Critical Care - Research Publications
Permanent URI for this collection
Search Results
1 - 4 of 4
-
ItemNo Preview AvailablePostoperative anaemia and patient-centred outcomes after major abdominal surgery: a retrospective cohort study.(Elsevier BV, 2022-09)BACKGROUND: Compared with anaemia before surgery, the underlying pathogenesis and implications of postoperative anaemia are largely unknown. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study analysed prospective data obtained from 2983 adult patients across 47 centres enrolled in a clinical trial evaluating restrictive and liberal intravenous fluids. The primary endpoint was persistent disability or death up to 90 days after surgery. Secondary endpoints included major septic complications, hospital stay, and patient quality of recovery using a 15-item quality of recovery (QoR-15) score, hospital re-admissions, and disability-free survival up to 12 months after surgery. Anaemia and disability were defined according to the WHO definitions. Multivariable regression was used to adjust for baseline risk and surgery. RESULTS: A total of 2983 patients met inclusion criteria for this study, of which 78.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 76.7-80.1%) had postoperative anaemia. Patients with postoperative anaemia had a higher adjusted risk of death or disability up to 90 days after surgery when compared with those without anaemia: 18.2% vs 9.2% (risk ratio [RR]=1.51; 95% CI, 1.10-2.07, P=0.011); lower QoR-15 scores on Day 3 and Day 30, 105 (95% CI, 87-119) vs 114 (95% CI, 99-128; P<0.001), and 130 (95% CI, 112-140) vs 139 (95% CI, 121-144; P<0.011), respectively; higher adjusted risk of a composite of mortality/septic complications, 2.01 (95% CI, 1.55-42.67; P<0.001); unplanned admission to ICU (RR=2.65; 95% CI, 1.65-4.23; P<0.001); and longer median (inter-quartile range [IQR]) hospital stays, 6.6 (4.4-12.4) vs 3.7 (2.5-6.5) days (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative anaemia is common and is independently associated with poor outcomes after surgery. Optimal prevention and treatment strategies need to be investigated. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04978285 (ClinicalTrials.gov).
-
ItemIntraoperative low tidal volume ventilation and the risk of ICD-10 coded delirium and the use for antipsychotic medications(BMC, 2022-05-16)BACKGROUND: Low tidal volume (VT) ventilation and its associated increase in arterial carbon dioxide (PaCO2) may affect postoperative neurologic function. We aimed to test the hypothesis that intraoperative low VT ventilation affect the incidence of postoperative ICD-10 coded delirium and/or the need for antipsychotic medications. METHODS: This is a post-hoc analysis of a large randomized controlled trial evaluating low vs. conventional VT ventilation during major non-cardiothoracic, non-intracranial surgery. The primary outcome was the incidence of ICD-10 delirium and/or the use of antipsychotic medications during hospital stay, and the absolute difference with its 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated. RESULTS: We studied 1206 patients (median age of 64 [55-72] years, 59.0% males, median ARISCAT of 26 [19-37], and 47.6% of ASA 3). ICD-10 coded delirium and /or antipsychotic medication use was diagnosed in 11.2% with similar incidence between low and conventional VT ventilation (11.1% vs. 11.3%; absolute difference, -0.24 [95%CI, -3.82 to 3.32]; p = 0.894). There was no interaction between allocation group and type of surgery. CONCLUSION: In adult patients undergoing major surgery, low VT ventilation was not associated with increased risk of ICD-10 delirium and/or the use of antipsychotic medications during hospital stay. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ANZCTR Identifier: ACTRN12614000790640 .
-
ItemIntra-operative ventilator mechanical power as a predictor of postoperative pulmonary complications in surgical patients A secondary analysis of a randomised clinical trial(LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS, 2022-01)BACKGROUND: Studies in critically ill patients suggest a relationship between mechanical power (an index of the energy delivered by the ventilator, which includes driving pressure, respiratory rate, tidal volume and inspiratory pressure) and complications. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the association between intra-operative mechanical power and postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs). DESIGN: Post hoc analysis of a large randomised clinical trial. SETTING: University-affiliated academic tertiary hospital in Melbourne, Australia, from February 2015 to February 2019. PATIENTS: Adult patients undergoing major noncardiothoracic, nonintracranial surgery. INTERVENTION: Dynamic mechanical power was calculated using the power equation adjusted by the respiratory system compliance (CRS). Multivariable models were used to assess the independent association between mechanical power and outcomes. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the incidence of PPCs within the first seven postoperative days. The secondary outcome was the incidence of acute respiratory failure. RESULTS: We studied 1156 patients (median age [IQR]: 64 [55 to 72] years, 59.5% men). Median mechanical power adjusted by CRS was 0.32 [0.22 to 0.51] (J min-1)/(ml cmH2O-1). A higher mechanical power was also independently associated with increased risk of PPCs [odds ratio (OR 1.34, 95% CI, 1.17 to 1.52); P < 0.001) and acute respiratory failure (OR 1.40, 95% CI, 1.21 to 1.61; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: In patients receiving ventilation during major noncardiothoracic, nonintracranial surgery, exposure to a higher mechanical power was independently associated with an increased risk of PPCs and acute respiratory failure. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry no: 12614000790640.
-
ItemSugammadex, neostigmine and postoperative pulmonary complications: an international randomised feasibility and pilot trial(BMC, 2021-11-09)BACKGROUND: Sugammadex reduces residual neuromuscular blockade after anaesthesia, potentially preventing postoperative pulmonary complications. However, definitive evidence is lacking. We therefore conducted a feasibility and pilot trial for a large randomised controlled trial of sugammadex, neostigmine, and postoperative pulmonary complications. METHODS: Patients aged ≥40 years having elective or expedited abdominal or intrathoracic surgery were recruited in Australia and Hong Kong. Perioperative care was at the discretion of clinicians, except for the use of rocuronium and/or vecuronium for neuromuscular blockade and the randomised intervention (sugammadex or neostigmine) for reversal. Feasibility measurements included recruitment, crossover, acceptability, completeness, and workload. Trial coordinator feedback was systematically sought. Patient-reported quality of life was measured using the EQ-5D-5L score. The primary pilot outcome was the incidence of new pulmonary complications up to hospital discharge (or postoperative day 7 if still in hospital). RESULTS: Among 150 eligible patients, 120 consented to participate (recruitment rate 80%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 73 to 86%). The randomised intervention was administered without crossover to 115 of 117 patients who received reversal (98%, 95% CI 94 to 100%). The protocol was acceptable or highly acceptable to the anaesthetist in 108 of 116 cases (93%, 95% CI 87 to 97%; missing = 4). Four patients of the 120 patients were lost to follow-up at 3 months (3.3%, 95% CI 0.9 to 8.3%). Case report forms were complete at 3 months for all remaining patients. The median time to complete trial processes was 3.5 h (range 2.5-4.5 h). Trial coordinators reported no barriers to trial processes. Patients were aged 64 (standard deviation 11) years, 70 (58%) were male and 50 (42%) were female, and planned surgeries were thoracic (23 [19%]), upper abdominal (41 [34%]), and lower abdominal (56 [47%]). The primary outcome was observed in 5 (8.5%) of the 59 sugammadex patients and 5 (8.2%) of the 61 neostigmine patients (odds ratio 1.02, 95% CI 0.28 to 3.67). CONCLUSIONS: A large international randomised controlled trial of sugammadex, neostigmine and postoperative pulmonary complications in adult patients having abdominal and intrathoracic surgery, including collection of cost-effectiveness evidence for Health Technology Appraisal, is feasible. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Prospectively registered at the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ( ACTRN12620001313921 ) on December 7, 2020. www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=380645&isReview=true .