Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica最新文献

Background: The glycemic response to critical COVID-19 remains uncertain. We aimed to assess the association between COVID-19, insulin requirements, glycemic control, and mortality in intensive care unit (ICU) patients.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective observational study of 350 COVID-19 patients and 1067 non-COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU. Insulin requirement was defined as the total units of exogenous insulin required to cover one gram of administered carbohydrates (insulin-to-carbohydrate ratio, ICR). We used multivariable generalized linear mixed-model (GLMM) analysis to assess the association of the interaction between COVID-19 and ICU-day with daily ICR, adjusted for fixed and time-dependent covariates. Glycemic control was assessed after stratification on diabetes and COVID-19. We used multivariable logistic regression analysis to assess the association between ICR and 90-day mortality.

Results: The mean (95% CI) of the mean daily ICR among patients without diabetes was 0.09 (0.08-0.11) U/g and 0.15 (0.11-0.18) U/g in the non-COVID-19 group and COVID-19 group (p = .01), respectively. In diabetes patients, the corresponding ICRs were 0.52 (0.43-0.62) U/g and 0.59 (0.50-0.68) U/g (p = .32). In multivariable GLMM analysis, the interaction between COVID-19 and ICU-day was independently associated with ICR (risk estimate 1.22, 95% CI 1.15-1.31, p < .001). COVID-19 was associated with higher hypoglycemia prevalence irrespective of diabetes status, higher average glucose levels, more pronounced glucose variability, and a lower proportion of glucose values within target range among patients without diabetes. On multivariable logistic regression analysis, the adjusted odds ratio for 90-day mortality was 1.77 (95% CI 0.94-3.34, p = .076) per one unit increase in mean ICR.

Conclusion: In our cohort of ICU patients, COVID-19 was associated with higher daily insulin requirements per gram of administered carbohydrates, and worse glycemic control. We found no robust association between ICR and increased odds of death at 90 days.

Background: Childbirth remains one of the most painful experiences for women. Patient-controlled epidural analgesia provides the women in labor with self-control and thereby a shorter time interval between onset of pain and administration of analgesia, thus potentially improving the childbirth experience. This scoping review aims to investigate PCEA during labor involving maternal satisfaction, risks of adverse effects and obstetric interventions by mapping the evidence and identifying gaps in the current evidence base.

Methods: The forthcoming review will adhere to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) and the JBI methodology for scoping reviews. A systematic search will be carried out across major peer-reviewed databases and gray literature will be sought. All study types involving women in labor receiving PCEA will be eligible for inclusion. The extracted data will be charted regarding trial characteristics, population/participation characteristics, interventions, outcomes, and key findings.

Results: The results will be presented through relevant tables, figures, and graphs when appropriate. Alongside this, we present the data descriptively to explain how the results align with the objectives of the review.

Conclusion: PCEA offers women greater autonomy during childbirth, making it essential to examine its effects and potential risks. By mapping current evidence regarding PCEA, this review aims to identify knowledge gaps and provide insights to enhance maternal care and improve childbirth experiences.

Background: Continuous vital sign monitoring detects far more severe vital sign deviations (SVDs) than intermittent clinical rounds, and deviations are to some extent related to subsequent serious adverse events (SAEs). Early detection of SAEs is pivotal to allow for effective interventions but the time relationship between detection of SAEs by continuous vital sign monitoring versus clinical practice is not well-described at the general ward.

Aim: To quantify the time difference between detection of SAEs by continuous vital sign monitoring and clinical suspicion of deterioration (CSD) in major abdominal surgery patients.

Methods: Five hundred and five patients had their vital signs continuously monitored in combination with usual clinical practice consisting of National Early Warning Score assessments at least every 8'th hour, assessments during rounds, and other kinds of staff-patient interactions. The primary outcome was the time difference between the first chart note of CSD versus the first SVD, detected by continuous vital sign monitoring, in patients with a subsequent confirmed SAE during or up to 48 h after end of continuous vital sign monitoring.

Results: Out of the 505 continuously monitored patients, 142 patients had a combination of both postoperative SAE, CSD and SVD, and thus were included in the primary analysis. The median time from the first SVD to SAE was 42.8 h (interquartile range 19.8-72.1 h) compared to 13 minutes (interquartile range - 4.8 to 3.5 h) for CSD with a median difference of 48.1 h (95% confidence interval 43.0-54.8 h), p-value < .001.

Conclusion: Continuous vital sign monitoring detects signs of oncoming SAEs in the form of SVD hours before CSD, potentially allowing for earlier and more effective treatments to reduce the extent of SAEs.

Background: New-onset atrial fibrillation or flutter (NOAF) is a common arrhythmia in adult intensive care unit (ICU) patients. Intravenous amiodarone is one of the most used anti-arrhythmic drugs, despite its risk of inducing acute amiodarone-induced pulmonary toxicity (APT). We aimed to outline the body of evidence on acute APT in ICU patients with NOAF.

Methods: We performed a systematic search using the population, intervention, comparison, and outcome (PICO) approach. We included studies of adults admitted to the ICU, who developed NOAF during their ICU stay, were treated with amiodarone, and reported on acute APT, irrespective of research design. The CASE guidelines were applied to evaluate the quality of the included studies, and study results are reported in accordance with the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

Results: No randomised controlled trials or observational studies were identified. Nine case reports and one retrospective case series of fatal outcomes in ICU patients treated with amiodarone for NOAF constituted the evidence base. The quality of the included studies was high with a mean of 10 (range 8-12) of the 13 CASE guideline criteria fulfilled. The studies included a total of 16 critically ill adults who was diagnosed with acute APT after a mean of 9 days (range 2-20 days) following initiation of amiodarone with a mean total dose of amiodarone of 4553 mg (range 1100-13,500 mg) predominantly administrated intravenously. Three out of nine patients in the case reports died in the ICU during the amiodarone treatment. No long-term follow-up was conducted for the survivors.

Conclusion: Acute APT in adult ICU patients treated with amiodarone for NOAF is poorly described and is based on a total of 16 reported cases. Additional studies assessing the safety of amiodarone in critically ill adults with NOAF in the ICU is warranted.

Background: Severe acute respiratory syndrome (ARDS) may require veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-V ECMO). The aim of this study was to provide data on patient selection and outcome in a nationwide cohort study of patients with COVID-19 associated ARDS supported with V-V ECMO.

Methods: We identified all patients with COVID-19, who were supported with V-V ECMO in Denmark from March 10, 2020, to December 31, 2021, and retrieved data on patients who were referred to- and accepted for ECMO, demographics, outcome data, and complications. Risk factors for mortality were analysed using multivariate Cox regression analysis.

Results: During the study period, 1836 patients were admitted to Danish intensive care units (ICUs). In the same period, there were 197 enquiries for ECMO of whom 118 patients were considered eligible. Overall, 71 patients were cannulated for ECMO; three patients were cannulated for veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-A ECMO) due to right sided heart failure and 68 patients were cannulated for V-V ECMO. Two patients accepted for V-V ECMO died during cannulation. The median age was 55 years (IQR 45-60) and 66% were males. The median duration of ECMO support was 13 days (IQR 7-21), mechanical ventilation median 26 days (IQR 14-42), ICU stay median 34 days (IQR 17-46), and length of hospital stay median 41 days (IQR 25-56). Ninety-day mortality was 43%. Age of 60 years or more was associated with an increased risk of mortality. Pre-existing hypertension was associated with a decreased risk of mortality.

Conclusion: A nationwide, Danish cohort study of 68 COVID-19 patients supported with V-V ECMO, showed a 90-day survival of 43%, which is in accordance with reports from comparable cohorts. Age of 60 years or more was associated with an increased risk of mortality. Pre-existing hypertension was associated with a decreased risk of mortality.

Background: The anterior quadratus lumborum (QL) block may be used for postoperative pain management for intra-abdominal surgeries, but the evidence is uncertain. We aimed to investigate the benefit and harm of the anterior QL block compared to placebo/no block for intra-abdominal surgery.

Methods: We searched Medline, Embase, and CENTRAL for randomized controlled trials investigating anterior QL block for postoperative pain management for adult patients undergoing any intra-abdominal surgery. The two co-primary outcomes were cumulative 24-h opioid consumption and serious adverse events. We performed meta-analysis, trial sequential analysis (TSA), assessed the risk of bias, and present the certainty of evidence with the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach.

Results: Thirty-five trials randomizing 2418 patients were included in the meta-analyses. Anterior QL block may reduce cumulative 24-h intravenous opioid consumption compared to placebo/no block (MD -10.42 mg, 96.7% CI -14.83 to -6.01, TSA-adjusted CI -17.03 to -3.82, p < .01). Two trials reported on SAEs. Anterior QL block may have little to no effect on the number of serious adverse events compared to placebo (RR 1.49, 96.7% CI 0.19 to 11.47, p = .68), but the evidence is very uncertain. All trial results were assessed as being high risk of bias.

Conclusions: The anterior QL block may reduce cumulative 24-h opioid consumption. Reported serious adverse events were few and the anterior QL block may have little to no effect on the number of SAEs, but the evidence was very uncertain.