The panel formulated and provided the rationale for recommendations on selected ventilatory interventions for adult patients with ARDS. Clinicians managing patients with ARDS should personalize decisions for their patients, particularly regarding the conditional recommendations in this guideline.
Objective Trends in severe sepsis mortality derived from administrative data may be biased by changing ICD-9-CM coding practices. We sought to determine temporal trends in severe sepsis mortality using clinical trial data that does not rely on ICD-9-CM coding and compare mortality trends in trial data to those observed from administrative data. Design We searched MEDLINE for multicenter, randomized trials that enrolled patients with severe sepsis from 1991-2009. We calculated standardized mortality ratios (SMR) for each trial from observed 28-day mortality of usual care participants and predicted mortality from severity of illness scores. To compare mortality trends from clinical trials to administrative data, we identified adult severe sepsis hospitalizations in the Nationwide Inpatient Sample, 1993-2009, using two previously validated algorithms. Setting and Patients Hospitalized patients with severe sepsis or septic shock. Measurements and Main Results Of 3244 potentially eligible articles, we included 36 multicenter severe sepsis trials, with a total of 14,418 participants in a usual care arm. Participants with severe sepsis receiving usual care had a 28-day mortality of 33.2%. Observed mortality decreased 3.0% annually (95% CI 0.8%, 5.0%, p=0.009), decreasing from 46.9% [SMR 0.94, 95% CI (0.86, 1.03)] during years 1991-1995 to 29% [SMR 0.53, (95% CI (0.50, 0.57)] during years 2006-2009 (3.0% annual change). Trends in hospital mortality among patients with severe sepsis identified from administrative data [“Angus definition”: 4.7% annual change, (95% CI 4.1%, 5.3%), p=0.69), “Martin definition”: 3.5% annual change, (95% CI 3.0%, 4.1%, p=0.97)] were similar to trends identified from clinical trials. Conclusion Since 1991, patients with severe sepsis enrolled in usual care arms of multicenter randomized trials have experienced decreasing mortality. The mortality trends identified in clinical trial participants appear similar to those identified using administrative data and support the use of administrative data to monitor mortality trends in patients with severe sepsis.
Context New-onset fibrillation (AF) has been reported in 6–20% of patients with severe sepsis. Whereas chronic AF is a known risk factor for stroke and death, the clinical significance of new-onset AF in the setting of severe sepsis is uncertain. Objective To determine the in-hospital stroke and in-hospital mortality risks associated with new-onset AF in patients with severe sepsis. Design Retrospective population-based cohort of California State Inpatient Database administrative claims data from 1/1/2007 through 12/31/2007. Setting Non-Federal acute care hospitals. Patients Data was available from 3,144,787 hospitalized adults. Severe sepsis [N=49,082 (1.56%)] was defined by validated ICD-9-CM code 995.92. New-onset AF was defined as AF that occurred during the hospital stay, after excluding AF cases present at admission. Main Outcome Measures A priori outcome measures were in-hospital ischemic stroke (ICD-9-CM codes of 433, 434, or 436) and mortality. Results Patients with severe sepsis were 69±16 years old and 48% were women. New-onset atrial fibrillation occurred in 5.9% of patients with severe sepsis versus 0.6% of patients without severe sepsis [multivariable-adjusted odds ratio (OR), 6.82; 95% confidence interval (CI), 6.54–7.11; P<0.001]. Severe sepsis was present in 14% of all new-onset AF in hospitalized adults. Compared with severe sepsis patients without new-onset AF, patients with new-onset AF during severe sepsis had greater risks of in-hospital stroke (75/2896 (2.6%) vs. 306/46186 (0.6%) strokes, adjusted OR 2.70; 95% CI, 2.05–3.57; P <0.0001) and in-hospital mortality (1629 (56%) vs. 18027 (39%) deaths, adjusted relative risk, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.04–1.11; P <0.0001). Findings were robust across two definitions of severe sepsis, multiple methods of addressing confounding, and multiple sensitivity analyses. Conclusion Among patients with severe sepsis, patients with new-onset AF were at increased risk for in-hospital stroke and death compared with patients with no AF and patients with pre-existing AF.
Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common arrhythmia encountered in the ICU. Preexisting AF is highly prevalent among older patients with chronic conditions who are at risk for critical illness, whereas new-onset AF can be triggered by accelerated atrial remodeling and arrhythmogenic triggers encountered during critical illness. The acute loss of atrial systole and onset of rapid ventricular rates that characterize new-onset AF often lead to decreased cardiac output and hemodynamic compromise. Thus, new-onset AF is both a marker of disease severity as well as a likely contributor to poor outcomes, similar to other manifestations of organ dysfunction during critical illness. Evaluating immediate hemodynamic effects of new-onset AF during critical illness is an important component of rapid clinical assessment aimed at identifying patients in need of urgent direct current cardioversion, treatment of reversible inciting factors, and identification of patients who may benefit from pharmacologic rate or rhythm control. In addition to acute hemodynamic effects, new-onset AF during critical illness is associated with both short- and long-term increases in the risk of stroke, heart failure, and death, with AF recurrence rates of approximately 50% within 1 year following hospital discharge. In the absence of a strong evidence base, there is substantial practice variation in the choice of strategies for management of new-onset AF during critical illness. We describe acute and long-term evaluation and management strategies based on current evidence and propose future avenues of investigation to fill large knowledge gaps in the management of patients with AF during critical illness.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.