Dysfunctional cerebral autoregulation is associated with delirium in critically ill adults.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Lee KF
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6893984 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Dec
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Dysfunctional cerebral autoregulation is associated with delirium in critically ill adults.
Lee Kevin Fh KF Wood Michael D MD Maslove David M DM Muscedere John G JG Boyd J Gordon JG
Journal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism 20181008 12
Delirium is common during critical illness and is associated with morbidity and mortality, but its pathophysiology is unknown. We tested whether dysfunctional cerebral autoregulation (CA) contributes to the development of delirium. Adult patients (<i>n</i> = 40) with respiratory failure and/or shock were prospectively enrolled. Continuous recordings of regional cerebral oxygen saturation (rSO<sub>2</sub>) were obtained by near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) during the first 72 h of intensive care ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Delirium among critically ill patients is common. Presence of delirium imparts a poorer prognosis to patients, including longer ICU and hospital length of stay, increased risk of institutionalization, higher health related costs, and elevated mortality. Even with such grave consequences, the rates of delirium diagnosis are dire. The importance of early recognition through validated tools and appropriate management of this life-threatening condition cannot be over emphasized. This article provides an overview of delirium pathophysiology, diagnosis, and management with a focus on critically ill patients.
| S-EPMC4224112 | biostudies-other
Project description:Background: Systemic inflammation is a whole body reaction that can have an infection-positive (i.e. sepsis) or infection-negative origin. It is important to distinguish between septic and non-septic presentations early and reliably, because this has significant therapeutic implications for critically ill patients. We hypothesized that a molecular classifier based on a small number of RNAs expressed in peripheral blood could be discovered that would: 1) determine which patients with systemic inflammation had sepsis; 2) be robust across independent patient cohorts; 3) be insensitive to disease severity; and 4) provide diagnostic utility. The overall goal of this study was to identify and validate such a molecular classifier. Methods and Findings: We conducted an observational, non-interventional study of adult patients recruited from tertiary intensive care units (ICU). Biomarker discovery was conducted with an Australian cohort (n = 105) consisting of sepsis patients and post -surgical patients with infection-negative systemic inflammation. Using this cohort, a four-gene classifier consisting of a combination of CEACAM4, LAMP1, PLA2G7 and PLAC8 RNA biomarkers was identified. This classifier, designated SeptiCyte® Lab, was externally validated using RT-qPCR and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis in five cohorts (n = 345) from the Netherlands. Cohort 1 (n=59) consisted of unambiguous septic cases and infection-negative systemic inflammation controls; SeptiCyte® Lab gave an area under curve (AUC) of 0.96 (95% CI: 0.91-1.00). ROC analysis of a more heterogeneous group of patients (Cohorts 2-5; 249 patients after excluding 37 patients with infection likelihood possible) gave an AUC of 0.89 (95% CI: 0.85-0.93). Disease severity, as measured by Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score or the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) IV score, was not a significant confounding variable. The diagnostic utility o f SeptiCyte® Lab was evaluated by comparison to various clinical and laboratory parameters that would be available to a clinician within 24 hours of ICU admission. SeptiCyte® Lab was significantly better at differentiating sepsis from infection-negative systemic inflammation than all tested parameters, both singly and in various logistic combinations. SeptiCyte® Lab more than halved the diagnostic error rate compared to PCT in all tested cohorts or cohort combinations. Conclusions: SeptiCyte® Lab is a rapid molecular assay that may be clinically useful in the management of ICU patients with systemic inflammation. SIRS and Sepsis ICU patients, admission samples Retrospective, mutli-site sutdy using retrospective physician adjudication as a comparator
2015-10-24 | E-GEOD-74224 | biostudies-arrayexpress
Project description:Background: Systemic inflammation is a whole body reaction that can have an infection-positive (i.e. sepsis) or infection-negative origin. It is important to distinguish between septic and non-septic presentations early and reliably, because this has significant therapeutic implications for critically ill patients. We hypothesized that a molecular classifier based on a small number of RNAs expressed in peripheral blood could be discovered that would: 1) determine which patients with systemic inflammation had sepsis; 2) be robust across independent patient cohorts; 3) be insensitive to disease severity; and 4) provide diagnostic utility. The overall goal of this study was to identify and validate such a molecular classifier. Methods and Findings: We conducted an observational, non-interventional study of adult patients recruited from tertiary intensive care units (ICU). Biomarker discovery was conducted with an Australian cohort (n = 105) consisting of sepsis patients and post -surgical patients with infection-negative systemic inflammation. Using this cohort, a four-gene classifier consisting of a combination of CEACAM4, LAMP1, PLA2G7 and PLAC8 RNA biomarkers was identified. This classifier, designated SeptiCyte® Lab, was externally validated using RT-qPCR and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis in five cohorts (n = 345) from the Netherlands. Cohort 1 (n=59) consisted of unambiguous septic cases and infection-negative systemic inflammation controls; SeptiCyte® Lab gave an area under curve (AUC) of 0.96 (95% CI: 0.91-1.00). ROC analysis of a more heterogeneous group of patients (Cohorts 2-5; 249 patients after excluding 37 patients with infection likelihood possible) gave an AUC of 0.89 (95% CI: 0.85-0.93). Disease severity, as measured by Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score or the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) IV score, was not a significant confounding variable. The diagnostic utility o f SeptiCyte® Lab was evaluated by comparison to various clinical and laboratory parameters that would be available to a clinician within 24 hours of ICU admission. SeptiCyte® Lab was significantly better at differentiating sepsis from infection-negative systemic inflammation than all tested parameters, both singly and in various logistic combinations. SeptiCyte® Lab more than halved the diagnostic error rate compared to PCT in all tested cohorts or cohort combinations. Conclusions: SeptiCyte® Lab is a rapid molecular assay that may be clinically useful in the management of ICU patients with systemic inflammation. SIRS and Sepsis ICU patients, admission samples
2015-10-24 | GSE74224 | GEO
Project description:Social determinants of health may affect ICU outcome, but the association between social determinants of health and delirium remains unclear. We evaluated the association between three social determinants of health and delirium occurrence and duration in critically ill adults.DesignSecondary, subgroup analysis of a cohort study.SettingSingle, 36-bed mixed medical-surgical ICU in the Netherlands.PatientsNine hundred fifty-six adults consecutively admitted from July 2016 to February 2020. Patients admitted after elective surgery, residing in a nursing home, or not expected to survive greater than or equal to 48 hours were excluded.InterventionNone.Measurements and main resultsFour factors related to three Center for Disease Control social determinants of health domains (social/community context [ethnicity], education access/quality [educational level], and economic stability [employment status and monthly income]) were collected at ICU admission from patients (or families). Well-trained ICU nurses evaluated patients without coma (Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale, -4, -5) and with the Confusion Assessment Method-ICU and/or a delirium day was defined by greater than or equal to 1 + Confusion Assessment Method-ICU and/or scheduled antipsychotic use. Multivariable logistic regression models controlling for ICU days and 10 delirium risk variables (before-ICU: age, Charlson, cognitive impairment, any antidepressant, antipsychotic, or benzodiazepine use; ICU baseline: Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation IV and admission type; daily ICU: Sequential Organ Failure Assessment, restraint use, coma, benzodiazepine, or opioid use) evaluated associations between each social determinant of health factor and both ICU delirium occurrence and duration. Delirium occurred in 393/956 patients (45.4%) for 2 days (1-5 d). Patients with low (vs high) income had more ICU delirium (p = 0.05). Multivariate analyses revealed no social determinants of health to be significantly associated with increased delirium occurrence or duration. Low (vs high) income was weakly associated with increased delirium occurrence (adjusted odds ratio, 1.83; 95% CI, 0.91-3.89). Low (vs high) education (adjusted relative risk, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.97-1.53) was weakly associated with a longer delirium duration.ConclusionsSocial determinants of health did not affect ICU delirium in one Dutch region. Additional research across different countries/regions and where additional social determinants of health are considered is needed to define the association between social determinants of health and ICU delirium.
| S-EPMC8425818 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVE:We investigated the potential association of cerebral autoregulation (CA) with postoperative delirium (PD), a common complication of cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). METHODS:In patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery with CPB, cerebral blood flow velocity (CBFV) and blood pressure (BP) were continuously recorded during 5-min preoperatively (T1), after 24?h (T2), and 7?days after procedure (T3). Prospective multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to determine the independent risk factors of PD. Autoregulation index (ARI) was calculated from the CBFV response to a step change in BP derived by transfer function analysis. RESULTS:In 67 patients, mean age 64.3?±?9.5?years, CA was depressed at T2 as shown by values of ARI (3.9?±?1.7), compared to T1 (5.6?±?1.7) and T3 (5.5?±?1.8) (p?<?0.001). Impaired CA was found in 37 (55%) patients at T2 and in 7 patients (20%) at T3. Lower ARI at T1 and T2 were predictors of PD (p?=?0.003). CONCLUSION:Dynamic CA was impaired after CABG surgery with CPB and was a significant independent risk factor of PD. SIGNIFICANCE:Assessment of CA before and after surgery could have considerable potential for early identification of patients at risk of PD, thus reducing poor outcomes and length of stay. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION:www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02143544, April 30, 2014).
| S-EPMC7106549 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Ketamine is increasingly being used for analgosedation, but its effect on delirium remains unclear. We compared delirium risk variables and ketamine analgosedation use between adults who developed incident delirium and those who did not, evaluated whether ketamine analgosedation increases delirium risk, and compared ICU delirium characteristics, treatments, and outcomes between ketamine and nonketamine patients with delirium.DesignSecondary, subgroup analysis of a cohort study.SettingSingle, 36-bed mixed medical-surgical ICU in the Netherlands from July 2016 to February 2020.PatientsConsecutive adults were included. Patients admitted after elective surgery, not expected to survive greater than or equal to 48 hours, admitted with delirium, or where delirium occurred prior to ketamine use were excluded.InterventionNone.Measurements and main resultsTrained ICU nurses evaluated patients without coma (Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale. -4/-5) every 8 hours with the Confusion Assessment Method ICU; a delirium day was defined by greater than or equal to1 + Confusion Assessment Method ICU and/or scheduled antipsychotic use. Among 11 variables compared between the delirium and nondelirium groups (Baseline: age, Charlson Comorbidity score, cognitive impairment, admission type, and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation-IV score, daily ICU [until delirium occurrence or discharge]: Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score, coma, benzodiazepine, opioid, and ketamine use) and total ICU days, 7 (age, Charlson score, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score, coma, benzodiazepine, opioid, and ketamine use) were significantly different and were entered, along with delirium occurrence, in a logistic regression model. A total of 332 of 925 of patients (36%) developed delirium. Ketamine use was greater in patients with delirium (54 [16%] vs 4 [0.7%]; p < 0.01). Ketamine use (adjusted odds ratio, 5.60; 95% CI, 1.09-29.15), age (adjusted odds ratio, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.01-1.06), coma (adjusted odds ratio, 2.10; 95% CI, 1.15-3.78), opioid use (adjusted odds ratio, 171.17; 95% CI, 66.45-553.68), and benzodiazepine use (adjusted odds ratio, 34.07; 95% CI, 8.12-235.34) were each independently and significantly associated with increased delirium. Delirium duration, motoric subtype, delirium treatments, and outcomes were not different between the ketamine and nonketamine groups.ConclusionsKetamine analgosedation may contribute to increased ICU delirium. The characteristics of ketamine and nonketamine delirium are similar. Further prospective research is required to evaluate the magnitude of risk for delirium with ketamine use.
| S-EPMC8480939 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: A multidisciplinary team updated an institution-specific pain, agitation, and delirium (PAD) guideline based on the recommendations from the Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM) PAD guidelines. This institution-specific guideline emphasized protocolized sedation with increased as needed boluses, and nonbenzodiazepine infusions, daily sedation interruption, and pairing of spontaneous awakening (SAT) and breathing trials (SBT). Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of implementation of a PAD guideline on clinical outcomes and medication utilization in an academic medical center intensive care unit (ICU). It was hypothesized that implementation of an updated guideline would improve clinical outcomes and decrease usage of benzodiazepine infusions. Methods: Pre-post retrospective chart review of 2417 (1147 pre, 1270 post) critically ill, mechanically ventilated adults in a medical/surgical ICU over a 2-year period (1 year pre and post guideline implementation). Results: After guideline implementation, average ventilation days was reduced (3.98 vs 3.43 days, P = .0021), as well as ICU and hospital length of stay (LOS) (4.79 vs 4.34 days, P = .048 and 13.96 vs 12.97 days, P = .045, respectively). Hospital mortality (19 vs 19%, P = .96) and acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE) IV scores (77.28 vs 78.75, P = .27) were similar. After guideline implementation, the percentage of patients receiving midazolam infusions decreased (422/1147 [37%] vs 363/1270 patients [29%], P = .0001). The percentage of patients receiving continuous infusion propofol (679/1147 [59%] vs 896/1270 [70%], P = .0001) and dexmedetomidine (78/1147 [7%] vs 147/1270 [12%], P = .0001) increased. Conclusions: Implementing a multidisciplinary PAD guideline utilizing protocolized sedation and daily sedation interruption decreased ventilation days and ICU and hospital LOS while decreasing midazolam drip usage.
| S-EPMC6431725 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCOVID-19 has been a devastating pandemic with little known of its neuropsychiatric complications. Delirium is 1 of the most common neuropsychiatric syndromes among hospitalized cancer patients with incidence ranging from 25% to 40% and rates of up to 85% in the terminally ill. Data on the incidence, risk factors, duration, and outcomes of delirium in critically ill cancer patients with COVID-19 are lacking.ObjectiveTo report the incidence, riaks and outcomes of critically ill cancer patients who developed COVID-19.MethodsThis is a retrospective single-center study evaluating delirium frequency and outcomes in all critically ill cancer patients with COVID-19 admitted between March 1 and July 10, 2020. Delirium was assessed by Confusion Assessment Method for Intensive Care Unit, performed twice daily by trained intensive care unit (ICU) nursing staff. Patients were considered to have a delirium-positive day if Confusion Assessment Method for Intensive Care Unit was positive at least once per day.ResultsA total of 70 patients were evaluated. Of those 70, 53 (75.7%) were found to be positive for delirium. Patients with delirium were significantly older than patients without delirium (median age 67.5 vs 60.3 y, P = 0.013). There were no significant differences in demographic characteristics, chronic medical conditions, neuropsychiatric history, cancer type, or application of prone positioning between the 2 groups. Delirium patients were less likely to receive cancer-directed therapies (58.5% vs 88.2%, P = 0.038) but more likely to receive antipsychotics (81.1% vs 41.2%, P = 0.004), dexmedetomidine (79.3% vs 11.8%, P < 0.001), steroids (84.9% vs 58.8%, P = 0.039), and vasopressors (90.6% vs 58.8%, P = 0.006). Delirium patients were more likely to be intubated (86.8% vs 41.2%, P < 0.001), and all tracheostomies (35.9%) occurred in patients with delirium. ICU length of stay (19 vs 8 d, P < 0.001) and hospital length of stay (37 vs 12 d, P < 0.001) were significantly longer in delirium patients, but there was no statistically significant difference in hospital mortality (43.4% vs 58.8%, P = 0.403) or ICU mortality (34.0% vs 58.8%, P = 0.090).ConclusionsDelirium in critically ill cancer patients with COVID-19 was associated with less cancer-directed therapies and increased hospital and ICU length of stay. However, the presence of delirium was not associated with an increase in hospital or ICU mortality.
| S-EPMC9162788 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Mean arterial pressure (MAP) below the lower limit of cerebral autoregulation during cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) is associated with complications after cardiac surgery. However, simply raising empiric MAP targets during CPB might result in MAP above the upper limit of autoregulation (ULA), causing cerebral hyperperfusion in some patients and predisposing them to cerebral dysfunction after surgery. We hypothesized that MAP above an ULA during CPB is associated with postoperative delirium.Autoregulation during CPB was monitored continuously in 491 patients with the cerebral oximetry index (COx) in this prospective observational study. COx represents Pearson's correlation coefficient between low-frequency changes in regional cerebral oxygen saturation (measured with near-infrared spectroscopy) and MAP. Delirium was defined throughout the postoperative hospitalization based on clinical detection with prospectively defined methods.Delirium was observed in 45 (9.2%) patients. Mechanical ventilation for >48 h [odds ratio (OR), 3.94; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.72-9.03], preoperative antidepressant use (OR, 3.0; 95% CI, 1.29-6.96), prior stroke (OR, 2.79; 95% CI, 1.12-6.96), congestive heart failure (OR, 2.68; 95% CI, 1.28-5.62), the product of the magnitude and duration of MAP above an ULA (mm Hg h; OR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.03-1.15), and age (per year of age; OR, 1.01; 95% CI, 1.01-1.07) were independently associated with postoperative delirium.Excursions of MAP above the upper limit of cerebral autoregulation during CPB are associated with risk for delirium. Optimizing MAP during CPB to remain within the cerebral autoregulation range might reduce risk of delirium.clinicaltrials.gov NCT00769691 and NCT00981474.
| S-EPMC4235573 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Delirium is an acute confusional state, common in critical illness and associated with cognitive decline. There is no effective pharmacotherapy to prevent or treat delirium, although it is scientifically plausible that thiamine could be effective. Thiamine studies in dementia patients are inconclusive. Aside from small numbers, all used oral administration: bioavailability of thiamine is poor; parenteral thiamine bypasses this. In the UK, parenteral thiamine is administered as a compound vitamin B and C solution (Pabrinex®). The aim of this review is to evaluate the effectiveness of parenteral thiamine (alone or in a compound solution) in preventing or treating delirium in critical illness. METHODS:We will search for studies in electronic databases (MEDLINE (Pro-Quest), EMBASE, CINAHL, LILACS, CNKI, AMED, and Cochrane CENTRAL), clinical trials registries (WHO International Clinical Trials Registry, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Controlled-trials.com), and grey literature (Google Scholar, conference proceedings, and Index to Theses). We will perform complementary searches of reference lists of included studies, relevant reviews, clinical practice guidelines, or other pertinent documents (e.g. official documents and government reports). We will consider quasi-randomised or randomised controlled trials in critically ill adults. We will include studies that evaluate parenteral thiamine versus standard of care, placebo, or any other non-pharmacological or pharmacological interventions. The primary outcomes will be the delirium core outcome set, including incidence and severity of delirium and cognition. Secondary outcomes are adapted from the ventilation core outcome set: duration of mechanical ventilation, length of stay, and adverse events incidence. Screening, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment will be undertaken independently by two reviewers. If data permits, we will conduct meta-analyses using a random effects model and, where appropriate, sensitivity and subgroup analyses to explore sources of heterogeneity. DISCUSSION:This review will provide evidence for the effectiveness of parental thiamine in the prevention or treatment of delirium in critical care. Findings will contribute to establishing the need for a multicentre study of parenteral thiamine in the prevention and treatment of critical care delirium. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION:PROSPERO CRD42019118808.
| S-EPMC7275448 | biostudies-literature