Explore the vast range of titles available.

Bronchoscopy-guided percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy (BPDT) and ultrasound-guided percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy (USPDT) are widely employed techniques. However, USPDT provides better vascular mapping and reduces bleeding risk, while BPDT offers better tracheal entry and fewer airway complications. Their comparative efficacy and safety were systematically evaluated, with special consideration for high-risk patients, including obese and critically ill individuals with complex airway anatomy. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, an in-depth literature search was conducted in Embase, PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library, focusing on adult patients undergoing percutaneous tracheostomy with USPDT, BPDT, or both. Quality assessment indicated that most studies exhibited a low risk of bias, though concerns regarding randomization and selective reporting were noted in some cases. A meta-analysis was conducted using pooled effect sizes, procedural success rates, complication rates, and heterogeneity (I²), applying a random-effects model. Ten studies involving 1,069 patients were analyzed. The pooled analysis demonstrated a moderate positive association between USPDT and BPDT in improving procedural success and reducing complications (CI: 0.41 to 0.55, standardized mean difference = 0.48, 95%, p < 0.05). However, significant heterogeneity (I² = 72.95%) was observed, likely due to variations in study design and patient populations. USPDT and BPDT are both practical and safe for percutaneous tracheostomy, with unique advantages for different clinical scenarios. The findings support a hybrid approach integrating both modalities to enhance procedural safety and efficiency, particularly in high-risk populations. Future large-scale trials should focus on reducing heterogeneity, assessing long-term outcomes, and improving cost-effectiveness to establish best-practice guidelines for broader clinical implementation.

INTRODUCTION:Critically ill patients with cirrhosis admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) are usually on broad-spectrum antibiotics because of suspected infection or as a hospital protocol. It is unclear if additional rifaximin has any synergistic effect with broad-spectrum antibiotics in ICU patients with acute overt hepatic encephalopathy (HE).METHODS:In this double-blind trial, patients with overt HE admitted to ICU were randomized to receive antibiotics (ab) alone or antibiotics with rifaximin (ab + r). Resolution (or 2 grade reduction) of HE, time to resolution of HE, in-hospital mortality, nosocomial infection, and changes in endotoxin levels were compared between the 2 groups. A subgroup analysis of patients with decompensated cirrhosis and acute-on-chronic liver failure was performed.RESULTS:Baseline characteristics and severity scores were similar among both groups (92 in each group). Carbapenems and cephalosporin with beta-lactamase inhibitors were the most commonly used ab. On Kaplan-Meier analysis, 44.6% (41/92; 95% confidence interval [CI], 32-70.5) in ab-only arm and 46.7% (43/92; 95% CI, 33.8-63) in ab + r arm achieved the primary objective (P = 0.84).Time to achieve the primary objective (3.65 ± 1.82 days and 4.11 ± 2.01 days; P = 0.27) and in-hospital mortality were similar among both groups (62% vs 50%; P = 0.13). Seven percent and 13% in the ab and ab + r groups developed nosocomial infections (P = 0.21). Endotoxin levels were unaffected by rifaximin. Rifaximin led to lower in-hospital mortality (hazard ratio: 0.39 [95% CI, 0.2-0.76]) in patients with decompensated cirrhosis but not in patients with acute-on-chronic liver failure (hazard ratio: 0.99 [95% CI, 0.6-1.63]) because of reduced nosocomial infections.DISCUSSION:Reversal of overt HE in those on ab was comparable with those on ab + r.

Patients with cirrhosis are susceptible to infections, especially by multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs). There are limited data on the incidence of culture-positive infections and the validity of Sepsis 3-criteria in patients with cirrhosis admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) in India, which we aimed to assess.BACKGROUNDPatients with cirrhosis are susceptible to infections, especially by multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs). There are limited data on the incidence of culture-positive infections and the validity of Sepsis 3-criteria in patients with cirrhosis admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) in India, which we aimed to assess.In this prospective study, we included consecutive patients with cirrhosis admitted to the ICU between November 1, 2021, and April 30, 2022. The primary objective was to compare the outcomes of patients with microbiologically proven infections with those without proven infections. The secondary objective was to assess the predictors of infections and mortality and the impact of drug-resistant organisms.METHODSIn this prospective study, we included consecutive patients with cirrhosis admitted to the ICU between November 1, 2021, and April 30, 2022. The primary objective was to compare the outcomes of patients with microbiologically proven infections with those without proven infections. The secondary objective was to assess the predictors of infections and mortality and the impact of drug-resistant organisms.A total of 298 patients (9.4% women) were included. The incidence of microbiologically proven infection was 34% (101/298; 95%CI=27.6-41.2). Most patients (61%) had healthcare-associated infections, Gram-negative organisms accounted for 75.3%, and bacteremia was the commonest site. Drug-resistant organisms accounted for 52.5% (53/101; 95%CI=39.3-68.7), of which 39.6% were multidrug-resistant (MDR) and 12.8% were extensively drug-resistant (XDR). Mortality was significantly higher in patients with proven infections than those without (61.4% vs. 44.2%; P=0.007). The sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score (OR=1.91; 95%CI=1.04-3.52; P<0.001) and presence of fever and/or positive quick SOFA (qSOFA; OR=1.91;1.04-3.52; P=0.03) were associated with an increased risk of infections. The SOFA score (OR=1.06;95%CI=1.002-1.12; P=0.04), MELD NA score (OR=1.08;95%CI=1.05-1.12; P<0.001), and presence of fever and/or positive qSOFA (OR=2.19; 95%CI=1.27-3.76; P=0.005) predicted mortality.RESULTSA total of 298 patients (9.4% women) were included. The incidence of microbiologically proven infection was 34% (101/298; 95%CI=27.6-41.2). Most patients (61%) had healthcare-associated infections, Gram-negative organisms accounted for 75.3%, and bacteremia was the commonest site. Drug-resistant organisms accounted for 52.5% (53/101; 95%CI=39.3-68.7), of which 39.6% were multidrug-resistant (MDR) and 12.8% were extensively drug-resistant (XDR). Mortality was significantly higher in patients with proven infections than those without (61.4% vs. 44.2%; P=0.007). The sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score (OR=1.91; 95%CI=1.04-3.52; P<0.001) and presence of fever and/or positive quick SOFA (qSOFA; OR=1.91;1.04-3.52; P=0.03) were associated with an increased risk of infections. The SOFA score (OR=1.06;95%CI=1.002-1.12; P=0.04), MELD NA score (OR=1.08;95%CI=1.05-1.12; P<0.001), and presence of fever and/or positive qSOFA (OR=2.19; 95%CI=1.27-3.76; P=0.005) predicted mortality.One-third of the patients with cirrhosis admitted to the ICU had microbiologically proven infection, and the mortality rate in such patients was high. SOFA, qSOFA, and fever can predict microbiologically proven infections and mortality in patients with cirrhosis.CONCLUSIONSOne-third of the patients with cirrhosis admitted to the ICU had microbiologically proven infection, and the mortality rate in such patients was high. SOFA, qSOFA, and fever can predict microbiologically proven infections and mortality in patients with cirrhosis.