Prevalence and outcome of acute gastrointestinal injury in critically ill patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:The aim of the study was to investigate the prevalence and impact of acute gastrointestinal injury (AGI) on clinical outcomes in critically ill patients. METHODS:The PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases were searched to identify trials that assessed gastrointestinal injury in critically ill patients. Outcome measures were prevalence of AGI among critically ill patients; incidence of mortality among critically ill patients with AGI, and incidence of mortality stratified by severity of AGI. RESULTS:The meta-analysis included 14 studies. The prevalence of AGI in critically ill patients was 40% [95% confidence interval (CI), 27%-54%]; the incidence of mortality among critically ill patients with AGI was 33% (95% CI, 26%-41%). There was a higher risk of mortality in critically ill patients with AGI compared to those without AGI [risk ratio (RR) = 2.01; 95% CI 1.20-3.37, P = .008). Subgroup analyses of studies that defined AGI according to European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM) criteria confirmed these findings and showed that the risk of mortality was higher in critically ill patients with more severe AGI (ESICM grade III and IV vs grade II) [RR of 1.86 (95% CI 1.48-2.34), P < .00001]. CONCLUSION:AGI is common in critically ill patients, mortality in critically ill patients with AGI is high, and severity of AGI is associated with mortality. The widespread clinical use of standard criteria with a severity gradation will facilitate the diagnosis and management of AGI in critically ill patients.
Project description:In 2012, the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine proposed a definition for acute gastrointestinal injury (AGI) based on current medical evidence and expert opinion. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the feasibility of using the current AGI grading system and to investigate the association between AGI severity grades with clinical outcome in critically ill patients.Adult patients at 14 general intensive care units (ICUs) with an expected ICU stay ?24 h were prospectively studied. The AGI grade was assessed daily on the basis of gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms, intra-abdominal pressures, and feeding intolerance (FI) in the first week of admission to the ICU.Among the 550 patients enrolled, 456 patients (82.9%) received mechanical ventilation, and 470 patients were identified for AGI. The distribution of the global AGI grade was 24.5% with grade I, 49.4% with grade II, 20.6% with grade III, and 5.5% with grade IV. AGI grading was positively correlated with 28- and 60-day mortality (P?<?0.0001). Univariate Cox regression analysis showed that age, sepsis, diabetes mellitus, coronary artery disease, the use of vasoactive drugs, serum creatinine and lactate levels, mechanical ventilation, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) score, and the global AGI grade were significantly (P???0.02) associated with 60-day mortality. In a multivariate analysis including these variables, diabetes mellitus (HR 1.43, 95% CI 1.03-1.87; P?=?0.05), the use of vasoactive drugs (HR 1.56, 95% CI 1.12-2.11; P?=?0.01), serum lactate (HR 1.15, 95% CI 1.06-1.24; P?=?0.03), global AGI grade (HR 1.65, 95% CI 1.28-2.12; P?=?0.008), and APACHE II score (HR 1.04, 95% CI 1.02-1.06; P?<?0.001) were independently associated with 60-day mortality. In a subgroup analysis of 402 patients with 7-day survival, in addition to clinical predictors and the AGI grade on the first day of ICU stay, FI within the first week of ICU stay had an independent and incremental prognostic value for 60-day mortality (?2?=?41.9 vs. 52.2, P?=?0.007).The AGI grading scheme is useful for identifying the severity of GI dysfunction and could be used as a predictor of impaired outcomes. In addition, these results support the hypothesis that persistent FI within the first week of ICU stay is an independent determinant for mortality.Chinese Clinical Trial Registry identifier: ChiCTR-OCS-13003824 . Registered on 29 September 2013.
Project description:PURPOSE: Acute gastrointestinal (GI) dysfunction and failure have been increasingly recognized in critically ill patients. The variety of definitions proposed in the past has led to confusion and difficulty in comparing one study to another. An international working group convened to standardize the definitions for acute GI failure and GI symptoms and to review the therapeutic options. METHODS: The Working Group on Abdominal Problems (WGAP) of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM) developed the definitions for GI dysfunction in intensive care patients on the basis of the available evidence and current understanding of the pathophysiology. RESULTS: Definitions for acute gastrointestinal injury (AGI) with its four grades of severity, as well as for feeding intolerance syndrome and GI symptoms (e.g. vomiting, diarrhoea, paralysis, high gastric residual volumes) are proposed. AGI is a malfunctioning of the GI tract in intensive care patients due to their acute illness. AGI grade I = increased risk of developing GI dysfunction or failure (a self-limiting condition); AGI grade II = GI dysfunction (a condition that requires interventions); AGI grade III = GI failure (GI function cannot be restored with interventions); AGI grade IV = dramatically manifesting GI failure (a condition that is immediately life-threatening). Current evidence and expert opinions regarding treatment of acute GI dysfunction are provided. CONCLUSIONS: State-of-the-art definitions for GI dysfunction with gradation as well as management recommendations are proposed on the basis of current medical evidence and expert opinion. The WGAP recommends using these definitions for clinical and research purposes.
Project description:Multiple Biomarkers have recently been shown to be elevated in COVID-19, a respiratory infection with multi-organ dysfunction; however, information regarding the prognostic value of cardiac biomarkers as it relates to disease severity and cardiac injury are inconsistent. The goal of this meta-analysis was to summarize the evidence regarding the prognostic relevance of cardiac biomarkers from data available in published reports. PubMed, Embase and Web of Science were searched from inception through April 2020 for studies comparing median values of cardiac biomarkers in critically ill versus non-critically ill COVID-19 patients, or patients who died versus those who survived. The weighted mean differences (WMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) between the groups were calculated for each study and combined using a random effects meta-analysis model. The odds ratio (OR) for mortality based on cardiac injury was combined from studies reporting it. Troponin levels were significantly higher in COVID-19 patients who died or were critically ill versus those who were alive or not critically ill (WMD 0.57, 95% CI 0.43-0.70, p?<?0.001). Additionally, BNP levels were also significantly higher in patients who died or were critically ill (WMD 0.45, 95% CI - 0.21-0.69, p?<?0.001). Cardiac injury was independently associated with significantly increased odds of mortality (OR 6.641, 95% CI 1.26-35.1, p?=?0.03). A significant difference in levels of D-dimer was seen in those who died or were critically ill. CK levels were only significantly higher in those who died versus those who were alive (WMD 0.79, 95% CI 0.25-1.33, p?=?0.004). Cardiac biomarkers add prognostic value to the determination of the severity of COVID-19 and can predict mortality.
Project description:<h4>Introduction</h4>In critical illness, the association of hypoglycemia, blood glucose (BG) variability and outcome are not well understood. We describe the incidence, clinical factors and outcomes associated with an early hypoglycemia and BG variability in critically ill patients.<h4>Methods</h4>Retrospective interrogation of prospectively collected data from the Australia New Zealand Intensive Care Society Adult Patient Database on 66184 adult admissions to 24 intensive care units (ICUs) from 1 January 2000 to 31 December 2005. Primary exposure was hypoglycemia (BG < 4.5 mmol/L) and BG variability (BG < 4.5 and >or= 12.0 mmol/L) within 24 hours of admission. Primary outcome was all-cause mortality.<h4>Results</h4>The cumulative incidence of hypoglycemia and BG variability were 13.8% (95% confidence interval (CI) = 13.5 to 14.0; n = 9122) and 2.9% (95%CI = 2.8 to 3.0, n = 1913), respectively. Several clinical factors were associated with both hypoglycemia and BG variability including: co-morbid disease (P < 0.001), non-elective admissions (P < 0.001), higher illness severity (P < 0.001), and primary septic diagnosis (P < 0.001). Hypoglycemia was associated with greater odds of adjusted ICU (odds ratio (OR) = 1.41, 95% CI = 1.31 to 1.54) and hospital death (OR = 1.36, 95% CI = 1.27 to 1.46). Hypoglycemia severity was associated with 'dose-response' increases in mortality. BG variability was associated with greater odds of adjusted ICU (1.5, 95% CI = 1.4 to 1.6) and hospital (1.4, 95% CI = 1.3 to 1.5) mortality, when compared with either hypoglycemia only or neither.<h4>Conclusions</h4>In critically ill patients, both early hypoglycemia and early variability in BG are relatively common, and independently portend an increased risk for mortality.
Project description:Background Multiple Biomarkers have recently been shown to be elevated in COVID-19, a respiratory infection with multi-organ dysfunction; however, information regarding the prognostic value of cardiac biomarkers as it relates to disease severity and cardiac injury are inconsistent. Research Question The goal of this meta-analysis was to summarize the evidence regarding the prognostic relevance of cardiac biomarkers from data available in published reports. Study Design and Methods PubMed was searched from inception through April 2020 for studies comparing median values of cardiac biomarkers in critically ill versus non-critically ill COVID-19 patients, or patients who died versus those who survived. The weighted mean differences (WMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) between the groups were calculated for each study and combined using a random effects meta-analysis model. The odds ratio (OR) for mortality based on cardiac injury was combined from studies reporting it. Results Troponin levels were significantly higher in COVID-19 patients who died or were critically ill versus those who were alive or not critically ill (WMD 0.58, 95% CI 0.42-0.71, p<0.001). Cardiac injury was independently associated with significantly increased odds of mortality (OR 6.641, 95% CI 1.26 - 35.1, p=0.03). No difference in BNP was seen between the two groups. A significant difference in levels of D-dimer was seen in those who died or were critically ill. CK levels were only significantly higher in those who died versus those who were alive (WMD 0.47 95% CI 0.09-0.84, p=0.014). Interpretation Cardiac biomarkers add prognostic value to the determination of the severity of COVID-19 and can predict mortality.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Despite advances in the management of bloodstream infections (BSI) caused by Candida spp., the mortality still remains high in critically ill patients. The worldwide epidemiology of yeast-related BSI is subject to changing species distribution and resistance patterns, challenging antifungal treatment strategies. The aim of this single-center study was to identify predictors of mortality after 28 and 180 days in a cohort of mixed surgical and medical critically ill patients with candidemia. METHODS:Patients, who had been treated for laboratory-confirmed BSI caused by Candida spp. in one of 12 intensive care units (ICU) at a University hospital between 2008 and 2017, were retrospectively identified. We retrieved data including clinical characteristics, Candida species distribution, and antifungal management from electronic health records to identify risk factors for mortality at 28 and 180 days using a Cox regression model. RESULTS:A total of 391 patients had blood cultures positive for Candida spp. (incidence 4.8/1000 ICU admissions). The mortality rate after 28 days was 47% (n?=?185) and increased to 60% (n?=?234) after 180 days. Age (HR 1.02 [95% CI 1.01-1.03]), a history of liver cirrhosis (HR 1.54 [95% CI 1.07-2.20]), septic shock (HR 2.41 [95% CI 1.73-3.37]), the Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment score (HR 1.12 [95% CI 1.07-1.17]), Candida score (HR 1.25 [95% CI 1.11-1.40]), and the length of ICU stay at culture positivity (HR 1.01 [95% CI 1.00-1.01]) were significant risk factors for death at 180 days. Patients, who had abdominal surgery (HR 0.66 [95% CI 0.48-0.91]) and patients, who received adequate (HR 0.36 [95% CI 0.24-0.52]) or non-adequate (HR 0.31 [95% CI 0.16-0.62]) antifungal treatment, had a reduced mortality risk compared to medical admission and no antifungal treatment, respectively. CONCLUSIONS:The mortality of critically ill patients with Candida BSI is high and is mainly determined by disease severity, multiorgan dysfunction, and antifungal management rather than species distribution and susceptibility. Our results underline the importance of timely treatment of candidemia. However, controversies remain on the optimal definition of adequate antifungal management.
Project description:PURPOSE:Selenium supplementation is a potentially promising adjunctive therapy for critically ill patients, but the results are controversy among studies. Accordingly, we performed this meta-analysis to more clearly detect the efficacy and safety of selenium supplementation on critically ill patients. METHODS:Systematic literature retrieval was carried out to obtain RCTs on selenium supplementation for critically ill patients up to August 2017. Data extraction and quality evaluation of these studies were performed by 2 investigators. Statistical analyses was performed by RevMan 5.3. Trial sequential analysis (TSA) was conducted to control the risks of type I and type II errors and calculate required information size (RIS). RESULTS:Totally 19 RCTs involving 3341 critically ill patients were carried out in which 1694 participates were in the selenium supplementation group, and 1647 in the control. The aggregated results suggested that compared with the control, intravenous selenium supplement as a single therapy could decrease the total mortality (RR?=?0.86, 95% CI: 0.78-0.95, P?=?.002, TSA-adjusted 95% CI?=?0.77-0.96, RIS?=?4108, n?=?3297) and may shorten the length of stay in hospital (MD -2.30, 95% CI -4.03 to -0.57, P?=?.009), but had no significant treatment effect on 28-days mortality (RR?=?0.96, 95% CI: 0.85-1.09, P?=?.54) and could not shorten the length of ICU stay (MD -0.15, 95% CI -1.68 to 1.38, P?=?.84) in critically ill patients. Our results also showed that selenium supplementation did not increase incidence of drug-induced side effect compared with the control (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.30, P?=?.73). CONCLUSIONS:The current evidence suggests that the use of selenium could reduce the total mortality, and TSA results showed that our outcome is reliable and no more randomized controlled trials are needed. But selenium supplementation might have no effect on reducing 28-days mortality as well as the incidence of new infections, or on length of stay in ICU or mechanical ventilation. However, the results should be used carefully because of potential limitations.
Project description:INTRODUCTION: Glutamine supplementation is supposed to reduce mortality and nosocomial infections in critically ill patients. However, the recently published reducing deaths due to oxidative stress (REDOX) trials did not provide evidence supporting this. This study investigated the impact of glutamine-supplemented nutrition on the outcomes of critically ill patients using a meta-analysis. METHODS: We searched for and gathered data from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Elsevier, Web of Science and ClinicalTrials.gov databases reporting the effects of glutamine supplementation on outcomes in critically ill patients. We produced subgroup analyses of the trials according to specific patient populations, modes of nutrition and glutamine dosages. RESULTS: Among 823 related articles, eighteen Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) met all inclusion criteria. Mortality events among 3,383 patients were reported in 17 RCTs. Mortality showed no significant difference between glutamine group and control group. In the high dosage subgroup (above 0.5 g/kg/d), the mortality rate in the glutamine group was significantly higher than that of the control group (relative risk (RR) 1.18; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.02 to 1.38; P?=?0.03). In 15 trials, which included a total of 2,862 patients, glutamine supplementation reportedly affected the incidence of nosocomial infections in the critically ill patients observed. The incidence of nosocomial infections in the glutamine group was significantly lower than that of the control group (RR 0.85; 95% CI, 0.74 to 0.97; P?=?0.02). In the surgical ICU subgroup, glutamine supplementation statistically reduced the rate of nosocomial infections (RR 0.70; 95% CI, 0.52 to 0.94; P?=?0.04). In the parental nutrition subgroup, glutamine supplementation statistically reduced the rate of nosocomial infections (RR 0.83; 95% CI, 0.70 to 0.98; P?=?0.03). The length of hospital stay was reported in 14 trials, in which a total of 2,777 patients were enrolled; however, the patient length of stay was not affected by glutamine supplementation. CONCLUSIONS: Glutamine supplementation conferred no overall mortality and length of hospital stay benefit in critically ill patients. However, this therapy reduced nosocomial infections among critically ill patients, which differed according to patient populations, modes of nutrition and glutamine dosages.
Project description:<h4>Background</h4>Antiplatelet agents are commonly used for cardiovascular diseases, but their pleiotropic effects in critically ill patients are controversial. We therefore performed a meta-analysis of cohort studies to investigate the effect of antiplatelet therapy in the critically ill.<h4>Methods</h4>Nine cohort studies, retrieved from PubMed and Embase before November 2015, involving 14,612 critically ill patients and 4765 cases of antiplatelet users, were meta-analysed. The main outcome was hospital or 30-day mortality. Secondary outcome was acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) or acute lung injury (ALI). Random- or fixed-effect models were taken for quantitative synthesis of the data.<h4>Results</h4>Antiplatelet therapy was associated with decreased mortality (odds ratio (OR) 0.61; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.52-0.71; I2 = 0%; P <0. 001) and ARDS/ALI (OR 0.64; 95% CI, 0.50-0.82; I2 = 0%; P <0. 001). In every stratum of subgroups, similar findings on mortality reduction were consistently observed in critically ill patients.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Antiplatelet therapy is associated with reduced mortality and lower incidence of ARDS/ALI in critically ill patients, particularly those with predisposing conditions such as high-risk surgery, trauma, pneumonia, and sepsis. However, it remains unclear whether similar findings can be observed in the unselected and broad population with critical illness.
Project description:Although significant improvements have been achieved in the renal replacement therapy of acute kidney injury (AKI), the mortality of patients with AKI remains high. The aim of this study is to prospectively investigate the capacity of Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation version II (APACHE II), Simplified Acute Physiology Score version II (SAPS II), Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) and Acute Tubular Necrosis Individual Severity Index (ATN-ISI) to predict in-hospital mortality of critically ill patients with AKI. A prospective observational study was conducted in a university teaching hospital. 189 consecutive critically ill patients with AKI were selected according Risk, Injury, Failure, Loss, or End-stage kidney disease criteria. APACHE II, SAPS II, SOFA and ATN-ISI counts were obtained within the first 24?hours following admission. Receiver operating characteristic analyses (ROCs) were applied. Area under the ROC curve (AUC) was calculated. Sensitivity and specificity of in-hospital mortality prediction were calculated. In this study, the in-hospital mortality of critically ill patients with AKI was 37.04% (70/189). AUC of APACHE II, SAPS II, SOFA and ATN-ISI was 0.903 (95% CI 0.856 to 0.950), 0.893 (95% CI 0.847 to 0.940), 0.908 (95% CI 0.866 to 0.950) and 0.889 (95% CI 0.841 to 0.937) and sensitivity was 90.76%, 89.92%, 90.76% and 89.08% and specificity was 77.14%, 70.00%, 71.43% and 71.43%, respectively. In this study, it was found APACHE II, SAPS II, SOFA and ATN-ISI are reliable in-hospital mortality predictors of critically ill patients with AKI. Trial registration number: NCT00953992.