Dexmedetomidine versus propofol for prolonged sedation in critically ill trauma and surgical patients

Backgroundand Purpose: Currently, dexmedetomidine versus propofol has primarily been studied in medical and cardiac surgery patients with outcomes indicating safe and effective sedation. The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy of dexmedetomidine versus propofol for prolonged sedation in trauma and surgical patients.MethodsThis was a single-center prospective study conducted in the Trauma/Surgical Intensive Care Unit (ICU) at a Level I academic trauma center. It included patients 18 years of age or older requiring mechanical ventilation who were randomly assigned based on unit bed location to receive either dexmedetomidine or propofol. The primary outcome was duration of mechanical ventilation. Secondary outcomes included mortality; proportion of time in target sedation; incidence of delirium, hypotension, and bradycardia; and ICU and hospital length of stay (LOS).ResultsA total of 57 patients were included. Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. There was no significant difference in duration of mechanical ventilation (median [IQR]) between the dexmedetomidine (78.5[125] hours) and propofol (105[130] hours; p = 0.15) groups. There was no difference between groups in ICU mortality, ICU and hospital LOS, or incidence of delirium. Safety outcomes were also similar. Patients in the dexmedetomidine group spent a significantly greater percentage of time in target sedation (98[8] %) compared to propofol group (92[10] %; p = 0.02).ConclusionsOur results suggest that, similar to medical and cardiac surgery patients, dexmedetomidine and propofol are safe and effective sedation agents in critically ill trauma and surgical patients; however, dexmedetomidine achieves target sedation better than propofol for this specific population.     

Accuracy of prehospital triage systems for mass casualty incidents in trauma register studies - A systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies

BackgroundPrioritising patients in mass casualty incidents (MCI) can be extremely difficult. Therefore, triage systems are important in every emergency medical service. This study reviews the accuracy of primary triage systems for MCI in trauma register studies.MethodsWe registered a protocol at PROSPERO ID: CRD42018115438. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Central, Web of Science, Scopus, Clinical Trials, Google Scholar, and reference lists for eligible studies. We included studies that both examined a primary triage system for MCI in trauma registers and provided sensitivity and specificity for critically injured vs non-critically injured as results. We excluded studies that used paediatric, chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear MCIs populations or triage systems. Finally, we calculated intra-study relative sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic odds ratio for each triage system.ResultsTriage Sieve (TS) significantly underperformed in relative diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) when compared to START and CareFlight (CF) (START vs TS: 19.85 vs 13.23 (p<0.0001)│CF vs TS: 23.72 vs 12.83 (p<0.0001)). There was no significant difference in DOR between TS and Military Sieve (MS) (p<0.710). Compared to START, MS and CF TS had significantly higher relative specificity (START vs TS: 93.6% vs 96.1% (p=0.047)│CF vs TS: 96% vs 95.3% (p=0.0006)│MS vs TS: 94% vs 88.3% (p=0.0002)) and lower relative sensitivity (START vs TS: 57.8% vs 34.8% (p<0.0001)│CF vs TS: 53.9% vs 34.7% (p<0.0001)│MS vs TS: 51.9% vs 35.2% p<0.0001)).CF had significantly better relative DOR than START (CF vs START: 23.56 vs 27.79 (p=0.043)). MS had significantly better relative sensitivity than CF and START (MS vs CF: 49.5% vs 38.7% (p<0.0001)│MS vs START: 49.4% vs 43.9% (p=0.01)). In contrast, CF had significantly better relative specificity than MS (MS vs CF: 91.3% vs 93.3% (p<0.0001)). The remaining comparisons did not yield any significant differences.ConclusionAs the included studies were at risk of bias and had heterogenic characteristics, our results should be interpreted with caution. Nonetheless, our results point towards inferior accuracy of Triage Sieve compared to START and CareFlight, and less firmly point towards superior accuracy of Military Sieve compared to START, CareFlight and Triage Sieve     

Asistencia biventricular en el manejo de la disfunción ventricular izquierda secundaria a ECMO-VA periférica: a propósito de 2 casos

We report 2 patients with cardiogenic shock that developed severe left ventricular dysfunction due to a non-opening aortic valve while on peripheral VA-ECMO (Veno-Arterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenator). Patients were managed combining a LV (Left Ventricle) mechanical assist device, and central VA – ECMO to support the right ventricle, thus providing full circulatory and respiratory assistance. Patients were able to bridge to cardiac transplantation. We therefore recommend such combination in patients with severe LV dysfunction while on p-ECMO (peripheral ECMO) support.     

Evaluation of Routine Coronary Angiography Before Pulmonary Thromboendarterectomy

1. Download : Download high-res image (253KB)
2. Download : Download full-size image

     

超声子宫输卵管造影中近端输卵管“梗阻”的方法学研究

目的：探讨超声子宫输卵管造影中近端输卵管“梗阻”方法的可行性。方法选取2011年1月～2014年1月本院妇产科就诊的疑患不孕症患者175例,按完全随机分组方法将患者分成A、B、C、D共4个组。四组按不同方法进行造影。结果各组输卵管显示情况比较,近端梗阻率A组最高,为30.12%,B组为22.99%,C组为17.05%,D组最低为10.00%,四组比较差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。远端梗阻四组比较,差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）。结论经阴道超声子宫输卵管造影对输卵管是否通畅判断准确,而且其有一定治疗作用。     

The evolution of a purpose designed hybrid trauma operating room from the trauma service perspective: The RAPTOR (resuscitation with angiography percutaneous treatments and operative resuscitations)

Traumatic injury is the leading cause of potentially preventable lost years of life in the Western world and exsanguination is the most potentially preventable cause of post-traumatic death. With mature trauma systems and experienced trauma centres, extra-abdominal sites, such as the pelvis, constitute the most frequent anatomic site of exsanguination. Haemorrhage control for such bleeding often requires surgical adjuncts most notably interventional radiology (IR). With the usual paradigm of surgery conducted within an operating room and IR procedures within distant angiography suites, responsible clinicians are faced with making difficult decisions regarding where to transport the most physiologically unstable patients for haemorrhage control. If such a critical patient is transported to the wrong suite, they may die unnecessarily despite having potentially salvageable injuries. Thus, it seems only logical that the resuscitative operating room of the future would have IR capabilities making it the obvious geographic destination for critically unstable patients, especially those who are exsanguinating.     

Patient distribution in a mass casualty event of an airplane crash

Introduction

Difficulties have been reported in the patient distribution during Mass Casualty Incidents. In this study we analysed the regional patient distribution protocol (PDP) and the actual patient distribution after the 2009 Turkish Airlines crash near Amsterdam.

Methods

Analysis of the patient distribution of 126 surviving casualties of the crash by collecting data on medical treatment capacity, number of patients received per hospital, triage classification, Injury Severity Score (ISS), secondary transfers, distance from the crash site, and the critical mortality rate.

Results

The PDP holds ambiguous definitions of medical treatment capacity and was not followed. There were 14 receiving hospitals (distance from crash: 5.8–53.5 km); four hospitals received 133–213% of their treatment capacity, and 5 hospitals received 1 patient. Three hospitals within 20 km of the crash did not receive any casualties. Level I trauma centres received 89% of the ‘critical’ casualties and 92% of the casualties with ISS ≥ 16. Only 3 casualties were secondarily transferred, and no casualties died in, or on the way to hospital (critical mortality rate = 0%).

Conclusion

Patient distribution worked out well after the crash as secondary transfers were low and critical mortality rate was zero. However, the regional PDP was not followed in this MCI and casualties were unevenly distributed among hospitals. The PDP is indistinctive, and should be updated in cooperation between Emergency Services, surrounding hospitals, and Schiphol International Airport as a high risk area.     

Acute Sodium Chlorite Poisoning Associated with Renal Failure

Background and Objectives: Different techniques of continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) might have different effects on azotemic control. Accordingly, we tested whether continuous veno-venous hemodiafiltration (CVVHDF) or continuous veno-venous hemofiltration (CVVH) would achieve better control of serum creatinine and plasma urea levels. Design: Retrospective controlled study. Setting: Two tertiary Intensive Care Units. Patients: Critically ill patients with acute renal failure (ARF) treated with CVVHDF (n = 49) or CVVH (n = 50). Interventions: Retrieval of daily morning urea and creatinine values before and after the initiation of CRRT for up to 2 weeks of treatment. Measurements and Results: Before treatment, serum urea and creatinine concentrations were significantly lower in the CVVH group than in CVVHDF group (urea: 31.0 ± 15.0 mmol/L for CVVHDF and 24.7 ± 16.1 mmol/L for CVVH, p = 0.01, creatinine: 547 ± 308 µmol/L vs. 326 ± 250 µmol/L, p < 0.0001). These differences were still significant after 48 h of treatment (urea: 20.1 ± 8.3 mmol/L vs. 14.1 ± 6.1 mmol/L; p = 0.0003, creatinine: 360 ± 189 µmol/L vs. 215 ± 118 µmol/L; p < 0.0001). Throughout the duration of therapy, mean urea levels (22.3 ± 9.0 mmol/L for CVVHDF vs. 16.7 ± 7.8 mmol/L for CVVH, p < 0.0001) and mean creatinine levels (302 ± 167 vs. 211 ± 103 µmol/L, p < 0.0001) were better controlled in the CVVH group. Conclusions: CRRT strategies based on different techniques might have a significantly different impact on azotemic control.     

POSSIBLE STRATEGIES TO PROLONG CIRCUIT LIFE DURING HEMOFILTRATION: THREE CONTROLLED STUDIES

Background and Aims: The prevention of filter clotting is an important goal in the management of continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT). Anticoagulation is the mainstay of such prevention. However, other strategies might prolong filter life without increasing the risk of bleeding. We tested the effectiveness of three strategies (use of flat plate configuration, heparin administration into the air chamber and use of a larger membrane surface) aimed at prolonging circuit life without increasing the dose of anticoagulation. Methods: Thirty-one critically ill patients with acute renal failure (ARF) managed with continuous venovenous hemofiltration (CVVH) were studied. Filters were randomized in a crossover design to three consecutive studies: (1) filtration with either hollow-fiber or flat-plate hemofilters, (2) administration of heparin dose pre-filter or divided into pre-filter and directly into the bubble trap chamber and (3) use of two different surface areas with Filtral 8 (surface area 0.75 m²) vs. Filtral 12 (surface area 1.30 m²) hemofilters. Results: Mean circuit life for flat-plate and hollow-fiber hemofilters (cohort 1) was 14.7 ± 4.7 h and 17.1 ± 2.8 h respectively (NS). Mean circuit life for single heparin administration site vs. double site administration (cohort 2) was 17 ± 3.2 h and 18 ± 3.1 h respectively (NS). Mean circuit lifespan for 0.75 m² and 1.30 m² hemofilters was 16 ± 12.2 h and 15.7 ± 14.3 h respectively (NS) (cohort 3). Visible clot formation in the bubble trap chamber was a frequent cause of circuit failure. Conclusion: Neither flat plate membrane configuration nor increasing membrane surface area, nor heparin administration in the air chamber prolong circuit life during CVVH. The bubble trap chamber is a frequent site of circuit clotting.