In December 2019, a novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, appeared, causing a wide range of symptoms, mainly respiratory infection. In March 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) a pandemic, therefore the efforts of scientists around the world are focused on finding the right treatment and vaccine for the novel disease. COVID-19 has spread rapidly over several months, affecting patients across all age groups and geographic areas. The disease has a diverse course; patients may range from asymptomatic to those with respiratory failure, complicated by acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). One possible complication of pulmonary involvement in COVID-19 is pulmonary fibrosis, which leads to chronic breathing difficulties, long-term disability and affects patients’ quality of life. There are no specific mechanisms that lead to this phenomenon in COVID-19, but some information arises from previous severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) or Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) epidemics. The aim of this narrative review is to present the possible causes and pathophysiology of pulmonary fibrosis associated with COVID-19 based on the mechanisms of the immune response, to suggest possible ways of prevention and treatment.

BackgroundThe majority of critically ill patients experience distress during their stay in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU), resulting from systemic illness, multiple interventions and environmental factors. Providing humane care should address concomitant treatment of pain, agitation and delirium. The use of sedation and approaches to ICU delirium should be monitored according to structured guidelines. However, it is unknown to what extent these concepts are followed in Eastern European countries like Poland. The aim of this study was to evaluate sedation and delirium practices in ICUs in Poland, as a representative of the Eastern European block, particularly the implementation of sedation and ICU delirium screening tools, availability of written sedation guidelines, choice of sedation and delirium treatment agents.MethodsA national postal survey was conducted in all Polish ICUs in early 2016.ResultsA total of 165 responses out of 436 addressed units were received (37.8%). Out of responding ICUs delirium is monitored in only 11.9% of the units in Poland. Sedation monitoring tool is used in only 46.1% of units. Only 19.4% of ICUs have written protocols for sedation and 32.1% do not practice daily sedation interruption. The most frequently used agents for short-term sedation (<24 h) were propofol and fentanyl infusions and benzodiazepines (midazolam) and morphine for longer sedation (>24 h). The preferred agents for delirium treatment were haloperidol (77.6%), dexmedetomidine (43.6%) and quetiapine (19.4%). Close to one-third (32.7%) of respondents chose a benzodiazepine (diazepam) for ICU delirium treatment. Non-pharmacological treatment for ICU delirium was reported by only 45% of the respondents.ConclusionsA majority of Polish ICUs do not adhere to international guidelines regarding sedation and delirium practices. There continues to be inadequate use of sedation and delirium monitoring tools. High usage of benzodiazepines for sedation and ICU delirium treatment reveals persistence of non-evidence-based practice. This study should prompt further assessment of other Eastern Europe countries and help generate a collective response to update these aspects of patient safety and comfort.

Many patients treated in the intensive care unit (ICU) experience pain that is a source of suffering and leaves a longterm imprint (chronic pain, post-traumatic stress disorder). Nearly 30% of patients experience pain at rest, while the percentage increases to 50% during nursing procedures. Pain in ICU patients can be divided into four categories: continuous ICU treatment-related pain/discomfort, acute illness-related pain, intermittent procedural pain and pre-existing chronic pain present before ICU admission. As daily nursing procedures and interventions performed in the ICU may be a potential source of pain, it is crucial to use simple pain monitoring tools. The assessment of pain intensity in ICU patients remains an everyday challenge for clinicians, especially in sedated, intubated and mechanically ventilated patients. Regular assessment of pain intensity leads to improved outcome and better quality of life of patients in the ICU and after discharge from ICU. The gold standard in pain evaluation is patient self-reporting, which is not always possible. Current research shows that the two tools best validated for patients unable to self-report pain are the Behavioral Pain Scale (BPS) and the Critical Care Pain Observation Tool (CPOT). Although international guidelines recommend the use of validated tools for pain evaluation, they underline the need for translation into a given language. The authors of this publication obtained an official agreement from the authors of the two behavioral scales -CPOT and BPS -for translation into Polish. Validation of these tools in the Polish population will aid their wider use in pain assessment in ICUs in Poland.

IntroductionPain in the critically ill affects nearly 50% of patients. In patients unable to self-report pain, behavioural scales are used. The aim of this study was to validate the Polish version of the Critical Care Pain Observation Tool (CPOT).Material and methodsThe prospective observational cohort study included patients observed during non-nociceptive and nociceptive procedures, at rest, during the intervention, and 15 min after each intervention. Assessments included self-report by patients and CPOT assessment carried out by two blinded observers.ResultsA total of 71 patients were included in the study (mean age: 66 years), predominantly males (50/71, 70%), mean APACHE II score 26.04 ±10.56. Results showed an excellent inter-rater correlation (ICC) between raters (ICC scores > 0.97). Self-report NRS (numeric rating scale) scores were available from 58/71 patients (82%). Patients’ self-reported pain and CPOT showed a very strong correlation (Spearman’s R > 0.85, p < 0.0001). The CPOT has high diagnostic value for detection of presence of patients’ self-reported pain (ROC AUC = 0.938 for rater A and 0.951 for rater B, p < 0.0001). CPOT score ≥ 2 is an optimal cut-off to detect pain during a nociceptive procedure. A significantly higher mean CPOT score during a nociceptive procedure as compared to a non-nociceptive procedure or at rest was found (p < 0.0001).ConclusionsThis study shows that the Polish version of the CPOT can be used to assess pain in critically ill patients with no hypnotic, opioid-based analgo-sedation. Polish CPOT scores correlated well with patients’ self-reported presence of pain and showed excellent inter-rater reliability. This makes the Polish version of the CPOT a reliable pain assessment tool.

Postoperative cognitive disorders after cardiac surgery may manifest as postoperative delirium (POD) or later as postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD). The incidence of POD after cardiac surgery ranges from 16% to 73%. In contrast to POD, POCD is usually diagnosed after the discharge from hospital, with an incidence of 30 to 70% of cases, very often noticed only by close relative or friends, decreasing after six (20–30%) and twelve (15–25%) months after surgery. Perioperative cognitive disorders are associated with adverse short- and long-term effects, including increased morbidity and mortality. Due to the complexity of delirium pathomechanisms and the difficulties in the diagnosis, researchers have not yet found a clear answer to the question of which patient will be at a higher risk of developing delirium. The risk for POD and POCD in older patients with numerous comorbidities like hypertension, diabetes, and previous ischemic stroke is relatively high, and the predisposing cognitive profile for both conditions is important. The aim of this narrative review was to identify and describe biomarkers used in the diagnosis of delirium after cardiac surgery by presenting a search through studies regarding this subject, which have been published during the last ten years. The authors discussed brain-derived biomarkers, inflammation-related biomarkers, neurotransmitter-based biomarkers, and others. Work based on inflammation-related biomarkers, which are characterized by the low cost of implementation and the effectiveness of delirium diagnosis, seems to be the closest to the goal of discovering an inexpensive and effective marker. Currently, the use of a panel of tests, and not a single biomarker, brings us closer to the discovery of a test, or rather a set of tests ideal for the diagnosis of delirium after cardiac surgery.

Patients after cardiac surgery experience significant pain, but cannot communicate effectively due to opioid analgesia and sedation. Identification of pain with validated behavioral observation tool in patients with limited abilities to self-report pain improves quality of care and prevents suffering. Aim of this study was to validate Polish version of behavioral pain scale (BPS) in intubated, mechanically ventilated patients sedated with dexmedetomidine and morphine after cardiac surgery.Prospective observational cohort study included postoperative cardiac surgery patients, both sedated with dexmedetomidine and unsedated, observed at rest, during a nociceptive procedure (position change) and 10 minutes after intervention. Pain control was achieved using morphine infusion and nonopioid coanalgesia. Pain intensity evaluation included self-report by patient using numeric rating scale (NRS) and BPS assessments carried out by 2 blinded observers.A total of 708 assessments were performed in 59 patients (mean age 68 years), predominantly men (44/59, 75%). Results showed very good interrater correlation between raters (interrater correlation scores >0.87). Self-report NRS scores were obtained from all patients. Correlation between NRS and BPS was relatively strong during nociceptive procedures in all patients for rater A and rater B (Spearman R > 0.65, P < .001). Both mean NRS and BPS scores were significantly higher during nociceptive procedures as compared to assessments at rest, in both sedated and unsedated patients (P < .001).The results of this observational study show that the Polish translation of BPS can be regarded as a useful and validated tool for pain assessment in adult intubated patients. This instrument can be used in both unsedated and sedated cardiac surgery patients with limited communication abilities.

No abstract

Background: The aim of the study was to evaluate the differences in the circulating immune cells’ subgroups after the atherosclerotic plaque removal in patients presenting with postoperative complications as compared to the patients without complications after carotid endarterectomy (CEA). Methods: Patients with significant carotid atherosclerosis (n = 124, age range: 44 to 87 years) who underwent CEA were enrolled in a prospective study. The immunology study using flow cytometry was performed to determine the percentages of peripheral blood T cells (CD4+, CD8+, Treg—CD4+/CD25+) and NK (natural killer) cells before and after the procedure. The data were expressed as the percentage of total lymphocytes ± the standard error of mean. Results: The mean percentage of lymphocytes (61.54% ± 17.50% vs. 71.82% ± 9.68%, p = 0.030) and CD4 T lymphocytes (T helper, 38.13% ± 13.78% vs. 48.39% ± 10.24%, p = 0.027) was significantly lower six hours after CEA in patients with postoperative 30-day cardiovascular and neurological complications as compared to the group without complications. On the other hand the mean NK level in the group with complications was significantly higher (21.61% ± 9.00% vs. 15.80% ± 9.31%, p = 0.048). Conclusions: The results of this study suggest that after carotid endarterectomy the percentages of circulating immune cells subsets differ in patients with and without postoperative complications.