Purpose
Colloids are administered to more patients than crystalloids, although recent evidence suggests that colloids may possibly be harmful in some patients. The European Society of Intensive Care ...Medicine therefore assembled a task force to compile consensus recommendations based on the current best evidence for the safety and efficacy of the currently most frequently used colloids—hydroxyethyl starches (HES), gelatins and human albumin.
Methods
Meta-analyses, systematic reviews and clinical studies of colloid use were evaluated for the treatment of volume depletion in mixed intensive care unit (ICU), cardiac surgery, head injury, sepsis and organ donor patients. Clinical endpoints included mortality, kidney function and bleeding. The relevance of concentration and dosage was also assessed. Publications from 1960 until May 2011 were included. The quality of available evidence and strength of recommendations were based on the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.
Recommendations and conclusions
We recommend not to use HES with molecular weight ≥200 kDa and/or degree of substitution >0.4 in patients with severe sepsis or risk of acute kidney injury and suggest not to use 6% HES 130/0.4 or gelatin in these populations. We recommend not to use colloids in patients with head injury and not to administer gelatins and HES in organ donors. We suggest not to use hyperoncotic solutions for fluid resuscitation. We conclude and recommend that any new colloid should be introduced into clinical practice only after its patient-important safety parameters are established.
To review and revise the 1987 pediatric brain death guidelines.
Relevant literature was reviewed. Recommendations were developed using the GRADE system.
(1) Determination of brain death in term ...newborns, infants and children is a clinical diagnosis based on the absence of neurologic function with a known irreversible cause of coma. Because of insufficient data in the literature, recommendations for preterm infants less than 37 weeks gestational age are not included in this guideline. (2) Hypotension, hypothermia, and metabolic disturbances should be treated and corrected and medications that can interfere with the neurologic examination and apnea testing should be discontinued allowing for adequate clearance before proceeding with these evaluations. (3) Two examinations including apnea testing with each examination separated by an observation period are required. Examinations should be performed by different attending physicians. Apnea testing may be performed by the same physician. An observation period of 24 hours for term newborns (37 weeks gestational age) to 30 days of age, and 12 hours for infants and chi (> 30 days to 18 years) is recommended. The first examination determines the child has met the accepted neurologic examination criteria for brain death. The second examination confirms brain death based on an unchanged and irreversible condition. Assessment of neurologic function following cardiopulmonary resuscitation or other severe acute brain injuries should be deferred for 24 hours or longer if there are concerns or inconsistencies in the examination. (4) Apnea testing to support the diagnosis of brain death must be performed safely and requires documentation of an arterial Paco(2) 20 mm Hg above the baseline and ≥ 60 mm Hg with no respiratory effort during the testing period. If the apnea test cannot be safely completed, an ancillary study should be performed. (5) Ancillary studies (electroencephalogram and radionuclide cerebral blood flow) are not required to establish brain death and are not a substitute for the neurologic examination. Ancillary studies may be us d to assist the clinician in making the diagnosis of brain death (i) when components of the examination or apnea testing cannot be completed safely due to the underlying medical condition of the patient; (ii) if there is uncertainty about the results of the neurologic examination; (iii) if a medication effect may be present; or (iv) to reduce the inter-examination observation period. When ancillary studies are used, a second clinical examination and apnea test should be performed and components that can be completed must remain consistent with brain death. In this instance the observation interval may be shortened and the second neurologic examination and apnea test (or all components that are able to be completed safely) can be performed at any time thereafter. (6) Death is declared when the above criteria are fulfilled.
The GRADE system can be used to grade the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations for diagnostic tests or strategies. Here, in the fourth article of a five-part series, Schunemann et al ...describe how guideline developers are using GRADE to rate the quality of evidence and move from evidence to a recommendation for diagnostic tests and strategies. They discuss why guideline panels should be cautious when they use evidence of the accuracy of tests as the basis for recommendations and why evidence of test accuracy often provides low quality evidence for making recommendations. Finally, they conclude that, as for the other management recommendations, the GRADE approach to grading the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations for diagnostic tests provides a comprehensive and transparent approach for developing these recommendations. Recognizing that test results are surrogates for patient-important outcomes is central to this approach.
Issues of financial and intellectual conflict of interest in clinical practice guidelines have raised increasing concern. Professional organizations have responded by more rigorous regulation of ...conflict of interest. Nevertheless, tension remains between the competing goals of optimizing guideline quality by using the experience and insight of experts and ensuring that financial and intellectual conflicts of interest do not influence recommendations. The executive committee of the American College of Chest Physicians' Antithrombotic Guidelines has developed a strategy comprising 3 innovative aspects to address this tension: First, place equal emphasis on intellectual and financial conflicts and provide explicit criteria for both; second, a methodologist without important conflicts of interest should have primary responsibility for each chapter; and third, experts with important financial or intellectual conflicts of interest can collect and interpret evidence, but only panel members without important conflicts can be involved in developing the recommendation for a specific question. These strategies may help to achieve the benefits of expert input without conflicts of interest influencing recommendations.
Abstract Objectives In this article, we describe how to include considerations about resource utilization when making recommendations according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, ...Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Study Design and Settings We focus on challenges with rating the confidence in effect estimates (quality of evidence) and incorporating resource use into evidence profiles and Summary of Findings (SoF) tables. Results GRADE recommends that important differences in resource use between alternative management strategies should be included along with other important outcomes in the evidence profile and SoF table. Key steps in considering resources in making recommendations with GRADE are the identification of items of resource use that may differ between alternative management strategies and that are potentially important to decision makers, finding evidence for the differences in resource use, making judgments regarding confidence in effect estimates using the same criteria used for health outcomes, and valuing the resource use in terms of costs for the specific setting for which recommendations are being made. Conclusions With our framework, decision makers will have access to concise summaries of recommendations, including ratings of the quality of economic evidence, and better understand the implications for clinical decision making.
In the last part of a series of articles, describing the GRADE (Grading Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach to making recommendation, Guyatt et al look at how guideline ...panelists and clinicians can incorporate matters related to resource use into recommendations and practice. Clinical recommendations inevitably involve judgments about the allocation of resources, judgments commonly referred to as costs. In addition, some of the challenges of considering costs are discussed. The reasons for focusing on resource use rather than costs are also explained. Finally, Guyatt et al discuss how to incorporate considerations of resource use into recommendations.
Populations such as healthcare workers (HCW) that are unable to practice physical distancing are at high risk of acquiring Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). In these cases pharmacological ...prophylaxis would be a solution to reduce severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS CoV-2) transmission. Hydroxychloroquine has in vitro antiviral properties against SARS CoV-2. We therefore sought to determine the efficacy and safety of hydroxychloroquine as prophylaxis for COVID-19.
We electronically searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, the Cochrane COVID-19 Register of Controlled Trials, Epistemonikos COVID-19, clinicaltrials.gov, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform up to September 28th, 2020 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We calculated pooled relative risks (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes with the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using a random-effect model. We identified four RCTs (n = 4921) that met our eligibility criteria. The use of hydroxychloroquine, compared to placebo, did not reduce the risks of developing COVID-19 (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.04, moderate certainty), hospitalization (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.50, moderate certainty), or mortality (RR 3.26, 95% CI 0.13 to 79.74, low certainty), however, hydroxychloroquine use increased the risk of adverse events (RR 2.76, 95% CI 1.38 to 5.55, moderate certainty).
Although pharmacologic prophylaxis is an attractive preventive strategy against COVID-19, the current body of evidence failed to show clinical benefit for prophylactic hydroxychloroquine and showed a higher risk of adverse events when compared to placebo or no prophylaxis.
Celotno besedilo
Dostopno za:
DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NUK, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, SIK, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
PDF
