Explore the vast range of titles available.

Abstract Rationale In patients on prior statin therapy who are hospitalized for acute infections, current literature is unclear on whether statins should be continued during their hospitalization. Objectives To test the hypothesis that continuation of therapy with statins influences the inflammatory response to infection and that cessation may cause an inflammatory rebound. Methods Prospective randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial of atorvastatin (20 mg) or matched placebo in 150 patients on preexisting statin therapy requiring hospitalization for infection. Measurements and Main Results The primary end point was progression of sepsis during hospitalization. At baseline, the rate of severe sepsis was 32% in both groups. Compared with baseline, the odds ratio for severe sepsis declined in both groups: 0.43 placebo and 0.5 statins (Day 3) versus 0.14 placebo and 0.12 statins (Day 14). The rate of decline of severe sepsis was similar between the groups (odds ratio 1.17 [0.56–2.47], P = 0.7 Day 3; 0.85 [0.21–3.34], P = 0.8 Day 14). IL-6 and C-reactive protein declined in both groups with no statistically significant difference (P = 0.7 and P = 0.2, respectively). An increase in cholesterol occurred in the placebo group (P < 0.0001). Most patients were not critically ill. Hospital mortality was 6.6%, with no difference between the groups (6 [8%] of 75 statin group; 4 [5.3%] of 75 placebo group; P = 0.75). Conclusions This study does not support a beneficial role of continuing preexisting statin therapy on sepsis and inflammatory parameters. Cessation of established statin therapy was not associated with an inflammatory rebound. Clinical trial registered at the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN 12605000756628).

Purpose It is unknown whether protocols targeting systematic prevention and treatment of fever achieve lower mean body temperature than usual care in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. The objective of the Randomised Evaluation of Active Control of temperature vs. ORdinary temperature management trial was to confirm the feasibility of such a protocol with a view to conducting a larger trial. Methods We randomly assigned 184 adults without acute brain pathologies who had a fever in the previous 12 h, and were expected to be ventilated beyond the calendar day after recruitment, to systematic prevention and treatment of fever or usual care. The primary outcome was mean body temperature in the ICU within 7 days of randomisation. Secondary outcomes included in-hospital mortality, ICU-free days and survival time censored at hospital discharge. Results Compared with usual temperature management, active management significantly reduced mean temperature. In both groups, fever generally abated within 72 h. The mean temperature difference between groups was greatest in the first 48 h, when it was generally in the order of 0.5 °C. Overall, 23 of 89 patients assigned to active management (25.8%) and 23 of 89 patients assigned to usual management (25.8%) died in hospital (odds ratio 1.0, 95% CI 0.51–1.96, P  = 1.0). There were no statistically significant differences between groups in ICU-free days or survival to day 90. Conclusions Active temperature management reduced body temperature compared with usual care; however, fever abated rapidly, even in patients assigned to usual care, and the magnitude of temperature separation was small. Trial registration Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry Number, ACTRN12616001285448

Whether hydrocortisone reduces mortality among patients with septic shock is unclear. Patients with septic shock undergoing mechanical ventilation were assigned to receive an infusion of hydrocortisone or placebo. Hydrocortisone did not result in lower 90-day mortality.

Abstract Rationale Observational studies link statin therapy with improved outcomes in patients with severe sepsis. Objectives To test whether atorvastatin therapy affects biologic and clinical outcomes in critically ill patients with severe sepsis. Methods Phase II, multicenter, prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial stratified by site and prior statin use. A cohort of 250 critically ill patients (123 statins, 127 placebo) with severe sepsis were administrated either atorvastatin (20 mg daily) or matched placebo. Measurements and Main Results There was no difference in IL-6 concentrations (primary end point) between the atorvastatin and placebo groups (P = 0.76) and no interaction between treatment group and time to suggest that the groups behaved differently over time (P = 0.26). Baseline plasma IL-6 was lower among previous statin users (129 [87–191] vs. 244 [187–317] pg/ml; P = 0.01). There was no difference in length of stay, change in Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores or mortality at intensive care unit discharge, hospital discharge, 28- or 90-day (15% vs. 19%), or adverse effects between the two groups. Cholesterol was lower in patients treated with atorvastatin (2.4 [0.07] vs. 2.6 [0.06] mmol/L; P = 0.006). In the predefined group of 77 prior statin users, those randomized to placebo had a greater 28-day mortality (28% vs. 5%; P = 0.01) compared with those who received atorvastatin. The difference was not statistically significant at 90 days (28% vs. 11%; P = 0.06). Conclusions Atorvastatin therapy in severe sepsis did not affect IL-6 levels. Prior statin use was associated with a lower baseline IL-6 concentration and continuation of atorvastatin in this cohort was associated with improved survival. Clinical trial registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN 12607000028404).

Background In septic shock, the optimal timing of adjunctive vasopressin initiation shock is unknown. We aimed to assess the effect of its early initiation for patients with septic shock. Methods We conducted a multicenter target trial emulation to estimate the intensive care unit (ICU) mortality effect of early (≤ 6 h) adjunctive vasopressin compared with usual care. Eligible patients had septic shock diagnosed within 6 h of ICU admission. The primary outcome of this study was 30-day ICU mortality. Subgroup analyses were conducted to test the interaction of early vasopressin start with peak norepinephrine-equivalent dose (NED) at 6 h, APACHE score, peak lactate at 6 h and invasive mechanical ventilation. Secondary outcomes were the impact of delayed vasopressin introduction on 30-day ICU mortality and effect of NED at vasopressin start on 30-day ICU mortality. We used the parametric g-formula to emulate a target trial. Results Overall, 3,105 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Mean age was 62 years and mean APACHE III score was 83. In the first six hours of vasopressor therapy, 1,864 (60%) patients were invasively ventilated. Estimated 30-day ICU mortality was 19.34% (95%CI, 17.0 to 21.68) in the no vasopressin group and 18.45% (95%CI, 16.26 to 20.63) in the early vasopressin group; relative risk 0.95 (95%CI, 0.93 to 0.98). The estimated 30-day ICU mortality effect of starting vasopressin was particularly strong at lower norepinephrine doses (< 0.25 µg.kg −1 .min −1 ) and significant at lower norepinephrine doses than recommended by the Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines. Vasopressin administration progressively increased over the study period, from 35.2% (95%CI, 30.0 to 40.5) in 2015 to 45.1% (95%CI, 40.7 to 49.6) in 2021 (ß =  + 1.3% per year; 95%CI, + 0.46 to + 2.16, p  = 0.011). Patients had progressively lower norepinephrine equivalent dose (ß = − 0.05 µg.kg −1 .min −1 per year; 95%CI, − 0.09 to − 0.002, p  = 0.038) and lower total SOFA score (ß = − 0.1 point per year; 95%CI, − 0.18 to − 0.07, p  < 0.001) at vasopressin start. Conclusions In this emulation of a hypothetical target trial, patients with septic shock benefited from early vasopressin administration. These findings can help design prospective randomised-control trials of early adjunctive vasopressin use in septic shock.

PurposeTo investigate the impact of hydrocortisone treatment and illness severity on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) at 6 months in septic shock survivors from the ADRENAL trial.MethodsUsing the EuroQol questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) at 6 months after randomization we assessed HRQoL in patient subgroups defined by hydrocortisone or placebo treatment, gender, illness severity (APACHE II < or ≥ 25), and severity of shock (baseline peak catecholamine doses < or ≥ 15 mcg/min). Additionally, in subgroups defined by post-randomisation variables; time to shock reversal (days), treatment with renal replacement therapy (RRT), and presence of bacteremia.ResultsAt 6 months, there were 2521 survivors. Of these 2151 patients (85.3%-1080 hydrocortisone and 1071 placebo) completed 6-month follow-up. Overall, at 6 months the mean EQ-5D-5L visual analogue scale (VAS) was 70.8, mean utility score 59.4. Between 15% and 30% of patients reported moderate to severe problems in any given HRQoL domain. There were no differences in any EQ-5D-5L domain in patients who received hydrocortisone vs. placebo, nor in the mean VAS (p = 0.6161), or mean utility score (p = 0.7611). In all patients combined, males experienced lower pain levels compared to females [p = 0.0002). Neither higher severity of illness or shock impacted reported HRQoL. In post-randomisation subgroups, longer time to shock reversal was associated with increased problems with mobility (p = < 0.0001]; self-care (p = 0.0.0142), usual activities (p = <0.0001] and pain (p = 0.0384). Amongst those treated with RRT, more patients reported increased problems with mobility (p = 0.0307) and usual activities (p = 0.0048) compared to those not treated. Bacteraemia was not associated with worse HRQoL in any domains of the EQ-5D-5L.ConclusionsApproximately one fifth of septic shock survivors report moderate to extreme problems in HRQoL domains at 6 months. Hydrocortisone treatment for septic shock was not associated with improved HRQoL at 6 months. Female gender was associated with worse pain at 6 months.

Background The optimal transfusion threshold for patients undergoing venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) remains uncertain. Methods We used data from OBLEX (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03714048), an international, prospective, observational study conducted across 12 centres in Australia, Europe, and North America between 2019 and 2022. The study collected information on patient demographics, bleeding risk factors, transfusion practices during the first seven days of ECMO, and in-hospital mortality. Using these data, we emulated a target trial comparing the effects of liberal transfusion practice (transfusion initiated at Hb ≥ 90 g/L) and restrictive transfusion practice (transfusion initiated at Hb ≤ 70 g/L) on hospital mortality within seven days of ECMO initiation. Sequential trials approach was used to estimate the causal contrast. Results A total of 534 patients were included, with 46% dying during hospitalisation. After accounting for potential confounders, the liberal transfusion practice demonstrated a modest survival benefit within the first two days of ECMO, with differences in survival probabilities of 12% (95% CI 3% to 21%) at day 2 and 13% (95% CI 2% to 25%) at day 3, corresponding to the number needed to treat (NNT) of 8 and 7 respectively. No differences in survival benefit were found after day 3. These results were consistent across sensitivity and exploratory analyses. Conclusion This target trial emulation study suggests that a liberal transfusion threshold may provide a modest survival benefit during the early course of VA-ECMO, but no benefit afterwards. Prospective studies are needed to confirm these findings, assess clinical adoption, and investigate underlying mechanism.

The incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI) is increasing globally and it is much more common than end-stage kidney disease. AKI is associated with high mortality and cost of hospitalisation. Studies of treatments to reduce this high mortality have used differing renal replacement therapy (RRT) modalities and have not shown improvement in the short term. The reported long-term outcomes of AKI are variable and the effect of differing RRT modalities upon them is not clear. We used the prolonged follow-up of a large clinical trial to prospectively examine the long-term outcomes and effect of RRT dosing in patients with AKI. We extended the follow-up of participants in the Randomised Evaluation of Normal vs. Augmented Levels of RRT (RENAL) study from 90 days to 4 years after randomization. Primary and secondary outcomes were mortality and requirement for maintenance dialysis, respectively, assessed in 1,464 (97%) patients at a median of 43.9 months (interquartile range [IQR] 30.0-48.6 months) post randomization. A total of 468/743 (63%) and 444/721 (62%) patients died in the lower and higher intensity groups, respectively (risk ratio [RR] 1.04, 95% CI 0.96-1.12, p = 0.49). Amongst survivors to day 90, 21 of 411 (5.1%) and 23 of 399 (5.8%) in the respective groups were treated with maintenance dialysis (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.63-2.00, p = 0.69). The prevalence of albuminuria among survivors was 40% and 44%, respectively (p = 0.48). Quality of life was not different between the two treatment groups. The generalizability of these findings to other populations with AKI requires further exploration. Patients with AKI requiring RRT in intensive care have high long-term mortality but few require maintenance dialysis. Long-term survivors have a heavy burden of proteinuria. Increased intensity of RRT does not reduce mortality or subsequent treatment with dialysis. www.ClinicalTrials.govNCT00221013.