Early versus differed arterial catheterisation in critically ill patients with acute circulatory failure: a multicentre, open-label, pragmatic, randomised, non-inferiority controlled trial: the EVERDAC protocol.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Introduction
The use of peripheral indwelling arterial catheter for haemodynamic monitoring is widespread in the intensive care unit and is recommended in patients with shock. However, there is no evidence that the arterial catheter could improve patient's outcome, whereas the burden of morbidity generated is significant (pain, thrombosis, infections). We hypothesise that patients with shock may be managed without an arterial catheter.Methods and analysis
The EVERDAC study is an investigator-initiated, pragmatic, multicentre, randomised, controlled, open-label, non-inferiority clinical trial, comparing a less invasive intervention (ie, no arterial catheter insertion until felt absolutely needed, according to predefined safety criteria) or usual care (ie, systematic arterial catheter insertion in the early hours of shock). 1010 patients will be randomised with a 1:1 ratio in two groups according to the strategy. The primary outcome is all-cause mortality by 28 days after inclusion. A health economic analysis will be carried out.Ethics and dissemination
The study has been approved by the Ethics Committee (Comité de Protection des Personnes Île de France V, registration number 61606 CAT 2, 19 july 2018) and patients will be included after informed consent. The results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration number
NCT03680963.
SUBMITTER: Muller G
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8442046 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is an ongoing public health crisis that has led to many deaths due to multiple organ dysfunction syndromes (MODS). This article describes the clinical characteristics, management, and outcomes of critically ill COVID-19 patients who survived the disease through mechanical circulatory support (MCS).MethodsWe studied 25 critically ill COVID-19 patients who underwent MCS from January 20, 2020, to April 10, 2020, at the Tongji Hospital of Huazhong University of Science and Technology.ResultsThirteen (52%) of the 25 patients survived with MCS support, while 12 (48%) died. At the time of their hospital admission, we identified significant differences in their peak cardiac troponin I (cTnI) and interleukin 6 (IL-6) levels, as well as in their lymphocyte count and C-reactive protein (CRP) levels. Cox proportional hazards regression model revealed that receipt of renal replacement therapy (RRT) was associated with an approximately 20-fold improvement in survival [hazard ratio (HR) =0.049, 95% confidence interval (CI) =0.008 to 0.305]. The number of days spent on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support and the use of hydrogen (pH) at the time of MCS was also associated with an increase in survival. This contrasted with high-sensitivity C-reactive proteins (hs-CRP) and lactate, associated with a decrease in survival during MCS. Further analysis of the determinants relating to a COVID-19 patient's chance of survival on/after MCS was also indicated by levels of IL-6 (β=0.009, P=0.006), IL-8 (β=0.031, P=0.020), and TNF-α (β=0.107, P=0.014), which saw a significant increase in the 12 patients who died. This contrasts with the non-significant decrease in IL-6, IL-8, and TNF-α levels in the 13 patients who survived.ConclusionsThese results indicate that pH, lactate, hs-CRP, ECMO duration, and RRT are important clinical determinants for assessing how MCS can increase the chances of critically ill COVID-19 patients surviving the disease.
| S-EPMC8421987 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC4230320 | biostudies-literature
Project description:INTRODUCTION:The intraoperative administration of dexamethasone for prophylaxis against postoperative nausea and vomiting is a common and recommended practice. The safety of the administration of this immunosuppressive agent at a time of significant immunological disruption has not been rigorously evaluated in terms of infective complications. METHODS/ANALYSIS:This is a pragmatic, multicentre, randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial. A total of 8880 patients undergoing elective major surgery will be enrolled. Participants will be randomly allocated to receive either dexamethasone 8 mg or placebo intravenously following the induction of anaesthesia in a 1:1 ratio, stratified by centre and diabetes status. Patient enrolment into the trial is ongoing. The primary outcome is surgical site infection at 30 days following surgery, defined according to the Centre for Disease Control criteria. ETHICS/DISSEMINATION:The PADDI trial has been approved by the ethics committees of over 45 participating sites in Australia, New Zealand, Hong Kong, South Africa and the Netherlands. The trial has been endorsed by the Australia and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists Clinical Trials Network and the Australian Society for Infectious Diseases Clinical Research Network. Participant recruitment began in March 2016 and is expected to be complete in mid-2019. Publication of the results of the PADDI trial is anticipated to occur in early 2020. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:ACTRN12614001226695.
| S-EPMC6731833 | biostudies-other
Project description:Background: The use and perceived value of transcranial Doppler (TCD) scope in paediatric critical care medicine has not been extensively documented. Objective: To describe the use of TCD to assess non-traumatic brain injury in patients admitted to four paediatric intensive care units (PICUs) in France. Methods: We prospectively included all children (aged under 18) assessed with inpatient TCD between November 2014 and October 2015 at one of the four PICUs. The physicians completed a questionnaire within 4 h of performing TCD. Results: 152 children were included. The primary diagnosis was neurological disease in 106 patients (70%), including post ischemic-anoxic brain insult (n = 42, 28%), status epilepticus (n = 19, 13%), and central nervous system infection/inflammation (n = 15, 10%). TCD was the first-line neuromonitoring assessment in 110 patients (72%) and was performed within 24 h of admission in 112 patients (74%). The most common indications for TCD were the routine monitoring of neurological disorders (n = 85, 56%) and the detection of asymptomatic neurological disorders (n = 37, 24). Concordance between the operator's interpretation of TCD and the published normative values was observed for 21 of the 75 (28%) TCD abnormal findings according to the published normative values. The physicians considered that TCD was of value for the ongoing clinical management of 131 (86%) of the 152 patients. Conclusion: TCD is commonly used in French PICUs and tends to be performed early after admission on patients with a broad range of diseases. The physicians reported that the TCD findings often helped their clinical decision making. In view of the subjectivity of bedside interpretation, true TCD contribution to clinical care remains to be determined. Objective studies of the impact of TCD on patient management and clinical outcomes are therefore warranted.
| S-EPMC8282928 | biostudies-literature
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:The optimal thromboprophylactic strategy for patients affected by Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been debated among experts. This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of a thromboprophylaxis algorithm. This was a retrospective, single-center study in critically ill patients admitted to the intensive care unit (University affiliated Hospital) for acute respiratory failure due to Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). From March 16 to April 9, 2020, thromboprophylaxis was adjusted according to weight (control group, n = 19) and after this date, thromboprophylaxis depended on an algorithm based on thrombotic and hemorrhagic risk factors (protocol group, n = 13). With regard to safety (number of major bleeding events and blood transfusions), the groups were not significantly different. With regard to efficacy, the number of thrombotic events decreased from 37 to 0%, p = 0.025 after implementation of the algorithm. Also, peak fibrinogen dropped from 8.6 (7.2-9.3) to 6.5 (4.6-8.4) g/L, p = 0.041 and D-dimers from 2194 (1464-3763) to 1486 (900-2582) ng/mL, p = 0.0001. In addition, length of stay declined from 19 (10-31) to 5 (3-19) days, p = 0.009. In conclusion, a tailored thromboprophylaxis algorithm (risk stratification based on clinical parameters and biological markers) reduce thrombotic phenomena in critically ill COVID-19 patients without increasing major bleeding.
| S-EPMC8233177 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This SuperSeries is composed of the SubSeries listed below.
2022-02-28 | GSE197259 | GEO
Project description:ObjectiveTo determine if guided internet based cognitive behavioural therapy with a trauma focus (CBT-TF) is non-inferior to individual face-to-face CBT-TF for mild to moderate post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) to one traumatic event.DesignPragmatic, multicentre, randomised controlled non-inferiority trial (RAPID).SettingPrimary and secondary mental health settings across the UK's NHS.Participants196 adults with a primary diagnosis of mild to moderate PTSD were randomised in a 1:1 ratio to one of two interventions, with 82% retention at 16 weeks and 71% retention at 52 weeks. 19 participants and 10 therapists were purposively sampled and interviewed for evaluation of the process.InterventionsUp to 12 face-to-face, manual based, individual CBT-TF sessions, each lasting 60-90 minutes; or guided internet based CBT-TF with an eight step online programme, with up to three hours of contact with a therapist and four brief telephone calls or email contacts between sessions.Main outcome measuresPrimary outcome was the Clinician Administered PTSD Scale for DSM-5 (CAPS-5) at 16 weeks after randomisation (diagnosis of PTSD based on the criteria of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fifth edition, DSM-5). Secondary outcomes included severity of PTSD symptoms at 52 weeks, and functioning, symptoms of depression and anxiety, use of alcohol, and perceived social support at 16 and 52 weeks after randomisation.ResultsNon-inferiority was found at the primary endpoint of 16 weeks on the CAPS-5 (mean difference 1.01, one sided 95% confidence interval -∞ to 3.90, non-inferiority P=0.012). Improvements in CAPS-5 score of more than 60% in the two groups were maintained at 52 weeks, but the non-inferiority results were inconclusive in favour of face-to-face CBT-TF at this time point (3.20, -∞ to 6.00, P=0.15). Guided internet based CBT-TF was significantly (P<0.001) cheaper than face-to-face CBT-TF and seemed to be acceptable and well tolerated by participants. The main themes of the qualitative analysis were facilitators and barriers to engagement with guided internet based CBT-TF, treatment outcomes, and considerations for its future implementation.ConclusionsGuided internet based CBT-TF for mild to moderate PTSD to one traumatic event was non-inferior to individual face-to-face CBT-TF and should be considered a first line treatment for people with this condition.Trial registrationISRCTN13697710.
| S-EPMC9202033 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThe primary objective is to clarify the clinical profiles of paediatric patients who died in intensive care units (ICUs) or paediatric intensive care units (PICUs), and the secondary objective is to ascertain the demographic differences between patients who died with and without chronic conditions.MethodsIn this retrospective multicentre cohort study, we collected data on paediatric death from the Japanese Registry of Pediatric Acute Care (JaRPAC) database. We included patients who were ?16 years of age and had died in either a PICU or an ICU of a participating hospital between April 2014 and March 2017. The causes of death were compared between patients with and without chronic conditions.ResultsTwenty-three hospitals participated, and 6199 paediatric patients who were registered in the JaRPAC database were included. During the study period, 126 (2.1%) patients died (children without chronic illness, n=33; children with chronic illness, n=93). Twenty-five paediatric patients died due to an extrinsic disease, and there was a significant difference in extrinsic diseases between the two groups (children without chronic illness, 15 (45%); children with chronic illness, 10 (11%); p<0.01). Cardiovascular disease was the most common chronic condition (27/83, 29%). Eighty-three patients (85%) in the chronic group died due to an intrinsic disease, primarily congenital heart disease (14/93, 15%), followed by sepsis (13/93, 14%).ConclusionsThe majority of deaths were in children with a chronic condition. The major causes of death in children without a chronic illness were due to intrinsic factors such as cardiovascular and neuromuscular diseases, and the proportion of deaths due to extrinsic causes was higher in children without chronic illness.
| S-EPMC6720739 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundOptimal prophylactic and therapeutic management of thromboembolic disease in patients with COVID-19 remains a major challenge for clinicians. The aim of this study was to define the incidence of thrombotic and haemorrhagic complications in critically ill patients with COVID-19. In addition, we sought to characterise coagulation profiles using thromboelastography and explore possible biological differences between patients with and without thrombotic complications.MethodsWe conducted a multicentre retrospective observational study evaluating all the COVID-19 patients received in four intensive care units (ICUs) of four tertiary hospitals in the UK between March 15, 2020, and May 05, 2020. Clinical characteristics, laboratory data, thromboelastography profiles and clinical outcome data were evaluated between patients with and without thrombotic complications.ResultsA total of 187 patients were included. Their median (interquartile (IQR)) age was 57 (49-64) years and 124 (66.3%) patients were male. Eighty-one (43.3%) patients experienced one or more clinically relevant thrombotic complications, which were mainly pulmonary emboli (n = 42 (22.5%)). Arterial embolic complications were reported in 25 (13.3%) patients. ICU length of stay was longer in patients with thrombotic complications when compared with those without. Fifteen (8.0%) patients experienced haemorrhagic complications, of which nine (4.8%) were classified as major bleeding. Thromboelastography demonstrated a hypercoagulable profile in patients tested but lacked discriminatory value between those with and without thrombotic complications. Patients who experienced thrombotic complications had higher D-dimer, ferritin, troponin and white cell count levels at ICU admission compared with those that did not.ConclusionCritically ill patients with COVID-19 experience high rates of venous and arterial thrombotic complications. The rates of bleeding may be higher than previously reported and re-iterate the need for randomised trials to better understand the risk-benefit ratio of different anticoagulation strategies.
| S-EPMC7499016 | biostudies-literature