No abstract

No abstract

We aimed to develop a predictive model for intensive care unit (ICU)-discharged patients at risk of post-ICU deterioration. We performed a retrospective, single-centre cohort observational study by linking the hospital admission, patient pathology, ICU, and medical emergency team (MET) databases. All patients discharged from the Alfred Hospital ICU to wards between July 2012 and June 2014 were included. The primary outcome was a composite endpoint of any MET call, cardiac arrest call or ICU re-admission. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to identify predictors of outcome and develop a risk-stratification model. Four thousand, six hundred and thirty-two patients were included in the study. Of these, 878 (19%) patients had a MET call, 51 (1.1%) patients had cardiac arrest calls, 304 (6.5%) were re-admitted to ICU during the same hospital stay, and 964 (21%) had MET calls, cardiac arrest calls or ICU re-admission. A discriminatory predictive model was developed (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 0.72 [95% confidence intervals {CI} 0.70 to 0.73]) which identified the following factors: increasing age (odds ratio [OR] 1.012 [95% CI 1.007 to 1.017] P <0.001), ICU admission with subarachnoid haemorrhage (OR 2.26 [95% CI 1.22 to 4.16] P=0.009), admission to ICU from a ward (OR 1.67 [95% CI 1.31 to 2.13] P <0.001), Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) III score without the age component (OR 1.005 [95% CI 1.001 to 1.010] P=0.025), tracheostomy on ICU discharge (OR 4.32 [95% CI 2.9 to 6.42] P <0.001) and discharge to cardiothoracic (OR 2.43 [95%CI 1.49 to 3.96] P <0.001) or oncology wards (OR 2.27 [95% CI 1.05 to 4.89] P=0.036). Over the two-year period, 361 patients were identified as having a greater than 50% chance of having post-ICU deterioration. Factors are identifiable to predict patients at risk of post-ICU deterioration. This knowledge could be used to guide patient follow-up after ICU discharge, optimise healthcare resources, and improve patient outcomes and service delivery.

Summary Acute kidney injury is common after cardiac surgery. Vasoplegic hypotension may contribute to kidney injury, and different vasopressors may have variable effects on kidney function. We conducted a double‐blind, randomised feasibility trial comparing peri‐operative angiotensin‐2 with noradrenaline. We randomly allocated 60 patients at two centres to a blinded equipotent angiotensin‐2 or noradrenaline infusion intra‐operatively and for up to 48 h postoperatively, titrated to mean arterial pressure of 70–80 mmHg. Primary feasibility outcomes included consent rate, protocol adherence, infusion duration, mean arterial pressure maintenance in the target range and major adverse outcomes. Secondary outcomes included kidney injury rate. The consent rate was 47%. Protocol adherence was 100% in the angiotensin‐2 group and 94% in the noradrenaline group. Study drug duration was median (IQR [range]) 217 (160–270 [30–315]) vs. 185 (135–301 [0–480]) min (p = 0.78) min intra‐operatively, and 5 (0–16 [0–48]) vs. 14.5 (4.8–29 [0–48]) hours (p = 0.075) postoperatively for angiotensin‐2 and noradrenaline, respectively. The mean arterial pressure target was achieved postoperatively in 25 of 28 (89%) of the angiotensin‐2 group and 27 of 32 (84%) of the noradrenaline group. One participant had a stroke, one required extracorporeal support and three required renal replacement therapy, all in the noradrenaline group (p = 0.99, p = 0.99 and p = 0.1). Acute kidney injury occurred in 7 of 28 in the angiotensin‐2 group vs. 12 of 32 patients in the noradrenaline group (p = 0.31). This pilot study suggests that a trial comparing angiotensin‐2 with noradrenaline is feasible. Its findings justify further investigations of angiotensin‐2 in cardiac surgery.