ImportanceThere are inconsistencies in concept, criteria, practice, and documentation of brain death/death by neurologic criteria (BD/DNC) both internationally and within countries.ObjectiveTo formulate a consensus statement of recommendations on determination of BD/DNC based on review of the literature and expert opinion of a large multidisciplinary, international panel.ProcessRelevant international professional societies were recruited to develop recommendations regarding determination of BD/DNC. Literature searches of the Cochrane, Embase, and MEDLINE databases included January 1, 1992, through April 2020 identified pertinent articles for review. Because of the lack of high-quality data from randomized clinical trials or large observational studies, recommendations were formulated based on consensus of contributors and medical societies that represented relevant disciplines, including critical care, neurology, and neurosurgery.Evidence SynthesisBased on review of the literature and consensus from a large multidisciplinary, international panel, minimum clinical criteria needed to determine BD/DNC in various circumstances were developed.RecommendationsPrior to evaluating a patient for BD/DNC, the patient should have an established neurologic diagnosis that can lead to the complete and irreversible loss of all brain function, and conditions that may confound the clinical examination and diseases that may mimic BD/DNC should be excluded. Determination of BD/DNC can be done with a clinical examination that demonstrates coma, brainstem areflexia, and apnea. This is seen when (1) there is no evidence of arousal or awareness to maximal external stimulation, including noxious visual, auditory, and tactile stimulation; (2) pupils are fixed in a midsize or dilated position and are nonreactive to light; (3) corneal, oculocephalic, and oculovestibular reflexes are absent; (4) there is no facial movement to noxious stimulation; (5) the gag reflex is absent to bilateral posterior pharyngeal stimulation; (6) the cough reflex is absent to deep tracheal suctioning; (7) there is no brain-mediated motor response to noxious stimulation of the limbs; and (8) spontaneous respirations are not observed when apnea test targets reach pH <7.30 and Paco2 ≥60 mm Hg. If the clinical examination cannot be completed, ancillary testing may be considered with blood flow studies or electrophysiologic testing. Special consideration is needed for children, for persons receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, and for those receiving therapeutic hypothermia, as well as for factors such as religious, societal, and cultural perspectives; legal requirements; and resource availability.Conclusions and RelevanceThis report provides recommendations for the minimum clinical standards for determination of brain death/death by neurologic criteria in adults and children with clear guidance for various clinical circumstances. The recommendations have widespread international society endorsement and can serve to guide professional societies and countries in...

Aims:To obtain information on organizational aspects, case mix and practices in Indian Intensive Care Units (ICUs).Patients and Methods:An observational, 4-day point prevalence study was performed between 2010 and 2011 in 4209 patients from 124 ICUs. ICU and patient characteristics, and interventions were recorded for 24 h of the study day, and outcomes till 30 days after the study day. Data were analyzed for 4038 adult patients from 120 ICUs.Results:On the study day, mean age, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE II) and sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) scores were 54.1 ± 17.1 years, 17.4 ± 9.2 and 3.8 ± 3.6, respectively. About 46.4% patients had ≥1 organ failure. Nearly, 37% and 22.2% patients received mechanical ventilation (MV) and vasopressors or inotropes, respectively. Nearly, 12.2% patients developed an infection in the ICU. About 28.3% patients had severe sepsis or septic shock (SvSpSS) during their ICU stay. About 60.7% patients without infection received antibiotics. There were 546 deaths and 183 terminal discharges (TDs) from ICU (including left against medical advice or discharged on request), with ICU mortality 729/4038 (18.1%). In 1627 patients admitted within 24 h of the study day, the standardized mortality ratio was 0.67. The APACHE II and SOFA scores, public hospital ICUs, medical ICUs, inadequately equipped ICUs, medical admission, self-paying patient, presence of SvSpSS, acute respiratory failure or cancer, need for a fluid bolus, and MV were independent predictors of mortality.Conclusions:The high proportion of TDs and the association of public hospitals, self-paying patients, and inadequately equipped hospitals with mortality has important implications for critical care in India.

No abstract

Purpose: The DIANA study aimed to evaluate how often antimicrobial de-escalation (ADE) of empirical treatment is performed in the intensive care unit (ICU) and to estimate the effect of ADE on clinical cure on day 7 following treatment initiation. Methods: Adult ICU patients receiving empirical antimicrobial therapy for bacterial infection were studied in a prospective observational study from October 2016 until May 2018. ADE was defined as (1) discontinuation of an antimicrobial in case of empirical combination therapy or (2) replacement of an antimicrobial with the intention to narrow the antimicrobial spectrum, within the first 3 days of therapy. Inverse probability (IP) weighting was used to account for time-varying confounding when estimating the effect of ADE on clinical cure. Results: Overall, 1495 patients from 152 ICUs in 28 countries were studied. Combination therapy was prescribed in 50%, and carbapenems were prescribed in 26% of patients. Empirical therapy underwent ADE, no change and change other than ADE within the first 3 days in 16%, 63% and 22%, respectively. Unadjusted mortality at day 28 was 15.8% in the ADE cohort and 19.4% in patients with no change [p = 0.27; RR 0.83 (95% CI 0.60-1.14)]. The IP-weighted relative risk estimate for clinical cure comparing ADE with no-ADE patients (no change or change other than ADE) was 1.37 (95% CI 1.14-1.64). Conclusion: ADE was infrequently applied in critically ill-infected patients. The observational effect estimate on clinical cure suggested no deleterious impact of ADE compared to no-ADE. However, residual confounding is likely.

A bstract With increasing knowledge of the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), we now understand that COVID-19 presents with various extrapulmonary manifestations with multi-organ involvement. Involvement of the central nervous system (CNS) occurs probably via transsynaptic spread or transfer across the blood–brain barrier. Hypoxia, immune-mediated injury, and vascular damage are the potential mechanisms for the CNS manifestations. Headache, dizziness, chemosensory disturbances, such as loss of smell, taste, encephalopathy, stroke, etc., are among the commonly encountered neurological presentations. Headache is identified as one of the red flag symptoms for COVID-19. Sudden onset of loss of smell and/or taste in the absence of nasal congestion can help in COVID-19 case identification and testing prioritization. Both hemorrhagic and ischemic brain injury is common in patients developing stroke. Besides these, COVID-19-associated CNS involvement demands more careful attention toward patients with existing neurological disorders especially that are managed with immunosuppressant agents. In all, neurological involvement in COVID-19 is not uncommon and may precede, occur concomitantly or after the respiratory involvement. It may also be the sole presentation in some of the patients necessitating high vigilance for COVID-19. In this review, we briefly discussed the pathogenesis of CNS involvement and some important neurological manifestations in COVID-19. How to cite this article: Zirpe KG, Dixit S, Kulkarni AP, Sapra H, Kakkar G, Gupta R, et al. Pathophysiological Mechanisms and Neurological Manifestations in COVID-19. Indian J Crit Care Med 2020;24(10):975–980.

No abstract

Aim/objective/introduction Cytokine storm or cytokine release syndrome (CRS) is inevitable in severe and critically ill patients with novel coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). This review aimed to discuss current therapeutic options for the management of CRS in COVID-19. Background Cytokine storm is caused by the colossal release of proinflammatory cytokines [e.g., IL (interleukin)-2, IL-6, IL-8 TNF (tumor necrosis factor)-α, etc.] causing dysregulated, hyperimmune response. This immunopathogenesis leads to acute lung injury and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Targeting cytokine storm with the therapies that are already available in India with the support of published guidelines and consensus can assist in achieving a better outcome in COVID-19. Review results We predominantly included published guidelines or consensus recommendations about the management of cytokine storm in COVID-19. From the existing literature evidence, it is observed that among the currently available agents, low-dose corticosteroids and heparin can be beneficial in managing cytokine storm. The use of serine protease inhibitors such as ulinastatin has been advised by some experts. Though therapies such as high-dose vitamin C and interleukin-6 inhibitors (e.g., tocilizumab) have been advised, the evidence regarding their use for cytokine storm in COVID-19 is limited. Therapies such as Janus kinase inhibitors (JAK) inhibitors and Neurokinin-1 receptor (NK-1) antagonists are still in research. Besides, pharmaceutical treatments, use of blood purification strategies, and convalescent plasma may be life-saving options in some of the critically ill COVID-19 patients. For these therapies, there is a need to generate further evidence to substantiate their use in CRS management. Conclusion Current management of COVID-19 is preventive and supportive. Different therapies can be used to prevent and treat the cytokine storm. More research is needed for further supporting the use of these treatments in COVID-19. How to cite this article Mehta Y, Dixit SB, Zirpe KG, Ansari AS. Cytokine Storm in Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19): Expert Management Considerations. Indian J Crit Care Med 2020;24(6):429–434.

IntroductionRecently, an expert consensus on optimal use of procalcitonin (PCT)-guided antibiotic stewardship was published focusing mainly on Europe and the United States. However, for Asia-Pacific countries, recommendations may need adaptation due to differences in types of infections, available resources and standard of clinical care.MethodsPractical experience with PCT-guided antibiotic stewardship was discussed among experts from different countries, reflecting on the applicability of the proposed Berlin consensus algorithms for Asia-Pacific. Using a Delphi process, the group reached consensus on two PCT algorithms for the critically ill and the non-critically ill patient populations.ResultsThe group agreed that the existing evidence for PCT-guided antibiotic stewardship in patients with acute respiratory infections and sepsis is generally valid also for Asia-Pacific countries, in regard to proposed PCT cut-offs, emphasis on diagnosis, prognosis and antibiotic stewardship, overruling criteria and inevitable adaptations to clinical settings. However, the group noted an insufficient database on patients with tropical diseases currently limiting the clinical utility in these patients. Also, due to lower resource availabilities, biomarker levels may be measured less frequently and only when changes in treatment are highly likely.ConclusionsUse of PCT to guide antibiotic stewardship in conjunction with continuous education and regular feedback to all stakeholders has high potential to improve the utilization of antibiotic treatment also in Asia-Pacific countries. However, there is need for adaptations of existing algorithms due to differences in types of infections and routine clinical care. Further research is needed to understand the optimal use of PCT in patients with tropical diseases.