Oversedation has adverse effects on critically ill patients. The Analgosedation and Delirium Committee of the FEPIMCTI (Pan-American and Iberian Federation of Critical Care Medicine and Intensive Care) conducted a cross-sectional study through a survey addressed to ICU physicians: PANDEMIC (Pan-American and Iberian Study on the Management of Analgosedation and Delirium in Critical Care [fepImCti]). HYPOTHESIS: Worsening of these practices in the course of the pandemic and that continued afterwards, with further oversedation. OBJECTIVES: Perception of analgosedation and delirium practices in Pan-American and Iberian ICUs before, during and after the COVID-19 pandemic, and factors associated with persistent oversedation after the pandemic. Of the 1008 respondents, 25% perceived oversedation after the pandemic (95%CI 22.4-27.8). This perception was higher in South America (35.8%, P < .001). Main risk factor: habit acquired during the pandemic (adjusted OR [aOR] 3.16, 95%CI 2.24-4.45, P < .001). Main protective factor: delirium monitoring before the pandemic (aOR 0.70, 95%CI 0.50-0.98, P = .038). The factors identified in this study provide a basis for targeting future interventions.
In patients with spontaneous or traumatic intracranial hemorrhage, hematoma expansion is associated with poorer neurological outcomes and increased mortality. The administration of an antifibrinolytic agent like tranexamic acid (TXA) may potentially improve clinical outcomes in patients with acute brain injury by preventing such intracranial expansion. However, studies on the impact of TXA in these patients have yielded variable results, and its efficacy, appropriate dosing and optimal timing of administration remain unclear. The present review summarizes the clinical evidence regarding the proper use of tranexamic acid in the treatment of intracranial traumatic and non-traumatic hemorrhage, and its implications for clinical practice.
Objective: Evaluate the incidence of hypotension during the weaning phase of vasopressors.
Design: A single-center, open-label randomized clinical trial between May and December 2022.
Setting: a tertiary care academic medical center.
Patients: 91 adult patients over 18 years of age with septic shock (according to Sepsis-3).
Intervention: Patients were divided into two groups: initial reduction of norepinephrine or initial reduction of vasopressin.
Main variables of interest: The primary outcome was the incidence of hypotension within the first 24 h after reducing vasopressors. Additionally, the clinical impact of this hypotension was assessed through mortality, length of hospital stay, duration of vasopressor use, incidence of arrhythmias, and prevalence of hemodialysis.
Results: Out of a total of 91 patients, 78 were included in the analysis: 39 in the norepinephrine group and 39 in the vasopressin group. Despite a numerically significant difference in the incidence of hypotension between the groups (norepinephrine 43.6%, vasopressin 25.6%), there was no statistical difference (p = 0.153, relative risk = 1.7, 95% confidence interval: 0.9-3.2). In this sample, vasopressin withdrawal was predominantly titrated. There were no differences between the groups in terms of the evaluated clinical outcomes.
Conclusion: No differences were detected in the incidence of hypotension when weaning was initiated with norepinephrine or vasopressin, although it was non significantly higher in norepinephrine group. In our sample, vasopressin withdrawal was titrated, which differs from North American practice. Brazilian Clinical Trials Registry (REBEC: RBR-10smbw65).
Clinicaltrials: gov platform (NCT05506319).