Explore the vast range of titles available.

[...]in line are transport ventilators, which vary largely in performance according to generation and model. There is also a case study reporting a one-ventilator technique during air medical transport of twin newborns [5] and an article that pressure controlled ventilation was simultaneously achieved in two healthy volunteers via mask ventilation [6]. [...]modern anesthesia ventilators as well as new-generation transport ventilators provide a valuable resource.

In this factorial trial, the prophylactic use of dexamethasone, droperidol, ondansetron, and total intravenous anesthesia each resulted in similar reductions in the risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting. In this population of patients at high risk for nausea and vomiting, the rates of nausea and vomiting were 52 percent in those given no antiemetic intervention and 37 percent, 28 percent, and 22 percent in those given one, two, and three interventions, respectively. The prophylactic use of dexamethasone, droperidol, ondansetron, and total intravenous anesthesia each resulted in similar reductions in the risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting. Anesthesia is given to more than 75 million surgical patients annually, worldwide. Untreated, one third will have postoperative nausea, vomiting, or both. 1 – 3 Patients often rate postoperative nausea and vomiting as worse than postoperative pain. 4 , 5 It is not surprising, therefore, that prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting improves satisfaction among patients who are likely to experience them. 6 Vomiting increases the risk of aspiration and has been associated with suture dehiscence, esophageal rupture, subcutaneous emphysema, and bilateral pneumothoraxes. 7 , 8 Postoperative nausea and vomiting frequently delay discharge from postanesthesia care units, and they are the leading cause of unexpected hospital admission . . .

The viral load and tissue distribution of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) remain important questions. The current study investigated SARS-CoV-2 viral load, biodistribution and anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody formation in patients suffering from severe corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) induced acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). This is a retrospective single-center study in 23 patients with COVID-19-induced ARDS. Data were collected within routine intensive care. SARS-CoV-2 viral load was assessed via reverse transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR). Overall, 478 virology samples were taken. Anti-SARS-CoV-2-Spike-receptor binding domain (RBD) antibody detection of blood samples was performed with an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Most patients (91%) suffered from severe ARDS during ICU treatment with a 30-day mortality of 30%. None of the patients received antiviral treatment. Tracheal aspirates tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 in 100% of the cases, oropharyngeal swabs only in 77%. Blood samples were positive in 26% of the patients. No difference of viral load was found in tracheal or blood samples with regard to 30-day survival or disease severity. SARS-CoV-2 was never found in dialysate. Serologic testing revealed significantly lower concentrations of SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing IgM and IgA antibodies in survivors compared to non-survivors (p = 0.009). COVID-19 induced ARDS is accompanied by a high viral load of SARS-CoV-2 in tracheal aspirates, which remained detectable in the majority throughout intensive care treatment. Remarkably, SARS-CoV-2 RNA was never detected in dialysate even in patients with RNAemia. Viral load or the buildup of neutralizing antibodies was not associated with 30-day survival or disease severity.

Background Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a complex clinical diagnosis with various possible etiologies. One common feature, however, is pulmonary permeability edema, which leads to an increased alveolar diffusion pathway and, subsequently, impaired oxygenation and decarboxylation. A novel inhaled peptide agent (AP301, solnatide) was shown to markedly reduce pulmonary edema in animal models of ARDS and to be safe to administer to healthy humans in a Phase I clinical trial. Here, we present the protocol for a Phase IIB clinical trial investigating the safety and possible future efficacy endpoints in ARDS patients. Methods This is a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind intervention study. Patients with moderate to severe ARDS in need of mechanical ventilation will be randomized to parallel groups receiving escalating doses of solnatide or placebo, respectively. Before advancing to a higher dose, a data safety monitoring board will investigate the data from previous patients for any indication of patient safety violations. The intervention (application of the investigational drug) takes places twice daily over the course of 7 days, ensued by a follow-up period of another 21 days. Discussion The patients to be included in this trial will be severely sick and in need of mechanical ventilation. The amount of data to be collected upon screening and during the course of the intervention phase is substantial and the potential timeframe for inclusion of any given patient is short. However, when prepared properly, adherence to this protocol will make for the acquisition of reliable data. Particular diligence needs to be exercised with respect to informed consent, because eligible patients will most likely be comatose and/or deeply sedated at the time of inclusion. Trial registration This trial was prospectively registered with the EU Clinical trials register (clinicaltrialsregister.eu). EudraCT Number: 2017-003855-47 .

PurposeThe trauma centre of the Wuerzburg University Hospital has integrated a pioneering dual-room twin-CT scanner in a multiple trauma pathway. For concurrent treatment of two trauma patients, two carbon CT examination and intervention tables are positioned head to head with one sliding CT-Gantry in the middle. The focus of this study is the process of trauma care with the time to CT (tCT) and the time to operation (tOR) as quality indicator.MethodsAll patients with suspected multiple trauma, who required emergency surgery and who were initially diagnosed by the CT trauma protocol between 05/2018 and 12/2018 were included. Data relating to time spans (tCT and tOR), severity of injury and outcome was obtained.Results110 of the 589 screened trauma patients had surgery immediately after finishing primary assessment in the ER. The ISS was 17 (9–34) (median and interquartile range, IQR). tCT was 15 (11–19) minutes (median and IQR) and tOR was 96.5 (75–119) minutes (median and IQR). In the first 30 days, seven patients died (6.4%) including two within the first 24 h (2%). There were two ICU days (1–6) (median and IQR) and one (0–1) (median and IQR) ventilator day.ConclusionThe twin-CT technology is a fascinating tool to organize high-quality trauma care for two multiple trauma patients simultaneously.

Background Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) associated coagulopathy (CAC) leads to thromboembolic events in a high number of critically ill COVID-19 patients. However, specific diagnostic or therapeutic algorithms for CAC have not been established. In the current study, we analyzed coagulation abnormalities with point-of-care testing (POCT) and their relation to hemostatic complications in patients suffering from COVID-19 induced Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS). Our hypothesis was that specific diagnostic patterns can be identified in patients with COVID-19 induced ARDS at risk of thromboembolic complications utilizing POCT. Methods This is a single-center, retrospective observational study. Longitudinal data from 247 rotational thromboelastometries (Rotem®) and 165 impedance aggregometries (Multiplate®) were analysed in 18 patients consecutively admitted to the ICU with a COVID-19 induced ARDS between March 12th to June 30th, 2020. Results Median age was 61 years (IQR: 51–69). Median PaO 2 /FiO 2 on admission was 122 mmHg (IQR: 87–189), indicating moderate to severe ARDS. Any form of hemostatic complication occurred in 78 % of the patients with deep vein/arm thrombosis in 39 %, pulmonary embolism in 22 %, and major bleeding in 17 %. In Rotem® elevated A10 and maximum clot firmness (MCF) indicated higher clot strength. The delta between EXTEM A10 minus FIBTEM A10 (ΔA10) > 30 mm, depicting the sole platelet-part of clot firmness, was associated with a higher risk of thromboembolic events (OD: 3.7; 95 %CI 1.3–10.3; p  = 0.02). Multiplate® aggregometry showed hypoactive platelet function. There was no correlation between single Rotem® and Multiplate® parameters at intensive care unit (ICU) admission and thromboembolic or bleeding complications. Conclusions Rotem® and Multiplate® results indicate hypercoagulability and hypoactive platelet dysfunction in COVID-19 induced ARDS but were all in all poorly related to hemostatic complications..

Background Postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) increase morbidity and mortality of surgical patients, duration of hospital stay and costs. Postoperative atelectasis of dorsal lung regions as a common PPC has been described before, but its clinical relevance is insufficiently examined. Pulmonary electrical impedance tomography (EIT) enables the bedside visualization of regional ventilation in real-time within a transversal section of the lung. Dorsal atelectasis or effusions might cause a ventral redistribution of ventilation. We hypothesized the existence of ventral redistribution in spontaneously breathing patients during their recovery from abdominal and peripheral surgery and that vital capacity is reduced if regional ventilation shifts to ventral lung regions. Methods This prospective observational study included 69 adult patients undergoing elective surgery with an expected intermediate or high risk for PPCs. Patients undergoing abdominal and peripheral surgery were recruited to obtain groups of equal size. Patients received general anesthesia with and without additional regional anesthesia. On the preoperative, the first and the third postoperative day, EIT was performed at rest and during spirometry (forced breathing). The center of ventilation in dorso-ventral direction (COVy) was calculated. Results Both groups received intraoperative low tidal volume ventilation. Postoperative ventral redistribution of ventilation (forced breathing COVy; preoperative: 16.5 (16.0–17.3); first day: 17.8 (16.9–18.2), p  < 0.004; third day: 17.4 (16.2–18.2), p  = 0.020) and decreased forced vital capacity in percentage of predicted values (FVC%predicted) (median: 93, 58, 64%, respectively) persisted after abdominal surgery. In addition, dorsal to ventral shift was associated with a decrease of the FVC%predicted on the third postoperative day ( r  = − 0.66; p  < 0.001). A redistribution of pulmonary ventilation was not observed after peripheral surgery. FVC%predicted was only decreased on the first postoperative day (median FVC%predicted on the preoperative, first and third day: 85, 81 and 88%, respectively). In ten patients occurred pulmonary complications after abdominal surgery also in two patients after peripheral surgery. Conclusions After abdominal surgery ventral redistribution of ventilation persisted up to the third postoperative day and was associated with decreased vital capacity. The peripheral surgery group showed only minor changes in vital capacity, suggesting a role of the location of surgery for postoperative redistribution of pulmonary ventilation. Trial registration This prospective observational single centre study was submitted to registration prior to patient enrollment at ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT02419196 , Date of registration: December 1, 2014). Registration was finalized at April 17, 2015.

Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is increasingly relevant for an individualized antibiotic therapy and subsequently a necessary tool to reduce multidrug-resistant pathogens, especially in light of diminishing antimicrobial capabilities. Critical illness is associated with profound pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic alterations, which challenge dose finding and the application of particularly hydrophilic drugs such as β-lactam antibiotics. Methods: Implementation strategy, potential benefit, and practicability of the developed standard operating procedures were retrospectively analyzed from January to December 2020. Furthermore, the efficacy of the proposed dosing target of piperacillin in critically ill patients was evaluated. Results: In total, 160 patients received piperacillin/tazobactam therapy and were subsequently included in the study. Of them, 114 patients received piperacillin/tazobactam by continuous infusion and had at least one measurement of piperacillin serum level according to the standard operating procedure. In total, 271 measurements were performed with an average level of 79.0 ± 46.0 mg/L. Seventy-one piperacillin levels exceeded 100 mg/L and six levels were lower than 22.5 mg/L. The high-level and the low-level group differed significantly in infection laboratory parameters (CRP (mg/dL) 20.18 ± 11.71 vs. 5.75 ± 5.33) and renal function [glomerular filtration rate (mL/min/1.75 m2) 40.85 ± 26.74 vs. 120.50 ± 70.48]. Conclusions: Piperacillin levels are unpredictable in critically ill patients. TDM during piperacillin/tazobactam therapy is highly recommended for all patients. Although our implementation strategy was effective, further strategies implemented into the daily clinical workflow might support the health care staff and increase the clinicians’ alertness.

Background: Proportions of patients dying from the coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) vary between different countries. We report the characteristics; clinical course and outcome of patients requiring intensive care due to COVID-19 induced acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Methods: This is a retrospective, observational multicentre study in five German secondary or tertiary care hospitals. All patients consecutively admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) in any of the participating hospitals between March 12 and May 4, 2020 with a COVID-19 induced ARDS were included. Results: A total of 106 ICU patients were treated for COVID-19 induced ARDS, whereas severe ARDS was present in the majority of cases. Survival of ICU treatment was 65.0%. Median duration of ICU treatment was 11 days; median duration of mechanical ventilation was 9 days. The majority of ICU treated patients (75.5%) did not receive any antiviral or anti-inflammatory therapies. Venovenous (vv) ECMO was utilized in 16.3%. ICU triage with population-level decision making was not necessary at any time. Univariate analysis associated older age, diabetes mellitus or a higher SOFA score on admission with non-survival during ICU stay. Conclusions: A high level of care adhering to standard ARDS treatments lead to a good outcome in critically ill COVID-19 patients.