Heparin/N-acetylcysteine: an adjuvant in the management of burn inhalation injury: a study of different doses

The Preventive and Therapeutic Effects of Acute and Severe Inflammatory Disorders with Heparin and Heparinoid

Systematic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) and the accompanying sepsis pose a huge threat to human health worldwide. Heparin is a part of the standard supportive care for the disease. However, the molecular mechanism is not fully understood yet, and the potential signaling pathways that play key roles have not yet been elucidated. In this paper, the main findings regarding the molecular mechanisms associated with the beneficial effects of heparin, including inhibiting HMGB-1-driven inflammation reactions, histone-induced toxicity, thrombo-inflammatory response control and the new emerging mechanisms are concluded. To set up the link between the preclinical research and the clinical effects, the outcomes of the clinical trials are summarized. Then, the structure and function relationship of heparin is discussed. By providing an updated analysis of the above results, the paper highlights the feasibility of heparin as a possible alternative for sepsis prophylaxis and therapy.

Frequency, complications, and mortality of inhalation injury in burn patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis protocol

INTRODUCTION

Burns are tissue traumas caused by energy transfer and occur with a variable inflammatory response. The consequences of burns represent a public health problem worldwide. Inhalation injury (II) is a severity factor when associated with burn, leading to a worse prognosis. Its treatment is complex and often involves invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). The primary purpose of this study will be to assess the evidence regarding the frequency and mortality of II in burn patients. The secondary purposes will be to assess the evidence regarding the association between IIs and respiratory complications (pneumonia, airway obstruction, acute respiratory failure, acute respiratory distress syndrome), need for IMV and complications in other organ systems, and highlight factors associated with IIs in burn patients and prognostic factors associated with acute respiratory failure, need for IMV and mortality of II in burn patients.

METHODS

This is a systematic literature review and meta-analysis, according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA). PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS/VHL, Scopus, Web of Science, and CINAHL databases will be consulted without language restrictions and publication date. Studies presenting incomplete data and patients under 19 years of age will be excluded. Data will be synthesized through continuous (mean and standard deviation) and dichotomous (relative risk) variables and the total number of participants. The means, sample sizes, standard deviations from the mean, and relative risks will be entered into the Review Manager web analysis software (The Cochrane Collaboration).

DISCUSSION

Despite the extensive experience managing IIs in burn patients, they still represent an important cause of morbidity and mortality. Diagnosis and accurate measurement of its damage are complex, and therapies are essentially based on supportive measures. Considering the challenge, their impact, and their potential severity, IIs represent a promising area for research, needing further studies to understand and contribute to its better evolution. The protocol of this review is registered on the International prospective register of systematic reviews platform of the Center for Revisions and Disclosure of the University of York, United Kingdom (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero), under number RD42022343944.

Inhalation Injury, Respiratory Failure, and Ventilator Support in Acute Burn Care

Sustaining an inhalation injury increases the risk of severe complications and mortality. Current evidential support to guide treatment of the injury or subsequent complications is lacking, as studies either exclude inhalation injury or design limit inferences that can be made. Conventional ventilator modes are most commonly used, but there is no consensus on optimal strategies. Settings should be customized to patient tolerance and response. Data for pharmacotherapy adjunctive treatments are limited.

Pharmacologic Management of Pediatric Burns

Many pediatric patients with burn injuries may be initially treated in a hospital where pediatric specialized care, including resources and trained personnel may be limited. This includes resuscitation in adult emergency departments and inpatient care in mixed adult-pediatric burn units. The intent of this review is to provide a compilation of topics for the adult trained pharmacist or another healthcare practitioner on the management of pediatric patients with burn injuries. This article focuses on several key areas of pharmacologic burn management in the pediatric patient that may differ from the adult patient, including pain and sedation, fluid resuscitation, nutrition support, antimicrobial selection, anticoagulation, and inhalation injury. It is important that all clinicians have resources to help optimize the management of burn injuries in the pediatric population as, in addition to burn injury itself, pediatric patients have different pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics affecting which medications are used and how they are dosed. This article highlights several key differences between pediatric and adult patients, providing an additional resource to assist adult-trained pharmacists or other healthcare practitioners with making clinical decisions in the pediatric burn population.

An international RAND/UCLA expert panel to determine the optimal diagnosis and management of burn inhalation injury

BACKGROUND

Burn inhalation injury (BII) is a major cause of burn-related mortality and morbidity. Despite published practice guidelines, no consensus exists for the best strategies regarding diagnosis and management of BII. A modified DELPHI study using the RAND/UCLA (University of California, Los Angeles) Appropriateness Method (RAM) systematically analysed the opinions of an expert panel. Expert opinion was combined with available evidence to determine what constitutes appropriate and inappropriate judgement in the diagnosis and management of BII.

METHODS

A 15-person multidisciplinary panel comprised anaesthetists, intensivists and plastic surgeons involved in the clinical management of major burn patients adopted a modified Delphi approach using the RAM method. They rated the appropriateness of statements describing diagnostic and management options for BII on a Likert scale. A modified final survey comprising 140 statements was completed, subdivided into history and physical examination (20), investigations (39), airway management (5), systemic toxicity (23), invasive mechanical ventilation (29) and pharmacotherapy (24). Median appropriateness ratings and the disagreement index (DI) were calculated to classify statements as appropriate, uncertain, or inappropriate.

RESULTS

Of 140 statements, 74 were rated as appropriate, 40 as uncertain and 26 as inappropriate. Initial intubation with ≥ 8.0 mm endotracheal tubes, lung protective ventilatory strategies, initial bronchoscopic lavage, serial bronchoscopic lavage for severe BII, nebulised heparin and salbutamol administration for moderate-severe BII and N-acetylcysteine for moderate BII were rated appropriate. Non-protective ventilatory strategies, high-frequency oscillatory ventilation, high-frequency percussive ventilation, prophylactic systemic antibiotics and corticosteroids were rated inappropriate. Experts disagreed (DI ≥ 1) on six statements, classified uncertain: the use of flexible fiberoptic bronchoscopy to guide fluid requirements (DI = 1.52), intubation with endotracheal tubes of internal diameter < 8.0 mm (DI = 1.19), use of airway pressure release ventilation modality (DI = 1.19) and nebulised 5000IU heparin, N-acetylcysteine and salbutamol for mild BII (DI = 1.52, 1.70, 1.36, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Burns experts mostly agreed on appropriate and inappropriate diagnostic and management criteria of BII as in published guidance. Uncertainty exists as to the optimal diagnosis and management of differing grades of severity of BII. Future research should investigate the accuracy of bronchoscopic grading of BII, the value of bronchial lavage in differing severity groups and the effectiveness of nebulised therapies in different severities of BII.

The effect of nebulized heparin on clinical outcomes in mechanically ventilated patients: a meta-analysis and review of the literature

OBJECTIVE

To determine the relationship between use of nebulized heparin and clinical outcomes in mechanically ventilated patients.

METHODS

The Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and PubMed databases were searched for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs), published between database inception and May 2022. Primary outcomes were intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay and in-hospital mortality; secondary outcomes included duration of mechanical ventilation, ventilator-free days (VFDs) in 28 days, and length of hospitalization. The study protocol was registered on PROSPERO (registration No: CRD42022345533).

RESULTS

A total of eight RCTs (651 patients) were included. Nebulized heparin was associated with reduced ICU length of stay (six studies; mean difference [MD] -1.10, 95% confidence interval [CI] -1.87, -0.33, I2 = 76%), reduced duration of mechanical ventilation (two studies; MD -2.63, 95% CI -3.68, -1.58, I2 = 92%) and increased VFDs in 28 days (two studies; MD 4.22, 95% CI 1.10, 7.35, I2 = 18%), without increased incidence of adverse events, such as bleeding; but was not associated with a reduction in length of hospitalization (three studies; MD -1.00, 95% CI -2.90, -0.90, I2 = 0%) or in-hospital mortality (five studies; odds ratio 1.10, 95% CI 0.69, 1.77, I2 = 0%).

CONCLUSION

Nebulized heparin reduces ICU length of stay and duration of mechanical ventilation in mechanically ventilated patients, but has no effect on length of hospitalization or mortality.

Protective Effect of Nebulized Heparin in the Animal Models of Smoke Inhalation Injury: A Meta-analysis and Systematic Review of Experimental Studies

The pathophysiological mechanism of abnormal coagulation can result from smoke inhalation injury (SII). Heparin nebulization is a common treatment for lung disorders. This study aimed to use meta-analysis in animal models to examine the effectiveness of atomized heparin on SII. For our online searches, we used the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, Web of Science, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chinese BioMedical Literature Database, and Wanfang Database up to January 2022. Data for SII were retrieved and compared to control animals. The studies' findings were determined by combining standardized mean difference (SMD) analysis with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The findings showed that as compared to the control group, the heparin-treated group had a lower death rate (relative risk 0.42; 95% CI 0.22, 0.80; p < .05). The meta-analysis demonstrated favorable changes in lung physiology, including PaO2/FiO2 (SMD 1.04; 95% CI 0.65, 1.44; p < .001), lung wet-to-dry weight ratio (SMD -1.83; 95% CI -2.47, -1.18; p < .001), and pulmonary shunt Qs/Qt (SMD -0.69; 95% CI -1.29, -0.08; p < .05) after heparin nebulization for lung injury. The present data indicated that pulmonary artery mean pressure in the heparin therapy group was significantly lowered after 24 and 48 hours of therapy, suggesting that the cardiovascular system could recover following heparin treatment. As a result, heparin nebulization appeared to be more effective against SII and improved cardiopulmonary function compared to the control group. Graphical Abstract.

Patient-centred outcomes are under-reported in the critical care burns literature: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Developments in the care of critically ill patients with severe burns have led to improved hospital survival, but long-term recovery may be impaired. The extent to which patient-centred outcomes are assessed and reported in studies in this population is unclear.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review to assess the outcomes reported in studies involving critically ill burns patients. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies on the topics of fluid resuscitation, analgesia, haemodynamic monitoring, ventilation strategies, transfusion targets, enteral nutrition and timing of surgery were included. We assessed the outcomes reported and then classified these according to two suggested core outcome sets.

RESULTS

A comprehensive search returned 6154 studies; 98 papers met inclusion criteria. There were 66 RCTs, 19 clinical studies with concurrent controls and 13 interventional studies without concurrent controls. Outcome reporting was inconsistent across studies. Pain, reported using the visual analogue scale, fluid volume administered and mortality were the only outcomes measured in more than three studies. Sixty-six studies (67%) had surrogate primary outcomes. Follow-up was poor, with median longest follow-up across all studies 5 days (IQR 3-28). When compared to the suggested OMERACT core outcome set, 53% of papers reported on mortality, 28% reported on life impact, 30% reported resource/economic outcomes and 95% reported on pathophysiological manifestations. Burns-specific Falder outcome reporting was globally poor, with only 4.3% of outcomes being reported across the 98 papers.

CONCLUSION

There are deficiencies in the reporting of outcomes in the literature pertaining to the intensive care management of patients with severe burns, both with regard to the consistency of outcomes as well as a lack of focus on patient-centred outcomes. Long-term outcomes are infrequently reported. The development and validation of a core outcome dataset for severe burns would improve the quality of reporting.

Inhalational injury and use of heparin & N-acetylcysteine nebulization: A case report

Inhalational injury to the upper and lower airway occurs due to thermal or chemical irritation causing airway edema, capillary leak, mucin, and fibrin debris forming clots and soot. The use of unfractionated heparin (UFH) nebulization was found to be effective by dissolving airway clots. We report a case of inhalational burn injury where UFH nebulization led to a better outcome. A healthy male was trapped in a residential room during a fire in the building. He sustained facial, neck, upper chest, and left upper extremity burns accounting for 25% of body surface area. He was intubated at the site and started on supportive care. In the surgical intensive care unit, bronchoscopy showed severe tracheobronchial burn injury; a thorough lavage was done, started on UFH and N-acetylcysteine nebulization (NAC). The patient improved, and his trachea was extubated on day 6. In our patient, unfractionated heparin nebulization was beneficial as the patient was extubated early without landing to acute respiratory distress syndrome.

N-acetylcysteine and coronavirus disease 2019: May it work as a beneficial preventive and adjuvant therapy? A comprehensive review study

BACKGROUND

Coronaviruses are major pathogens of respiratory system causing different disorders, including the common cold, Middle East respiratory syndrome, and severe acute respiratory syndrome. Today's global pandemic coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has high mortality rate, with an approximate of 20% in some studies, and is 30-60 times more fatal than the common annual influenza, However, there is still no gold standard treatment for it. N-acetylcysteine (NAC) is a well-known multi-potential drug with hypothetically probable acceptable effect on COVID-related consequences, which we completely focused in this comprehensive review.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

PubMed, Scopus, Science Direct, and Google Scholar have been searched. Study eligibility criteria: efficacy of NAC in various subclasses of pathogenic events which may occur during COVID-19 infection. Efficacy of NAC for managing inflammatory or any symptoms similar to symptoms of COVID-19 was reviewed and symptom improvements were assessed.

RESULTS

Randomized clinical trials introduced NAC as an antioxidant glutathione analog and detoxifying agent promoted for different medical conditions and pulmonary disorders to alleviate influenza and reduce mortality by 50% in influenza-infected animals. The beneficial effects of NAC on viral disorders, including Epstein-Barr virus, HIV and hepatitis, and well-known vital organ damages were also exist and reported.

CONCLUSION

We classified the probable effects of NAC as oxidative-regulatory and apoptotic-regulatory roles, antiviral activities, anti-inflammatory roles, preventive and therapeutic roles in lung disorders and better oxygenation functions, supportive roles in intensive care unit admitted patients and in sepsis, positive role in other comorbidities and nonpulmonary end-organ damages or failures and even in primary COVID-associated cutaneous manifestations. Based on different beneficial effects of NAC, it could be administered as a potential adjuvant therapy for COVID-19 considering patient status, contraindications, and possible drug-related adverse events.

Respiratory Management in Smoke Inhalation Injury

Smoke inhalation injury (SII) is a major morbidity and cause of mortality in patients with burns. Damage caused by inhalation of thermal or chemical irritants, including toxic fumes and chemicals, leads to respiratory cilia and epithelial cell injuries, which turn to severe bronchospasm and alveolar damage and results in acute respiratory distress syndrome. Respiratory management plays a vital role in the treatment of SII. In this review, we provide an overview of SII with emphasis on respiratory management, including aerosol therapy, bronchial hygiene therapy, advanced ventilation modes, and heated humidified high-flow nasal cannula. In summary, the information may be helpful for further improvements in outcomes.

A Multicenter Evaluation of Outcomes Following the Use of Nebulized Heparin for Inhalation Injury (HIHI2 Study)

Inhalation injury causes significant morbidity and mortality secondary to compromise of the respiratory system as well as systemic effects limiting perfusion and oxygenation. Nebulized heparin reduces fibrin cast formation and duration of mechanical ventilation in patients with inhalation injury. To date, no study has compared both dosing strategies of 5000 and 10,000 units to a matched control group. This multicenter, retrospective, case-control study included adult patients with bronchoscopy-confirmed inhalation injury. Each control patient, matched according to age and percent of total body surface area, was matched to a patient who received 5000 units and a patient who received 10,000 units of nebulized heparin. The primary endpoint of the study was duration of mechanical ventilation. Secondary endpoints included 28-day mortality, ventilator-free days in the first 28 days, difference in lung injury scores, length of hospitalization, incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia, and rate of major bleeding. Thirty-five matched patient trios met inclusion criteria. Groups were well-matched for age (P = .975) and total body surface area (P = .855). Patients who received nebulized heparin, either 5000 or 10,000 units, had 8 to 11 less days on the ventilator compared to controls (P = .001). Mortality ranged from 3 to 14% overall and was not statistically significant between groups. No major bleeding events related to nebulized heparin were reported. Mechanical ventilation days were significantly decreased in patients who received 5000 or 10,000 units of nebulized heparin. Nebulized heparin, either 5000 units or 10,000 units, is a safe and effective treatment for inhalation injury.

Nebulized Heparin for Adult Patients With Smoke Inhalation Injury: A Review of the Literature

Objective: To review the clinical effects of nebulized heparin and N-acetylcysteine (NAC) in patients with smoke inhalation injury (IHI) and provide recommendations for use. Data Sources: A search of PubMed, MEDLINE, and Scopus databases was completed from database inception through April 15, 2020, using terms: heparin, acetylcysteine, smoke inhalation injury, and burn injury. Study Selection and Data Extraction: All studies pertaining to efficacy and safety of nebulized heparin and/or NAC for IHI in adult patients were evaluated. Reference lists were reviewed for additional publications. Nonhuman studies, non-English, and case report publications were excluded. Data Synthesis: Eight studies were included. Four demonstrated positive outcomes, 3 demonstrated no benefit or possible harm, and 1 assessed safety. Supporting trials treated patients within 48 hours of injury with 10 000 units of nebulized heparin with NAC for 7 days or until extubation. Two trials with negative findings treated patients within 72 hours, or unspecified, with 5000 units of nebulized heparin with NAC for 7 days, while the third used 25 000 units within 36 hours but was grossly underpowered for analysis. Clinical findings include reduced duration of mechanical ventilation and improved lung function with possible increase risk of pneumonia and no evidence of increased bleeding risk. Conclusions: Nebulized heparin may improve oxygenation and reduce duration of mechanical ventilation in IHI. If nebulized heparin is used, 10 000 units every 4 hours alternating with NAC and albuterol at 4-hour intervals is recommended. Sterile technique should be emphasized. Monitoring for bronchospasm or new-onset pneumonia should be considered.

Nebulized heparin for inhalation injury in burn patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Smoke inhalation injury increases overall burn mortality. Locally applied heparin attenuates lung injury in burn animal models of smoke inhalation. It is uncertain whether local treatment of heparin is benefit for burn patients with inhalation trauma. We systematically reviewed published clinical trial data to evaluate the effectiveness of nebulized heparin in treating burn patients with inhalation injury.

Methods

A systematic search was undertaken in PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, the Chinese Journals Full-text Database, the China Biomedical Literature Database and the Wanfang Database to obtain clinical controlled trails evaluating nebulized heparin in the treatment of burn patients with inhalation injury. Patient and clinical characteristics, interventions and physiological and clinical outcomes were recorded. Cochrane Risk of Bias Evaluation Tool and the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale were used to evaluate data quality. Potential publication bias was assessed by Egger’s test. A sensitivity analysis was conducted to assess the stability of the results. The meta-analysis was conducted in R 3.5.1 software.

Results

Nine trials were eligible for the systematic review and meta-analysis. Nebulized heparin can reduce lung injury and improve lung function in burn patients with inhalation injury without abnormal coagulation or bleeding, but the findings are still controversial. Mortality in the heparin-treated group was lower than that of the traditional treatment group (relative risk (RR) 0.75). The duration of mechanical ventilation (DOMV) was shorter in the heparin-treated group compared to the traditional treatment group (standardized mean difference (SMD) −0.78). Length of hospital stay was significantly shorter than that in the traditional treatment group (SMD −0.42), but incidence rates of pneumonia and unplanned reintubation were not significantly different in the study groups (RRs 0.97 and 0.88, respectively). No statistically significant publication biases were detected for the above clinical endpoints (p > 0.05).

Conclusions

Based on conventional aerosol therapy, heparin nebulization can further reduce lung injury, improve lung function, shorten DOMV and length of hospital stay, and reduce mortality, although it does not reduce the incidence of pneumonia and/or the unplanned reintubation rate.

Nebulized Heparin in Burn Patients with Inhalation Trauma-Safety and Feasibility

Background: Pulmonary hypercoagulopathy is intrinsic to inhalation trauma. Nebulized heparin could theoretically be beneficial in patients with inhalation injury, but current data are conflicting. We aimed to investigate the safety, feasibility, and effectiveness of nebulized heparin. Methods: International multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial in specialized burn care centers. Adult patients with inhalation trauma received nebulizations of unfractionated heparin (25,000 international unit (IU), 5 mL) or placebo (0.9% NaCl, 5 mL) every four hours for 14 days or until extubation. The primary outcome was the number of ventilator-free days at day 28 post-admission. Here, we report on the secondary outcomes related to safety and feasibility. Results: The study was prematurely stopped after inclusion of 13 patients (heparin N = 7, placebo N = 6) due to low recruitment and high costs associated with the trial medication. Therefore, no analyses on effectiveness were performed. In the heparin group, serious respiratory problems occurred due to saturation of the expiratory filter following nebulizations. In total, 129 out of 427 scheduled nebulizations were withheld in the heparin group (in 3 patients) and 45 out of 299 scheduled nebulizations were withheld in the placebo group (in 2 patients). Blood-stained sputum or expected increased bleeding risks were the most frequent reasons to withhold nebulizations. Conclusion: In this prematurely stopped trial, we encountered important safety and feasibility issues related to frequent heparin nebulizations in burn patients with inhalation trauma. This should be taken into account when heparin nebulizations are considered in these patients.

A Critical Update of the Assessment and Acute Management of Patients with Severe Burns

Significance: Burns are debilitating, life threatening, and difficult to assess and manage. Recent advances in assessment and management have occurred since a comprehensive review of the care of patients with severe burns was last published, which may influence research and clinical practice. Recent Advances: Recent advances have occurred in the understanding of burn pathophysiology, which has led to the identification of potential biomarkers of burn severity, such as protein C. There is new evidence about the potential superiority of natural colloids over crystalloids during fluid resuscitation, and new evidence about components of initial and perioperative management, including an improved understanding of pain following burns. Critical Issues: The limitations of the clinical examination highlight the need for imaging and biomarkers to assist in estimations of burn severity. Fluid resuscitation reduces mortality, although there is conjecture over the ideal method. The subsequent perioperative period is associated with significant morbidity and the evidence for preventing and treating pain, infection, and fluid overload while maximizing wound healing potential is described. Future Directions: Promising developments are ongoing in imaging technology, histopathology, biomarkers, and wound healing adjuncts such as hyperbaric oxygen therapy, topical negative pressure therapy, stem cell treatments, and skin substitutes. The greatest benefit from further research on management of patients with burns would most likely be derived from the elucidation of optimal fluid resuscitation protocols, pain management protocols, and surgical techniques from randomized controlled trials.

Preclinical and clinical studies of smoke-inhalation-induced acute lung injury: update on both pathogenesis and innovative therapy

Smoke-inhalation-induced acute lung injury (SI-ALI) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in victims of fire tragedies. SI-ALI contributes to an estimated 30% of burn-caused patient deaths, and recently, more attention has been paid to the specific interventions for this devastating respiratory illness. In the last decade, much progress has been made in the understanding of SI-ALI patho-mechanisms and in the development of new therapeutic strategies in both preclinical and clinical studies. This article reviews the recent progress in the treatment of SI-ALI, based on pathophysiology, thermal damage, airway obstruction, the nuclear-factor kappa-B signaling pathway, and oxidative stress. Preclinical therapeutic strategies include use of mesenchymal stem cells, hydrogen sulfide, peroxynitrite decomposition catalysts, and proton-pump inhibitors. Clinical interventions include high-frequency percussive ventilation, perfluorohexane, inhaled anticoagulants, and nebulized epinephrine. The animal model, dose, clinical application, and pharmacology of these medications are summarized. Future directions and further needs for developing innovative therapies are discussed.

Airway management in inhalation injury: a case series

Inhalation injury is a serious consequence of a fire or an explosion, with potential airway compromise and respiratory complications. We present a case series of five patients with inhalational burns who presented to Singapore General Hospital and discuss our approach to their early management, including early evaluation and planning for the upper and lower airway, coexisting cutaneous burns, and monitoring their ICU (intensive care unit) severity of illness, sepsis and acute respiratory distress syndrome. All five patients suffered various grades of inhalation injury. The patients were initially assessed by nasolaryngoscopy, and three patients were prophylactically intubated before being sent to the emergency operating theatre for definitive airway and burns management with fibreoptic bronchoscopy. All patients were successfully extubated and discharged stable. Various complications can arise as a result of an inhalation injury. Based on our cases and literature review, we propose a standardised workflow for patients with inhalation injury.

Systematic review of clinical outcome reporting in randomised controlled trials of burn care

INTRODUCTION

Systematic reviews collate trial data to provide evidence to support clinical decision-making. For effective synthesis, there must be consistency in outcome reporting. There is no agreed set of outcomes for reporting the effect of burn care interventions. Issues with outcome reporting have been identified, although not systematically investigated. This study gathers empirical evidence on any variation in outcome reporting and assesses the need for a core outcome set for burn care research.

METHODS

Electronic searches of four search engines were undertaken from January 2012 to December 2016 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs), using medical subject headings and free text terms including 'burn', 'scald' 'thermal injury' and 'RCT'. Two authors independently screened papers, extracted outcomes verbatim and recorded the timing of outcome measurement. Duplicate outcomes (exact wording ± different spelling), similar outcomes (albumin in blood, serum albumin) and identical outcomes measured at different times were removed. Variation in outcome reporting was determined by assessing the number of unique outcomes reported across all included trials. Outcomes were classified into domains. Bias was reduced using five researchers and a patient working independently and together.

RESULTS

147 trials were included, of which 127 (86.4%) were RCTs, 13 (8.8%) pilot studies and 7 (4.8%) RCT protocols. 1494 verbatim clinical outcomes were reported; 955 were unique. 76.8% of outcomes were measured within 6 months of injury. Commonly reported outcomes were defined differently. Numbers of unique outcomes per trial varied from one to 37 (median 9; IQR 5,13). No single outcome was reported across all studies demonstrating inconsistency of reporting. Outcomes were classified into 54 domains. Numbers of outcomes per domain ranged from 1 to 166 (median 11; IQR 3,24).

CONCLUSIONS

This review has demonstrated heterogeneity in outcome reporting in burn care research which will hinder amalgamation of study data. We recommend the development of a Core Outcome Set.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42017060908.

Nebulized heparin and N-acetylcysteine for smoke inhalational injury: A case report

RATIONALE

Every year, ∼40,000 people suffer burn-related injuries in the United States. Despite recent advances, the odds of dying from exposure to fire, flames, or smoke are one in ∼1500. Smoke inhalation causes injury to the airways via a complex physiological process, and the treatment is mainly supportive. Many recent interventions aim to decrease the formation of fibrin casts, the main cause of airway damage in these patients. Among these, treatment with a combination of nebulized heparin and N-acetylcysteine (NAC) has shown benefit.

PATIENT CONCERNS

We describe the case of a 58-year-old man who presented after smoke inhalation during a fire. Soot was found in the nostrils when he was admitted to our hospital, and after he began coughing up carbonaceous material, he was electively intubated and placed on volume assist control ventilation.

DIAGNOSIS

Bronchoscopy on the first day of intensive care confirmed the injury from smoke inhalation and revealed mucosal edema and soot involving the tracheobronchial tree.

INTERVENTIONS AND OUTCOMES

Inhaled unfractionated heparin of 10,000 IU in 3 mL of 0.9% normal saline alternating every 2 hours with 3 mL of 20% NAC was started 48 hours after admission and continued for 7 days. Bronchoscopy on the fifth day of intensive care showed significant improvement in airway edema and a resolution of soot.

LESSONS

On the basis of our experience with this case and limited literature, we posit that nebulized heparin and NAC may be of benefit in patients with inhalational smoke-induced lung injury and mild-to-severe lung injury scores.

Outcomes Following the Use of Nebulized Heparin for Inhalation Injury (HIHI Study)

Inhalation injury (IHI) causes significant morbidity and mortality in burn victims due to both local and systemic effects. Nebulized heparin promotes improvement in lung function and decreased mortality in IHI by reducing the inflammatory response and fibrin cast formation. The study objective was to determine if nebulized heparin 10,000 units improves lung function and decreases mechanical ventilation duration, mortality, and hospitalization length in IHI with minimal systemic adverse events. This retrospective, case-control study evaluated efficacy and safety of nebulized heparin administered to mechanically ventilated adults admitted within 48 hr of confirmed IHI. Nebulized heparin 10,000 units was administered Q4H for 7 days, or until extubation if sooner, alternating with albuterol and a mucolytic. Patients were matched on a case-by-case basis based on percent TBSA burn and age to patients from a historical group with IHI before heparin protocol implementation. The primary outcome was duration of mechanical ventilation. Secondary outcomes included lung injury score, ventilator-free days during the first 28 days, 28-day mortality, hospitalization length, ventilator-associated pneumonia incidence, bronchoscopy incidence, and bleeding events. Data were collected in 72 patients, 36 of which received nebulized heparin and 36 historical controls. Two patients from the heparin group and three patients from the control group died/were discharged while on the ventilator. Data were analyzed separately with 1) all subjects included and 2) with subjects who died/were discharged on the ventilator excluded. In the latter comparison, patients receiving nebulized heparin demonstrated a statistically significant decrease in median (interquartile range) duration of initial mechanical ventilation compared with controls [7.0 (4.0, 13.5) vs. 14.5 (5.3, 22.3) days; P = .044]. Patients in the heparin group had a significantly increased number of median (interquartile range) ventilator-free days in the first 28 days [21.0 (14.5-24.0) vs 13.5 (4.3-22.8) days; P = .031]. There were no differences in hospitalization length, lung injury score during the first 7 days post injury, 28-day mortality, ventilator-associated pneumonia rate, or bleeding events. Nebulized heparin 10,000 units in conjunction with a beta-agonist and mucolytic produced a significant decrease in duration of mechanical ventilation and increase in ventilator-free days in adult patients with IHI. Nebulized heparin was safe and did not result in an increase in bleeding events. To our knowledge, this is the first case-control study with matched cohorts based on age and %TBSA which are significant factors contributing to morbidity and mortality in IHI.

Burns: Pathophysiology of Systemic Complications and Current Management

As a result of many years of research, the intricate cellular mechanisms of burn injury are slowly becoming clear. Yet, knowledge of these cellular mechanisms and a multitude of resulting studies have often failed to translate into improved clinical treatment for burn injuries. Perhaps the most valuable information to date is the years of clinical experience and observations in the management and treatment of patients, which has contributed to a gradual improvement in reported outcomes of mortality. This review provides a discussion of the cellular mechanisms and pathways involved in burn injury, resultant systemic effects on organ systems, current management and treatment, and potential therapies that we may see implemented in the future.

Anticoagulant therapy in acute respiratory distress syndrome

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) presents a complex pathophysiology characterized by pulmonary activated coagulation and reduced fibrinolysis. Despite advances in supportive care of this syndrome, morbidity and mortality remains high, leading to the need of novel therapies to combat this disease. Focus these therapies in the inhibition of ARDS development pathophysiology is essential. Beneficial effects of anticoagulants in ARDS have been proved in preclinical and clinical trials, thanks to its anticoagulant and anti-inflammatory properties. Moreover, local administration by nebulization in the alveolar compartment increases local efficacy and does not produce systemic bleeding. In this review the coagulation and fibrinolytic pathway and its pharmacological targets to treat ARDS are summarized.

Nebulized Heparin With N-Acetylcysteine and Albuterol Reduces Duration of Mechanical Ventilation in Patients With Inhalation Injury

OBJECTIVE

Nebulized heparin has been proposed to improve pulmonary function in patients with inhalation injuries. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of nebulized heparin with N-acetylcysteine (NAC) and albuterol on the duration of mechanical ventilation in burn patients.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study evaluating mechanically ventilated adult patients admitted to a regional burn center with inhalation injury. Outcomes were compared between patients who were prescribed a combination of nebulized heparin with NAC and albuterol versus similar patients who did not.

RESULTS

A total of 48 patients met inclusion criteria (heparin n = 22; nonheparin n = 26). Patients in the nonheparin group had higher percentage of total body surface area (TBSA) burned (29.00 [5.75-51.88] vs 5.25 [0.50-13.25] %TBSA; P = .009), longer duration of mechanical ventilation (6.50 [2.75-17.00] vs 3.00 [1.00-8.25] days; P = .022), and longer intensive care unit length of stay (LOS) (3.00 [3.00-28.75] vs 5.50 days [2.00-11.25]; P = .033). Upon regression, use of heparin was the only variable associated with reducing the duration of mechanical ventilation ( P = .039).

CONCLUSION

Nebulized heparin in combination with NAC and albuterol was associated with a significant reduction in the duration of mechanical ventilation.

Nebulized Heparin Attenuates Pulmonary Coagulopathy and Inflammation through Alveolar Macrophages in a Rat Model of Acute Lung Injury

Objective  Alveolar macrophages play a key role in the development and resolution of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), modulating the inflammatory response and the coagulation cascade in lungs. Anti-coagulants may be helpful in the treatment of ARDS. This study investigated the effects of nebulized heparin on the role of alveolar macrophages in limiting lung coagulation and inflammatory response in an animal model of acute lung injury (ALI).

Methods  Rats were randomized to four experimental groups. In three groups, ALI was induced by intratracheal instillation of lipopolysaccharide (LPS) and heparin was nebulized at constant oxygen flow: the LPS/Hep group received nebulized heparin 4 and 8 hours after injury; the Hep/LPS/Hep group received nebulized heparin 30 minutes before and 4 and 8 hours after LPS-induced injury; the LPS/Sal group received nebulized saline 4 and 8 hours after injury. The control group received only saline. Animals were exsanguinated 24 hours after LPS instillation. Lung tissue, bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) and alveolar macrophages isolated from BALF were analysed.

Results  LPS increased protein concentration, oedema and neutrophils in BALF as well as procoagulant and proinflammatory mediators in lung tissue and alveolar macrophages. In lung tissue, nebulized heparin attenuated ALI through decreasing procoagulant (tissue factor, thrombin–anti-thrombin complexes, fibrin degradation products) and proinflammatory (interleukin 6, tumour necrosis factor alpha) pathways. In alveolar macrophages, nebulized heparin reduced expression of procoagulant genes and the effectors of transforming growth factor beta (Smad 2, Smad 3) and nuclear factor kappa B (p-selectin, CCL-2). Pre-treatment resulted in more pronounced attenuation.

Conclusion  Nebulized heparin reduced pulmonary coagulopathy and inflammation without producing systemic bleeding, partly by modulating alveolar macrophages.

Role of heparin in pulmonary cell populations in an in-vitro model of acute lung injury

Background

In the early stages of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), pro-inflammatory mediators inhibit natural anticoagulant factors and initiate an increase in procoagulant activity. Previous studies proved the beneficial effects of heparin in pulmonary coagulopathy, which derive from its anticoagulant and anti-inflammatory activities, although it is uncertain whether heparin works. Understanding the specific effect of unfractioned heparin on cell lung populations would be of interest to increase our knowledge about heparin pathways and to treat ARDS.

Methods

In the current study, the effect of heparin was assessed in primary human alveolar macrophages (hAM), alveolar type II cells (hATII), and fibroblasts (hF) that had been injured with LPS.

Results

Heparin did not produce any changes in the Smad/TGFß pathway, in any of the cell types evaluated. Heparin reduced the expression of pro-inflammatory markers (TNF-α and IL-6) in hAM and deactivated the NF-kß pathway in hATII, diminishing the expression of IRAK1 and MyD88 and their effectors, IL-6, MCP-1 and IL-8.

Conclusions

The current study demonstrated that heparin significantly ameliorated the cells lung injury induced by LPS through the inhibition of pro-inflammatory cytokine expression in macrophages and the NF-kß pathway in alveolar cells. Our results suggested that a local pulmonary administration of heparin through nebulization may be able to reduce inflammation in the lung; however, further studies are needed to confirm this hypothesis.

Ventilation strategies in paediatric inhalation injury

Inhalation injury increases morbidity and mortality in burns victims. While the diagnosis remains largely clinical, bronchoscopy is also helpful to diagnose and grade the severity of any injury. Inhalation injury results from direct thermal injury or chemical irritation of the respiratory tract, systemic toxicity from inhaled substances, or a combination of these factors. While endotracheal intubation is essential in cases where upper airway obstruction may occur, it has its own risks and should not be performed prophylactically in all cases of inhalation injury. The evidence-base informing the selection of optimal ventilation strategy in inhalation injury is sparse, and most recommendations are based on extrapolation from (largely adult) studies in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Conventional ventilation using a lung-protective approach (i.e. low tidal volume, limited plateau pressure, and permissive hypercarbia) is recommended as the initial approach if invasive ventilation is required; various rescue strategies may become necessary if there is a poor response. The efficacy of many widely used pharmacologic adjuncts in inhalation injury remains uncertain. Further research is urgently required to address these gaps in our knowledge.

Coagulopathy and its management in patients with severe burns

Severe burn injury is associated with systemic coagulopathy. The changes in coagulation described in patients with severe burns resemble those found patients with sepsis or major trauma. Coagulopathy in patients with severe burns is characterized by procoagulant changes, and impaired fibrinolytic and natural anticoagulation systems. Both the timing of onset and the severity of hemostatic derangements are related to the severity of the burn. The exact pathophysiology and time course of coagulopathy are uncertain, but, at least in part, result from hemodilution and hypothermia. As the occurrence of coagulopathy in patients with severe burns is associated with increased comorbidity and mortality, coagulopathy could be seen as a potential therapeutic target. Clear guidelines for the treatment of coagulopathy in patients with severe burns are lacking, but supportive measures and targeted treatments have been proposed. Supportive measures are aimed at avoiding preventable triggers such as tissue hypoperfusion caused by shock, or hemodilution and hypothermia following the usually aggressive fluid resuscitation in these patients. Suggested targeted treatments that could benefit patients with severe burns include systemic treatment with anticoagulants, but sufficient randomized controlled trial evidence is lacking.

Nebulized heparin for patients under mechanical ventilation: an individual patient data meta-analysis

Pulmonary coagulopathy is a characteristic feature of lung injury including ventilator-induced lung injury. The aim of this individual patient data meta-analysis is to assess the effects of nebulized anticoagulants on outcome of ventilated intensive care unit (ICU) patients. A systematic search of PubMed (1966-2014), Scopus, EMBASE, and Web of Science was conducted to identify relevant publications. Studies evaluating nebulization of anticoagulants in ventilated patients were screened for inclusion, and corresponding authors of included studies were contacted to provide individual patient data. The primary endpoint was the number of ventilator-free days and alive at day 28. Secondary endpoints included hospital mortality, ICU- and hospital-free days at day 28, and lung injury scores at day seven. We constructed a propensity score-matched cohort for comparisons between patients treated with nebulized anticoagulants and controls. Data from five studies (one randomized controlled trial, one open label study, and three studies using historical controls) were included in the meta-analysis, compassing 286 patients. In all studies unfractionated heparin was used as anticoagulant. The number of ventilator-free days and alive at day 28 was higher in patients treated with nebulized heparin compared to patients in the control group (14 [IQR 0-23] vs. 6 [IQR 0-22]), though the difference did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.459). The number of ICU-free days and alive at day 28 was significantly higher, and the lung injury scores at day seven were significantly lower in patients treated with nebulized heparin. In the propensity score-matched analysis, there were no differences in any of the endpoints. This individual patient data meta-analysis provides no convincing evidence for benefit of heparin nebulization in intubated and ventilated ICU patients. The small patient numbers and methodological shortcomings of included studies underline the need for high-quality well-powered randomized controlled trials.

Analysis and prediction of drug-drug interaction by minimum redundancy maximum relevance and incremental feature selection

Drug-drug interaction (DDI) defines a situation in which one drug affects the activity of another when both are administered together. DDI is a common cause of adverse drug reactions and sometimes also leads to improved therapeutic effects. Therefore, it is of great interest to discover novel DDIs according to their molecular properties and mechanisms in a robust and rigorous way. This paper attempts to predict effective DDIs using the following properties: (1) chemical interaction between drugs; (2) protein interactions between the targets of drugs; and (3) target enrichment of KEGG pathways. The data consisted of 7323 pairs of DDIs collected from the DrugBank and 36,615 pairs of drugs constructed by randomly combining two drugs. Each drug pair was represented by 465 features derived from the aforementioned three categories of properties. The random forest algorithm was adopted to train the prediction model. Some feature selection techniques, including minimum redundancy maximum relevance and incremental feature selection, were used to extract key features as the optimal input for the prediction model. The extracted key features may help to gain insights into the mechanisms of DDIs and provide some guidelines for the relevant clinical medication developments, and the prediction model can give new clues for identification of novel DDIs.