression (24-hours preceding drug exposure) revealed no association between any psychoactive drug and delirium. Post-hoc analysis (extended 48-hour exposure) revealed an association between delirium and high-potency anticholinergic (HR 2.45, 95% CI 1.08-5.54) and benzodiazepine (HR 1.08 per 5mg midazolam-equivalent increment, 95% CI 1.04-1.12) drugs. Delirious patients had longer ICU (P<0.0001) and hospital (P<0.0001) length of stay, and higher ICU and hospital mortality (P=0.003 and P=0.007, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The identification of psychoactive drugs as modifiable delirium risk factors plays an important role in the management of critically ill patients. This is particularly important given the burden of exposure and combinations of drugs used in this vulnerable patient population.

Sedation After Cardiac Surgery: Is One Drug Better Than Another?

The classic high-dose narcotic-based cardiac anesthetic has been modified to facilitate a fast-track, rapid recovery in the intensive care unit (ICU). Postoperative sedation is consequently now an essential component in recovery of the patient undergoing cardiac surgery. It must facilitate the patient's unawareness of the environment as well as reduce the discomfort and anxiety caused by surgery, intubation, mechanical ventilation, suction, and physiotherapy. Benzodiazepines seem well suited for this role, but propofol, opioids, and dexmedetomidine are among other agents commonly used for sedation in the ICU. However, what is an ideal sedative for this application? When compared with benzodiazepine-based sedation regimens, nonbenzodiazepines have been associated with shorter duration of mechanical ventilation and ICU length of stay. Current sedation guidelines recommend avoiding benzodiazepine use in the ICU. However, there are no recommendations on which alternatives should be used. In postcardiac surgery patients, inotropes and vasoactive medications are often required because of the poor cardiac function. This makes sedation after cardiac surgery unique in comparison with the requirements for most other ICU patient populations. We reviewed the current literature to try to determine if 1 sedative regimen might be better than others; in particular, we compare outcomes of propofol and dexmedetomidine in postoperative sedation in the cardiac surgical ICU.

A Pilot Study of the Use of Dexmedetomidine for the Control of Delirium by Reducing the Serum Concentrations of Brain-Derived Neurotrophic Factor, Neuron-Specific Enolase, and S100B in Polytrauma Patients

BACKGROUND

Delirium is very common among patients with polytrauma, although no suitable means exist to feasibly reduce the incidence and duration of delirium in these patients. Recent reports have suggested that continuous intravenous (IV) infusions of dexmedetomidine, rather than benzodiazepine, be administered for sedation to reduce the duration of delirium in this population. However, serum neuron-specific enolase (NSE), S100 calcium binding protein B (S100B), and brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) levels have not yet been investigated in polytrauma patients who received sedation with dexmedetomidine rather than other conventional sedatives. The aim of this study was to assess the association of blood BDNF, NSE, and S100B with the occurrence of delirium among polytrauma patients who had been sedated with dexmedetomidine.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Consecutive patients were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 treatment study groups, namely the "dexmedetomidine group" or the "common group." This case-control study included 18 patients with delirium and 34 matched controls in a 63-bed general intensive care unit (ICU). Blood samples were collected from all patients upon ICU admission, on the day when delirium was diagnosed, and on days 3 and 5 following diagnosis. The serum levels of S100B, BDNF, and NSE were determined by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. The sedation levels and delirium were assessed using the Richmond Agitation and Sedation Scale and the Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU.

RESULTS

The median BDNF, NSE, and S100B concentrations were significantly lower in the dexmedetomidine group than in the common group on the day when delirium was diagnosed and on the third day after delirium was diagnosed. The rate of delirium was significantly lower in the dexmedetomidine group than in the common group. There were clear differences in the BDNF, NSE, and S100B levels between the 2 groups on the fifth day after delirium was diagnosed.

CONCLUSIONS

Our randomized controlled study suggests that the sedation of polytrauma patients with dexmedetomidine could help reduce the serum BDNF, S100B, and NSE levels, which appear to be associated with the occurrence of delirium in the dexmedetomidine group.

Effect of dexmedetomidine and midazolam for flexible fiberoptic bronchoscopy in intensive care unit patients: A retrospective study

This study aimed to investigate the clinical effectiveness of dexmedetomidine and midazolam for sedation of intensive care unit (ICU) patients requiring flexible fiberoptic bronchoscopy (FFB).This retrospective cohort study included 148 patients from the third ICU ward of the Second Affiliated Hospital of Harbin Medical University (Harbin, China) who received simultaneous invasive mechanical ventilation and FFB between March 2012 and December 2014. Patients were divided into dexmedetomidine (n  =  72) and midazolam (n  =  76) groups according to sedative mode. The sedative effects, incidence of adverse events, and bronchoscopist satisfaction scores were compared between groups.During FFB, total sedation time and total time of FFB were significantly shorter in the midazolam group (P < .001, respectively), with a lower percentage of these patients requiring propofol for remedial sedation (P < .001). The incidence of FFB-related adverse events (including bronchospasm, cough, and decreased oxygen saturation) was significantly higher in dexmedetomidine group compared with midazolam group (P  =  .007, .014 and .008, respectively). However, the incidence of other adverse events was not significantly different between groups. In addition, bronchoscopist satisfaction scores were significantly higher in the midazolam compared with dexmedetomidine group (7.72 ± 1.65 vs 7.08 ± 1.77; P  =  .030).For sedation of ICU patients during FFB, combination of midazolam and dexmedetomidine demonstrated an enhanced sedative effect, lower incidence of adverse events, and higher bronchoscopist satisfaction score compared with dexmedetomidine alone, thus represents a suitable alternative sedative for FFB patients.

Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2016

OBJECTIVE

To provide an update to "Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2012."

DESIGN

A consensus committee of 55 international experts representing 25 international organizations was convened. Nominal groups were assembled at key international meetings (for those committee members attending the conference). A formal conflict-of-interest (COI) policy was developed at the onset of the process and enforced throughout. A stand-alone meeting was held for all panel members in December 2015. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee served as an integral part of the development.

METHODS

The panel consisted of five sections: hemodynamics, infection, adjunctive therapies, metabolic, and ventilation. Population, intervention, comparison, and outcomes (PICO) questions were reviewed and updated as needed, and evidence profiles were generated. Each subgroup generated a list of questions, searched for best available evidence, and then followed the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system to assess the quality of evidence from high to very low, and to formulate recommendations as strong or weak, or best practice statement when applicable.

RESULTS

The Surviving Sepsis Guideline panel provided 93 statements on early management and resuscitation of patients with sepsis or septic shock. Overall, 32 were strong recommendations, 39 were weak recommendations, and 18 were best-practice statements. No recommendation was provided for four questions.

CONCLUSIONS

Substantial agreement exists among a large cohort of international experts regarding many strong recommendations for the best care of patients with sepsis. Although a significant number of aspects of care have relatively weak support, evidence-based recommendations regarding the acute management of sepsis and septic shock are the foundation of improved outcomes for these critically ill patients with high mortality.

Foetal responses to dexmedetomidine in parturients undergoing caesarean section: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective This current meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate effects of dexmedetomidine on neonatal maternal factors. Methods The electronic databases of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched. The primary outcomes were neonatal parameters, including umbilical blood gases and Apgar scores. The secondary outcomes were maternal parameters. Results We identified six randomized controlled trials (RCTs). No differences in neonatal umbilical blood gases, and Apgar scores at 1 min (WMD: -0.09; 95% CI: -0.21 to 0.04; I²= 0%) and 5 min (weighted mean difference (WMD): 0.03; 95% CI: -0.05 to 0.11; I²= 37%) were observed with dexmedetomidine. For maternal parameters, characteristics of motor and sensory block and postoperative analgesia (standard mean difference (SMD): 3.99; 95% CI: 2.85 to 5.12; I²= 78%) were significantly improved after dexmedetomidine treatment. Adverse events, including nausea/vomiting and shivering (risk ratio (RR): 0.26; 95% CI: 0.11 to 0.60; I²= 0%), were lower after dexmedetomidine treatment. Conclusion This meta-analysis shows that dexmedetomidine is safe for neonates who are delivered by caesarean section. Moreover, dexmedetomidine used in neuraxial anaesthesia can improve the characteristics of motor and sensory block and prolong the maternal pain-free period. Dexmedetomidine can also reduce the maternal incidence of postoperative adverse effects.

Sedation of mechanically ventilated adults in intensive care unit: a network meta-analysis

Sedatives are commonly used for mechanically ventilated patients in intensive care units (ICU). However, a variety of sedatives are available and their efficacy and safety have been compared in numerous trials with inconsistent results. To resolve uncertainties regarding usefulness of these sedatives, we performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Randomized controlled trials comparing sedatives in mechanically ventilated ICU patients were included. Graph-theoretical methods were employed for network meta-analysis. A total of 51 citations comprising 52 RCTs were included in our analysis. Dexmedetomidine showed shorter MV duration than lorazepam (mean difference (MD): 68.7; 95% CI: 18.2-119.3 hours), midazolam (MD: 10.2; 95% CI: 7.7-12.7 hours) and propofol (MD: 3.4; 95% CI: 0.9-5.9 hours). Compared with dexmedetomidine, midazolam was associated with significantly increased risk of delirium (OR: 2.47; 95% CI: 1.17-5.19). Our study shows that dexmedetomidine has potential benefits in reducing duration of MV and lowering the risk of delirium.

Incidence and factors related to delirium in an intensive care unit

OBJECTIVES

To identify the incidence of delirium, compare the demographic and clinical characteristics of patients with and without delirium, and verify factors related to delirium in critical care patients.

METHOD

Prospective cohort with a sample made up of patients hospitalized in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) of a university hospital. Demographic, clinical variables and evaluation with the Confusion Assessment Method for Intensive Care Unit to identify delirium were processed to the univariate analysis and logistic regression to identify factors related to the occurrence of delirium.

RESULTS

Of the total 149 patients in the sample, 69 (46.3%) presented delirium during ICU stay, whose mean age, severity of illness and length of ICU stay were statistically higher. The factors related to delirium were: age, midazolam, morphine and propofol.

CONCLUSION

Results showed high incidence of ICU delirium associated with older age, use of sedatives and analgesics, emphasizing the need for relevant nursing care to prevent and identify early, patients presenting these characteristics.

OBJETIVOS

Identificar a incidência de delirium, comparar as características demográficas e clínicas dos pacientes com e sem delirium e verificar os fatores relacionados ao delirium em pacientes internados em Unidade de Terapia Intensiva (UTI).

MÉTODO

Coorte prospectiva, cuja amostra foi constituída de pacientes internados em UTI de um hospital universitário. Variáveis demográficas, clínicas e da avaliação com o Confusion Assessment Method for Intensive Care Unit para identificação de delirium foram processadas para análise univariada, e regressão logística para identificar fatores relacionados à ocorrência do delirium.

RESULTADOS

Do total de 149 pacientes da amostra, 69 (46,3%) apresentaram delirium durante a internação na UTI, observando-se que a média da idade, o índice de gravidade e o tempo de permanência nas UTI foram estatisticamente maiores. Os fatores relacionados ao delirium foram: idade, midazolam, morfina e propofol.

CONCLUSÃO

Os resultados mostraram elevada incidência de delirium na UTI e sua ocorrência associada às idades mais avançadas e o uso de sedativos e analgésicos, ressaltando-se a importância da atuação do enfermeiro na prevenção e identificação precoce do quadro nos pacientes com essas características.

Impact of dexmedetomidine on the incidence of delirium in elderly patients after cardiac surgery: A randomized controlled trial

Background

Delirium is a frequent complication after cardiac surgery and its occurrence is associated with poor outcomes. The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of perioperative dexmedetomidine administration on the incidence of delirium in elderly patients after cardiac surgery.

Methods

This randomized, double-blinded, and placebo-controlled trial was conducted in two tertiary hospitals in Beijing between December 1, 2014 and July 19, 2015. Eligible patients were randomized into two groups. Dexmedetomidine (DEX) was administered during anesthesia and early postoperative period for patients in the DEX group, whereas normal saline was administered in the same rate for the same duration for patients in the control (CTRL) group. The primary endpoint was the incidence of delirium during the first five days after surgery. Secondary endpoints included the cognitive function assessed on postoperative days 6 and 30, the overall incidence of non-delirium complications within 30 days after surgery, and the all-cause 30-day mortality.

Results

Two hundred eighty-five patients were enrolled and randomized. Dexmedetomidine did not decrease the incidence of delirium (4.9% [7/142] in the DEX group vs 7.7% [11/143] in the CTRL group; OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.65, p = 0.341). Secondary endpoints were similar between the two groups; however, the incidence of pulmonary complications was slightly decreased (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.26 to 1.00, p = 0.050) and the percentage of early extubation was significantly increased (OR 3.32, 95% CI 1.36 to 8.08, p = 0.008) in the DEX group. Dexmedetomidine decreased the required treatment for intraoperative tachycardia (21.1% [30/142] in the DEX group vs 33.6% [48/143] in the CTRL group, p = 0.019), but increased the required treatment for postoperative hypotension (84.5% [120/142] in the DEX group vs 69.9% [100/143] in the CTRL group, p = 0.003).

Conclusions

Dexmedetomidine administered during anesthesia and early postoperative period did not decrease the incidence of postoperative delirium in elderly patients undergoing elective cardiac surgery. However, considering the low delirium incidence, the trial might have been underpowered.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02267538

Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2016

OBJECTIVE

To provide an update to "Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2012".

DESIGN

A consensus committee of 55 international experts representing 25 international organizations was convened. Nominal groups were assembled at key international meetings (for those committee members attending the conference). A formal conflict-of-interest (COI) policy was developed at the onset of the process and enforced throughout. A stand-alone meeting was held for all panel members in December 2015. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee served as an integral part of the development.

METHODS

The panel consisted of five sections: hemodynamics, infection, adjunctive therapies, metabolic, and ventilation. Population, intervention, comparison, and outcomes (PICO) questions were reviewed and updated as needed, and evidence profiles were generated. Each subgroup generated a list of questions, searched for best available evidence, and then followed the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system to assess the quality of evidence from high to very low, and to formulate recommendations as strong or weak, or best practice statement when applicable.

RESULTS

The Surviving Sepsis Guideline panel provided 93 statements on early management and resuscitation of patients with sepsis or septic shock. Overall, 32 were strong recommendations, 39 were weak recommendations, and 18 were best-practice statements. No recommendation was provided for four questions.

CONCLUSIONS

Substantial agreement exists among a large cohort of international experts regarding many strong recommendations for the best care of patients with sepsis. Although a significant number of aspects of care have relatively weak support, evidence-based recommendations regarding the acute management of sepsis and septic shock are the foundation of improved outcomes for these critically ill patients with high mortality.

Dexmedetomidine vs propofol for gastrointestinal endoscopy: A meta-analysis

Background and aim

Several randomized controlled trials have compared sedation with dexmedetomidine and propofol in gastrointestinal endoscopy, with contradictory results. We conducted a meta-analysis of data from randomized controlled trials that compared dexmedetomidine with propofol.

Methods

We searched PubMed, the Cochrane library, and the Igaku-chuo-zasshi database for randomized trials eligible for inclusion in our meta-analysis. We identified six eligible randomized trials from the database search, and compared the effect of propofol versus dexmedetomidine with respect to: (a) patient's satisfaction level, (b) body movement or gagging, (c) cardiopulmonary complications, and (d) change in heart rate. Data from eligible studies were combined to calculate pooled risk difference (RD) or weighted mean difference (WMD).

Results

Compared to propofol, dexmedetomidine significantly decreased the patient's satisfaction level (WMD: -0.678, 95% confidence interval (CI): -1.149 to -0.207, p = 0.0048), and there was no significant heterogeneity among the trial results. The pooled RD for developing body movement or gagging when using dexmedetomidine was 0.107 (95% CI: -0.09 to 0.305, p = 0.288), with no significant differences. Compared with propofol, the pooled RD for hypotension, hypoxia, and bradycardia with dexmedetomidine sedation were -0.029 (95% CI: -0.11 to 0.05), -0.080 (95% CI: -0.178 to 0.018), and 0.022 (95% CI: -0.027 to 0.07), respectively, with no significant differences. Compared to propofol, dexmedetomidine significantly decreased the heart rate (WMD: -10.41, 95% CI: -13.77 to -7.051, p ≤ 0.0001), without significant heterogeneity.

Conclusions

In gastrointestinal endoscopy, patient satisfaction level was higher in propofol administration, when compared to dexmedetomidine. The risk of complications was similar.

Alpha-2 agonists for sedation of mechanically ventilated adults in intensive care units: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Care of critically ill patients in intensive care units (ICUs) often requires potentially invasive or uncomfortable procedures, such as mechanical ventilation (MV). Sedation can alleviate pain and discomfort, provide protection from stressful or harmful events, prevent anxiety and promote sleep. Various sedative agents are available for use in ICUs. In the UK, the most commonly used sedatives are propofol (Diprivan(®), AstraZeneca), benzodiazepines [e.g. midazolam (Hypnovel(®), Roche) and lorazepam (Ativan(®), Pfizer)] and alpha-2 adrenergic receptor agonists [e.g. dexmedetomidine (Dexdor(®), Orion Corporation) and clonidine (Catapres(®), Boehringer Ingelheim)]. Sedative agents vary in onset/duration of effects and in their side effects. The pattern of sedation of alpha-2 agonists is quite different from that of other sedatives in that patients can be aroused readily and their cognitive performance on psychometric tests is usually preserved. Moreover, respiratory depression is less frequent after alpha-2 agonists than after other sedative agents.

OBJECTIVES

To conduct a systematic review to evaluate the comparative effects of alpha-2 agonists (dexmedetomidine and clonidine) and propofol or benzodiazepines (midazolam and lorazepam) in mechanically ventilated adults admitted to ICUs.

DATA SOURCES

We searched major electronic databases (e.g. MEDLINE without revisions, MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, EMBASE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) from 1999 to 2014.

METHODS

Evidence was considered from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing dexmedetomidine with clonidine or dexmedetomidine or clonidine with propofol or benzodiazepines such as midazolam, lorazepam and diazepam (Diazemuls(®), Actavis UK Limited). Primary outcomes included mortality, duration of MV, length of ICU stay and adverse events. One reviewer extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included trials. A second reviewer cross-checked all the data extracted. Random-effects meta-analyses were used for data synthesis.

RESULTS

Eighteen RCTs (2489 adult patients) were included. One trial at unclear risk of bias compared dexmedetomidine with clonidine and found that target sedation was achieved in a higher number of patients treated with dexmedetomidine with lesser need for additional sedation. The remaining 17 trials compared dexmedetomidine with propofol or benzodiazepines (midazolam or lorazepam). Trials varied considerably with regard to clinical population, type of comparators, dose of sedative agents, outcome measures and length of follow-up. Overall, risk of bias was generally high or unclear. In particular, few trials blinded outcome assessors. Compared with propofol or benzodiazepines (midazolam or lorazepam), dexmedetomidine had no significant effects on mortality [risk ratio (RR) 1.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.85 to 1.24, I (2) = 0%; p = 0.78]. Length of ICU stay (mean difference -1.26 days, 95% CI -1.96 to -0.55 days, I (2) = 31%; p = 0.0004) and time to extubation (mean difference -1.85 days, 95% CI -2.61 to -1.09 days, I (2) = 0%; p < 0.00001) were significantly shorter among patients who received dexmedetomidine. No difference in time to target sedation range was observed between sedative interventions (I (2) = 0%; p = 0.14). Dexmedetomidine was associated with a higher risk of bradycardia (RR 1.88, 95% CI 1.28 to 2.77, I (2) = 46%; p = 0.001).

LIMITATIONS

Trials varied considerably with regard to participants, type of comparators, dose of sedative agents, outcome measures and length of follow-up. Overall, risk of bias was generally high or unclear. In particular, few trials blinded assessors.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence on the use of clonidine in ICUs is very limited. Dexmedetomidine may be effective in reducing ICU length of stay and time to extubation in critically ill ICU patients. Risk of bradycardia but not of overall mortality is higher among patients treated with dexmedetomidine. Well-designed RCTs are needed to assess the use of clonidine in ICUs and identify subgroups of patients that are more likely to benefit from the use of dexmedetomidine.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42014014101.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme. The Health Services Research Unit is core funded by the Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government Health and Social Care Directorates.

Delirium in the Intensive Care Unit

Delirium is characterized by impaired cognition with nonspecific manifestations. In critically ill patients, it may develop secondary to multiple precipitating or predisposing causes. Although it can be a transient and reversible syndrome, its occurrence in Intensive Care Unit (ICU) patients may be associated with long-term cognitive dysfunction. This condition is often under-recognized by treating physicians, leading to inappropriate management. For appropriate management of delirium, early identification and risk factor assessment are key factors. Multidisciplinary collaboration and standardized care can enhance the recognition of delirium. Interdisciplinary team working, together with updated guideline implementation, demonstrates proven success in minimizing delirium in the ICU. Moreover, should the use of physical restraint be necessary to prevent harm among mechanically ventilated patients, ethical clinical practice methodology must be employed. This traditional narrative review aims to address the presentation, risk factors, management, and ethical considerations in the management of delirium in ICU settings.

Sedation and Analgesia

Patients in the cardiothoracic intensive care unit (CTICU) are subject to numerous physical and mental stresses. While most of these cannot be completely eliminated, intensivists have many tools in their armamentarium to alleviate patients' pain and suffering. This chapter will consider the importance of analgesia and sedation in the CTICU and the relevant consequences of over- or under-treatment. We will examine the tools available for monitoring and titrating analgesia and sedation in critically ill patients. The major classes of medications available will be reviewed, with particular attention to their clinical effects, metabolism and excretion, and hemodynamic characteristics. Lastly, experimental evidence will be assessed regarding the best strategies for treatment of pain and agitation in the CTICU, including use of non-pharmacologic adjuvants.

[Depressive, anxiety and posttraumatic stress disorders as long-term sequelae of intensive care treatment]

Modern intensive care medicine has led to increased survival rates even after severe life-threatening medical conditions. In self-critical and multidimensional outcome research, however, it must be considered that beyond survival rates treatment on intensive care units (ICU) can also be associated with high long-term rates of depressive, anxiety and posttraumatic stress disorders. Significant correlations with increased somatic morbidity and mortality, persisting cognitive impairments and significant deficits in health-related quality of life must also be taken into consideration. Empirical analysis of the risk factors reveals that a history of premorbid depression, sociodemographic and socioeconomic variables, age, female sex, personality traits, the underlying pathophysiological condition requiring ICU treatment, mode of sedation and analgesia, life support measures, such as mechanical ventilation, manifold traumatic experiences and memories during the stay in the ICU are all of particular pathogenetic importance. In order to reduce principally modifiable risk factors several strategies are illustrated, including well-reflected intensive care sedation and analgesia, special prophylactic medication regarding the major risk of traumatic memories and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), psychological and psychotherapeutic interventions in states of increased acute stress symptoms and aids for personal memories and reorientation.

Dexmedetomidine may upregulate the expression of caveolin‑1 in lung tissues of rats with sepsis and improve the short‑term outcome

Dexmedetomidine (DXM) is a selective α2-adrenoceptor (α2‑AR) and imidazoline receptor (IR) agonist that has been reported to regulate inflammatory responses mediated by diverse signaling pathways through α2‑AR. The majority of the reported receptors or downstream molecules have been demonstrated to locate with caveolin‑1, a protein suggested to participate in regulating Toll‑like receptor 4 (TLR4)‑mediated inflammatory responses and the pathogen endocytosis capability of macrophages. The present study hypothesized that DXM may influence these pathways by regulating the expression of caveolin‑1 and mediating the subsequent effects. Using a cecal‑ligation and puncture‑induced rat sepsis model, it was initially observed that pre‑emptive DXM is able to upregulate and stabilize the amount of caveolin‑1 expression, which may be partly antagonized by both α2‑AR and the IR antagonist atepamezole (APZ). The pathophysiological parameters indicated that DXM is able to inhibit secondary lung injury, in addition to the rise of body temperature and arterial lactate accumulation, however it marginally increased arterial glucose and the murine sepsis score, which can be largely antagonized by APZ. The overall effect was beneficial and improved the 24‑h cumulative survival rate of rats with sepsis. In conclusion, preemptive clinical sedative doses of DXM may upregulate the expression of caveolin‑1 downregulated by sepsis, which may contribute to the inhibition of inflammatory pathways such as TLR4‑mediated pathways. Furthermore, DXM may favor the improvement of short‑term outcomes by the regulation of other metabolic pathways.

Dexmedetomidine for prevention of delirium in elderly patients after non-cardiac surgery: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Delirium is a postoperative complication that occurs frequently in patients older than 65 years, and presages adverse outcomes. We investigated whether prophylactic low-dose dexmedetomidine, a highly selective α₂ adrenoceptor agonist, could safely decrease the incidence of delirium in elderly patients after non-cardiac surgery.

METHODS

We did this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in two tertiary-care hospitals in Beijing, China. We enrolled patients aged 65 years or older, who were admitted to intensive care units after non-cardiac surgery, with informed consent. We used a computer-generated randomisation sequence (in a 1:1 ratio) to randomly assign patients to receive either intravenous dexmedetomidine (0·1 μg/kg per h, from intensive care unit admission on the day of surgery until 0800 h on postoperative day 1), or placebo (intravenous normal saline). Participants, care providers, and investigators were all masked to group assignment. The primary endpoint was the incidence of delirium, assessed twice daily with the Confusion Assessment Method for intensive care units during the first 7 postoperative days. Analyses were done by intention-to-treat and safety populations. This study is registered with Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, www.chictr.org.cn, number ChiCTR-TRC-10000802.

FINDINGS

Between Aug 17, 2011, and Nov 20, 2013, of 2016 patients assessed, 700 were randomly assigned to receive either placebo (n=350) or dexmedetomidine (n=350). The incidence of postoperative delirium was significantly lower in the dexmedetomidine group (32 [9%] of 350 patients) than in the placebo group (79 [23%] of 350 patients; odds ratio [OR] 0·35, 95% CI 0·22-0·54; p<0·0001). Regarding safety, the incidence of hypertension was higher with placebo (62 [18%] of 350 patients) than with dexmedetomidine (34 [10%] of 350 patients; 0·50, 0·32-0·78; p=0·002). Tachycardia was also higher in patients given placebo (48 [14%] of 350 patients) than in patients given dexmedetomidine (23 [7%] of 350 patients; 0·44, 0·26-0·75; p=0·002). Occurrence of hypotension and bradycardia did not differ between groups.

INTERPRETATION

For patients aged over 65 years who are admitted to the intensive care unit after non-cardiac surgery, prophylactic low-dose dexmedetomidine significantly decreases the occurrence of delirium during the first 7 days after surgery. The therapy is safe.

FUNDING

Braun Anaesthesia Scientific Research Fund and Wu Jieping Medical Foundation, Beijing, China. Study drugs were manufactured and supplied by Jiangsu Hengrui Medicine Co, Ltd, Jiangsu, China.

Sedation in mechanically ventilated patients-time to stay awake?

On June, 2016, Klompas and colleagues published an article in the Chest entitled "Associations between different sedatives and ventilator-associated events, length of stay, and mortality in patients who were mechanically ventilated", which investigated the effects of different sedatives on ventilator-associated events (VAEs), length of stay, and mortality in patients who were mechanically ventilated. This study used data of over 9,603 patients in order to investigate patients over the age of 18 who underwent mechanical ventilation for more than 3 days over a 7-year period in a large academic medical center. The investigators found that propofol and dexmedetomidine were associated with less time to extubation compared with benzodiazepines, but dexmedetomidine was also associated with less time to extubation vs. propofol. This study raises important questions about the sedation of critically ill patients.

Importance of the use of protocols for the management of analgesia and sedation in pediatric intensive care unit

Summary Introduction: Analgesia and sedation are essential elements in patient care in the intensive care unit (ICU), in order to promote the control of pain, anxiety and agitation, prevent the loss of devices, accidental extubation, and improve the synchrony of the patient with mechanical ventilation. However, excess of these medications leads to rise in morbidity and mortality. The ideal management will depend on the adoption of clinical and pharmacological measures, guided by scales and protocols. Objective: Literature review on the main aspects of analgesia and sedation, abstinence syndrome, and delirium in the pediatric intensive care unit, in order to show the importance of the use of protocols on the management of critically ill patients. Method: Articles published in the past 16 years on PubMed, Lilacs, and the Cochrane Library, with the terms analgesia, sedation, abstinence syndrome, mild sedation, daily interruption, and intensive care unit. Results: Seventy-six articles considered relevant were selected to describe the importance of using a protocol of sedation and analgesia. They recommended mild sedation and the use of assessment scales, daily interruptions, and spontaneous breathing test. These measures shorten the time of mechanical ventilation, as well as length of hospital stay, and help to control abstinence and delirium, without increasing the risk of morbidity and morbidity. Conclusion: Despite the lack of controlled and randomized clinical trials in the pediatric setting, the use of protocols, optimizing mild sedation, leads to decreased morbidity.

Management of Acute Respiratory Failure in Patients With Hematological Malignancy

Acute respiratory failure (ARF) is the leading cause of intensive care unit admission in patients with hematologic malignancies and is associated with a high mortality. The main causes of ARF are bacterial and opportunistic pulmonary infections and noninfectious lung disorders. Management consists of a systematic clinical evaluation aimed at identifying the most likely cause, which in turn determines the best first-line empirical treatments. The need for mechanical ventilation is a major determinant of prognosis. Beneficial outcomes have been demonstrated with early use of noninvasive ventilation (NIV) in selected patients with hematologic malignancies. However, most of these studies did not control the time between onset of ARF to NIV implementation nor accounted for the etiology of ARF or the presence of associated organ dysfunction at the time of NIV initiation. Moreover, the benefits demonstrated with NIV in these patients were derived from studies with high mortality rates of intubated patients. Additional studies are therefore warranted to determine the appropriate patients with hematologic malignancy and ARF who may benefit from prophylactic or curative NIV.

Pain and Agitation Management in Critically Ill Patients

Pain and agitation may be difficult to assess in a critically ill patient. Pain is best assessed by self-reporting pain scales; but in patients who are unable to communicate, behavioral pain scales seem to have benefit. Patients' sedation level should be assessed each shift and preferably by a validated ICU tool, such as the RASS or SAS scale. Pain is most appropriately treated with the use of opiates, and careful consideration should be given to the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of various analgesics to determine the optimal agent for each individual patient. Sedation levels should preferably remain light or with the use of a daily awakening trial. Preferred treatment of agitation is analgosedation with the addition of nonbenzodiazepine sedatives if necessary. There are risks associated with each agent used in the treatment of pain and agitation, and it is important to monitor patients for effectiveness, signs of toxicity, and adverse drug reactions.

The Relationship Between Sedatives, Sedative Strategy, and Healthcare-Associated Infection: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND Healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) cause significant morbidity in critically ill patients. An underappreciated but potentially modifiable risk factor for infection is sedation strategy. Recent trials suggest that choice of sedative agent, depth of sedation, and sedative management can influence HAI risk in mechanically ventilated patients. OBJECTIVE To better characterize the relationships between sedation strategies and infection. METHODS Systematic literature review. RESULTS We found 500 articles and accepted 70 for review. The 3 most common sedatives for mechanically ventilated patients (benzodiazepines, propofol, and dexmedetomidine) have different pharmacologic and immunomodulatory effects that may impact infection risk. Clinical data are limited but retrospective observational series have found associations between sedative use and pneumonia whereas prospective studies of sedative interruptions have reported possible decreases in bloodstream infections, pneumonia, and ventilator-associated events. CONCLUSION Infection rates appear to be highest with benzodiazepines, intermediate with propofol, and lowest with dexmedetomidine. More data are needed but studies thus far suggest that a better understanding of sedation practices and infection risk may help hospital epidemiologists and critical care practitioners find new ways to mitigate infection risk in critically ill patients. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2016;1-9.