Reducing tidal volume decreases mortality in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). However, the effect of the timing of low tidal volume ventilation is not well understood.
To evaluate the ...association of intensive care unit (ICU) mortality with initial tidal volume and with tidal volume change over time.
Multivariable, time-varying Cox regression analysis of a multisite, prospective study of 482 patients with ARDS with 11,558 twice-daily tidal volume assessments (evaluated in milliliter per kilogram of predicted body weight PBW) and daily assessment of other mortality predictors.
An increase of 1 ml/kg PBW in initial tidal volume was associated with a 23% increase in ICU mortality risk (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.23; 95% confidence interval CI, 1.06-1.44; P = 0.008). Moreover, a 1 ml/kg PBW increase in subsequent tidal volumes compared with the initial tidal volume was associated with a 15% increase in mortality risk (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.02-1.29; P = 0.019). Compared with a prototypical patient receiving 8 days with a tidal volume of 6 ml/kg PBW, the absolute increase in ICU mortality (95% CI) of receiving 10 and 8 ml/kg PBW, respectively, across all 8 days was 7.2% (3.0-13.0%) and 2.7% (1.2-4.6%). In scenarios with variation in tidal volume over the 8-day period, mortality was higher when a larger volume was used earlier.
Higher tidal volumes shortly after ARDS onset were associated with a greater risk of ICU mortality compared with subsequent tidal volumes. Timely recognition of ARDS and adherence to low tidal volume ventilation is important for reducing mortality. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT 00300248).
BACKGROUND:Long-term outcomes from sepsis are poorly understood, and sepsis in patients may have different long-term effects on mortality and quality of life. Long-term outcome studies of other ...critical illnesses such as acute lung injury have demonstrated incremental health effects that persist after hospital discharge. Whether patients with sepsis have similar long-term mortality and quality-of-life effects is unclear.
OBJECTIVE:We performed a systematic review of studies reporting long-term mortality and quality-of-life data (>3 months) in patients with sepsis, severe sepsis, and septic shock using defined search criteria.
DESIGN:Systematic review of the literature.
INTERVENTIONS:None.
MAIN RESULTS:Patients with sepsis showed ongoing mortality up to 2 yrs and beyond after the standard 28-day inhospital mortality end point. Patients with sepsis also had decrements in quality-of-life measures after hospital discharge. Results were consistent across varying severity of illness and different patient populations in different countries, including large and small studies. In addition, these results were consistent within observational and randomized, controlled trials. Study quality was limited by inadequate control groups and poor adjustment for confounding variables.
CONCLUSIONS:Patients with sepsis have ongoing mortality beyond short-term end points, and survivors consistently demonstrate impaired quality of life. The use of 28-day mortality as an end point for clinical studies may lead to inaccurate inferences. Both observational and interventional future studies should include longer-term end points to better-understand the natural history of sepsis and the effect of interventions on patient morbidities.
OBJECTIVE:To provide an update to “Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock2012.”
DESIGN:A consensus committee of 55 international experts representing 25 ...international organizations was convened. Nominal groups were assembled at key international meetings (for those committee members attending the conference). A formal conflict-of-interest (COI) policy was developed at the onset of the process and enforced throughout. A stand-alone meeting was held for all panel members in December 2015. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee served as an integral part of the development.
METHODS:The panel consisted of five sectionshemodynamics, infection, adjunctive therapies, metabolic, and ventilation. Population, intervention, comparison, and outcomes (PICO) questions were reviewed and updated as needed, and evidence profiles were generated. Each subgroup generated a list of questions, searched for best available evidence, and then followed the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system to assess the quality of evidence from high to very low, and to formulate recommendations as strong or weak, or best practice statement when applicable.
RESULTS:The Surviving Sepsis Guideline panel provided 93 statements on early management and resuscitation of patients with sepsis or septic shock. Overall, 32 were strong recommendations, 39 were weak recommendations, and 18 were best-practice statements. No recommendation was provided for four questions.
CONCLUSIONS:Substantial agreement exists among a large cohort of international experts regarding many strong recommendations for the best care of patients with sepsis. Although a significant number of aspects of care have relatively weak support, evidence-based recommendations regarding the acute management of sepsis and septic shock are the foundation of improved outcomes for these critically ill patients with high mortality.
Objective
To provide an update to “Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2012”.
Design
A consensus committee of 55 international experts representing 25 ...international organizations was convened. Nominal groups were assembled at key international meetings (for those committee members attending the conference). A formal conflict-of-interest (COI) policy was developed at the onset of the process and enforced throughout. A stand-alone meeting was held for all panel members in December 2015. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee served as an integral part of the development.
Methods
The panel consisted of five sections: hemodynamics, infection, adjunctive therapies, metabolic, and ventilation. Population, intervention, comparison, and outcomes (PICO) questions were reviewed and updated as needed, and evidence profiles were generated. Each subgroup generated a list of questions, searched for best available evidence, and then followed the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system to assess the quality of evidence from high to very low, and to formulate recommendations as strong or weak, or best practice statement when applicable.
Results
The Surviving Sepsis Guideline panel provided 93 statements on early management and resuscitation of patients with sepsis or septic shock. Overall, 32 were strong recommendations, 39 were weak recommendations, and 18 were best-practice statements. No recommendation was provided for four questions.
Conclusions
Substantial agreement exists among a large cohort of international experts regarding many strong recommendations for the best care of patients with sepsis. Although a significant number of aspects of care have relatively weak support, evidence-based recommendations regarding the acute management of sepsis and septic shock are the foundation of improved outcomes for these critically ill patients with high mortality.
OBJECTIVE:Survivors of severe critical illness frequently develop substantial and persistent physical complications, including muscle weakness, impaired physical function, and decreased ...health-related quality of life. Our objective was to determine the longitudinal epidemiology of muscle weakness, physical function, and health-related quality of life and their associations with critical illness and ICU exposures.
DESIGN:A multisite prospective study with longitudinal follow-up at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months after acute lung injury.
SETTING:Thirteen ICUs from four academic teaching hospitals.
PATIENTS:Two hundred twenty-two survivors of acute lung injury.
INTERVENTIONS:None.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:At each time point, patients underwent standardized clinical evaluations of extremity, hand grip, and respiratory muscle strength; anthropometrics (height, weight, mid-arm circumference, and triceps skin fold thickness); 6-minute walk distance, and the Medical Outcomes Short-Form 36 health-related quality of life survey. During their hospitalization, survivors also had detailed daily evaluation of critical illness and related treatment variables. Over one third of survivors had objective evidence of muscle weakness at hospital discharge, with most improving within 12 months. This weakness was associated with substantial impairments in physical function and health-related quality of life that persisted at 24 months. The duration of bed rest during critical illness was consistently associated with weakness throughout 24-month follow-up. The cumulative dose of systematic corticosteroids and use of neuromuscular blockers in the ICU were not associated with weakness.
CONCLUSIONS:Muscle weakness is common after acute lung injury, usually recovering within 12 months. This weakness is associated with substantial impairments in physical function and health-related quality of life that continue beyond 24 months. These results provide valuable prognostic information regarding physical recovery after acute lung injury. Evidence-based methods to reduce the duration of bed rest during critical illness may be important for improving these long-term impairments.
PDF
