Impact on patient outcome of emergency department length of stay prior to ICU admission

OBJECTIVE

The favorable evolution of critically ill patients is often dependent on time-sensitive care intervention. The timing of transfer to the intensive care unit (ICU) therefore may be an important determinant of outcomes in critically ill patients. The aim of this study was to analyze the impact upon patient outcome of the length of stay in the Emergency Care Department.

DESIGN

A single-center ambispective cohort study was carried out.

SETTING

A general ICU and Emergency Care Department (ED) of a single University Hospital.

PATIENTS

We included 269 patients consecutively transferred to the ICU from the ED over an 18-month period.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were first grouped into different cohorts based on ED length of stay (LOS), and were then divided into two groups: (a) ED LOS ≤5h and (b) ED LOS >5h.

VARIABLES

Demographic, diagnostic, length of stay and mortality data were compared among the groups.

RESULTS

Median ED LOS was 277min (IQR 129-622). Patients who developed ICU complications had a longer ED LOS compared to those who did not (349min vs. 209min, p<0.01). A total of 129 patients (48%) had ED LOS >5h. The odds ratio of dying for patients with ED LOS >5h was 2.5 (95% CI 1.3-4.7). Age and sepsis diagnosis were the risk factors associated to prolongation of ED length of stay.

CONCLUSIONS

A prolonged ED stay prior to ICU admission is related to the development of time-dependent complications and increased mortality. These findings suggest possible benefit from earlier ICU transfer and the prompt initiation of organ support.

In vitro AN69 and Polysulphone Membrane Permeability to Ceftazidime and in vivo Pharmacokinetics during Continuous Renal Replacement Therapies

BACKGROUND

Ceftazidime is a third-generation cephalosporin almost entirely eliminated by glomerular filtration and dose reductions are essential in patients with renal impairment. The physicochemical and pharmacokinetic properties of ceftazidime make it susceptible to be eliminated by continuous renal replacement therapies (CRRT), but there is little clinical information to guide the correct administration in patients undergoing these techniques.

METHODS

In vitro procedures were carried out in three different fluids, using AN69 or polysulphone membranes. Four patients entered the in vivo study. Two patients received 1,000 mg every 6 h and the other two 2,000 mg every 6 h. Concentrations of ceftazidime were measured by high-performance liquid chromatography.

RESULTS

No differences were detected in thesieving coefficients (Sc) or saturation coefficients (Sa)between membranes during continuous venovenous hemofiltration (CVVH) or continuous venovenous hemodiafiltration (CVVHD). Sc-Sa values were close to 1 when Ringer's lactate was used as ceftazidime vehicle, but were lower in plasma samples (p < 0.05). In patients, the Sc-Sa was 0.93 +/- 0.06 and correlated well with the unbound fraction (0.86 +/- 0.08). The contribution of CRRT to ceftazidime clearance was higher in anuric patients than in nonanuric patients.

CONCLUSIONS

No differences were shown in vitro in the Sc obtained with both membranes during CVVH or the Sa obtained during CVVHD. The contribution of clearance by CRRT to total clearance is clearly dependent on the renal function. The administration of ceftazidime every 6 h could be associated with unnecessarily high trough levels which increase the risk of drug nephrotoxicity. Nonanuric patients undergoing CRRT need higher ceftazidime doses to reach adequate plasma concentrations against pathogens isolated in the critically ill.

Comparative study of propofol versus midazolam in the sedation of critically ill patients: results of a prospective, randomized, multicenter trial

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effectiveness, characteristics, duration of action, hemodynamic and biochemical effects, and side effects of propofol and midazolam used for continuous intravenous sedation of ventilated critically ill patients.

DESIGN

Multicenter, prospective, randomized, nonblinded study.

SETTING

Nine Spanish general intensive care units (ICUs).

PATIENTS

Ninety-eight patients admitted to the ICU who were mechanically ventilated and required sedation for a minimum of 48 hrs.

INTERVENTIONS

Propofol or midazolam was used for induction and maintenance of continuous intravenous sedation for a maximum of 5 days. The effectiveness of those two regimens was assessed according to their effects on ventilatory management and the presence of agitation.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

In 93% of the patients studied, there was a medical cause necessitating mechanical ventilation. The mean (+/-SD) duration of sedation was 81 +/- 25 hrs and 88 +/- 27 hrs for the propofol and midazolam groups, respectively. The induction dose was 2.24 +/- 0.43 mg/kg over 318 +/- 363 secs for propofol, and 0.22 +/-0.07 mg/kg over 33 +/-29 secs for midazolam. The maintenance dose was 2.8 +/-1.1 mg/kg/hr for propofol and 0.14 +/- 0.10 mg/kg/hr for midazolam. There was no difference regarding the opiate and muscle relaxant requirements between the two groups. Sedation with propofol was more effective in achieving patient-ventilator synchrony than that with midazolam after the first hour of treatment (p < .01). Patients sedated with propofol awoke more rapidly and with less variability that those patients sedated with midazolam (23 +/- 16 mins vs. 137 +/- 185 mins, respectively, p < .05), particularly in those patients requiring deep sedation (27 +/- 16 mins vs. 237 +/- 222 mins, respectively, p < .01). No hemodynamic or biochemical changes were detected in any of the treatment groups. During induction, five patients in the propofol group and two patients in the midazolam group had hypotension.

CONCLUSIONS

In this population of critically ill patients, propofol is an effective and safe alternative for sedation, with some advantages, such as short duration of action and high effectiveness over the conventional regimen with benzodiazepines and opiates.