Dataset Information

Late Vasopressor Administration in Patients in the ICU: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Little is known about the prevalence, predictors, and outcomes of late vasopressor administration which evolves after admission to the ICU.

Research question

What is the epidemiology of late vasopressor administration in the ICU?

Study design and methods

We retrospectively studied a cohort of veterans admitted to the Veterans Administration ICUs for ≥ 4 days from 2014 to 2017. The timing of vasopressor administration was categorized as early (only within the initial 3 days), late (on day 4 or later and none on day 3), and continuous (within the initial 2 days through at least day 4). Regressions were performed to identify patient factors associated with late vasopressor administration and the timing of vasopressor administration with posthospitalization discharge mortality.

Results

Among the 62,206 hospitalizations with at least 4 ICU days, late vasopressor administration occurred in 5.5% (3,429 of 62,206). Patients with more comorbidities (adjusted OR [aOR], 1.02 per van Walraven point; 95% CI, 1.02-1.03) and worse severity of illness on admission (aOR, 1.01 per percentage point risk of death; 95% CI, 1.01-1.02) were more likely to receive late vasopressor therapy. Nearly 50% of patients started a new antibiotic within 24 h of receiving late vasopressor therapy. One-year mortality after survival to discharge was higher for patients with continuous (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.48; 95% CI, 1.33-1.65) and late vasopressor administration (aHR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.15-1.38) compared with only early vasopressor administration.

Interpretation

Late vasopressor administration was modestly associated with comorbidities and admission illness severity. One-year mortality was higher among those who received late vasopressor administration compared with only early vasopressor administration. Research to understand optimization of late vasopressor therapy administration may improve long-term mortality.

SUBMITTER: Viglianti EM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7417379 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic remains an immediate and present concern, yet as of now there is still no approved therapeutic available for the treatment of COVID-19.This study aimed to investigate and report evidence concerning demographic characteristics and currently-used medications that contribute to the ultimate outcomes of COVID-19 ICU patients.MethodsA retrospective cohort study was conducted among all COVID-19 patients in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) of Asir Central Hospital in Saudi Arabia between the 1st and 30th of June 2020. Data extracted from patients' medical records included their demographics, home medications, medications used to treat COVID-19, treatment durations, ICU stay, hospital stay, and ultimate outcome (recovery or death).Descriptive statistics and regression modelling were used to analyze and compare the results. The study was approved by the Institutional Ethics Committees at both Asir Central Hospital and King Khalid University.ResultsA total of 118 patients with median age of 57 years having definite clinical and disease outcomes were included in the study. Male patients accounted for 87% of the study population, and more than 65% experienced at least one comorbidity. The mean hospital and ICU stay was 11.4 and 9.8 days, respectively. The most common drugs used were tocilizumab (31.4%), triple combination therapy (45.8%), favipiravir (56.8%), dexamethasone (86.7%), and enoxaparin (83%). Treatment with enoxaparin significantly reduced the length of ICU stay (p = 0.04) and was found to be associated with mortality reduction in patients aged 50-75 (p = 0.03), whereas the triple regimen therapy and tocilizumab significantly increased the length of ICU stay in all patients (p = 0.01, p = 0.02 respectively).ConclusionCOVID-19 tends to affect males more significantly than females. The use of enoxaparin is an important part of COVID-19 treatment, especially for those above 50 years of age, while the use of triple combination therapy and tocilizumab in COVID-19 protocols should be reevaluated and restricted to patients who have high likelihood of benefit.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Recent guidelines advise against prophylactic antibiotics in patients with necrotizing pancreatitis, advocating instead a step-up drainage and necrosectomy strategy with antibiotics as dictated by microbiological findings. However, prompt antibiotic therapy is recommended in patients with sepsis or septic shock, a possible presentation of infected pancreatic necrosis (IPN). Consequently, in many critically ill patients with IPN, pancreatic samples are collected only after broad-spectrum antibiotic therapy initiation. Whether this prior antibiotic exposure alters the microbiological findings is unknown. The main objective was to determine whether prior antibiotic exposure sterilized the samples collected during procedures for suspected IPN in patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) for acute pancreatitis with suspected IPN. We retrospectively studied 56 consecutive ICU patients admitted with suspected IPN. We collected details on the microbiological samples and antimicrobials used. A definite diagnosis of IPN was given when bacteria were identified in pancreatic samples. RESULTS:In all, 137 pancreatic samples were collected, including 91 (66.4%) after antibiotic therapy initiation. IPN was confirmed in 48 (86%) patients. The proportion of positive samples was 74 (81.3%) in antibiotic-exposed patients and 32/46 (69.5%) in unexposed patients (p?=?0.58). Of the 74 positive samples from exposed patients, 62 (84%) had organisms susceptible to the antibiotics used. One-third of samples contained more than one organism. Among patients with IPN, 37.5% had positive blood cultures. Multidrug- or extensively drug-resistant bacteria were identified at some point in half the patients. Enterobacter cloacae complex was more frequent in the exposed group (p?=?0.02), as were Gram-negative anaerobic bacteria (p?=?0.03). CONCLUSION:Antibiotic exposure before sampling did not seem to affect culture positivity of pancreatic samples to confirm IPN, but may affect microbiological findings. Our results suggest that, in patients with sepsis and suspected IPN, antibiotics should be started immediately and pancreatic samples obtained as soon as possible thereafter. In other situations, antibiotics can be withheld until the microbiological results of pancreatic samples are available, to ensure accurate targeting of the spectrum to bacterial susceptibility patterns. ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT03253861.