Background Changes in Doppler flow patterns of hepatic veins (HV), portal vein (PV) and intra-renal veins (RV) reflect right atrial pressure and venous congestion; the feasibility of obtaining these assessments and the clinical relevance of the findings is unknown in a general ICU population. This study compares the morphology of HV, PV and RV waveform abnormalities in prediction of major adverse kidney events at 30 days (MAKE30) in critically ill patients. Study design and methods We conducted a prospective observational study enrolling adult patients within 24 h of admission to the ICU. Patients underwent an ultrasound evaluation of the HV, PV and RV. We compared the rate of MAKE-30 events in patients with and without venous flow abnormalities in the hepatic, portal and intra-renal veins. The HV was considered abnormal if S to D wave reversal was present. The PV was considered abnormal if the portal pulsatility index (PPI) was greater than 30%. We also examined PPI as a continuous variable to assess whether small changes in portal vein flow was a clinically important marker of venous congestion. Results From January 2019 to June 2019, we enrolled 114 patients. HV abnormalities demonstrate an odds ratio of 4.0 (95% CI 1.4–11.2). PV as a dichotomous outcome is associated with an increased odds ratio of MAKE-30 but fails to reach statistical significance (OR 2.3 95% CI 0.87–5.96), but when examined as a continuous variable it demonstrates an odds ratio of 1.03 (95% CI 1.00–1.06). RV Doppler flow abnormalities are not associated with an increase in the rate of MAKE-30 Interpretation Obtaining hepatic, portal and renal venous Doppler assessments in critically ill ICU patients are feasible. Abnormalities in hepatic and portal venous Doppler are associated with an increase in MAKE-30. Further research is needed to determine if venous Doppler assessments can be useful measures in assessing right-sided venous congestion in critically ill patients.

No abstract

Background Empiric antibiotic use among hospitalized U.S. adults is largely undescribed. Identifying factors associated with broad-spectrum empiric therapy may inform antibiotic stewardship interventions and facilitate benchmarking. Methods We performed a retrospective cohort study of adults discharged in 2019 from 928 hospitals in the Premier Healthcare Database. “Empiric” Gram-negative antibiotics were defined by administration before Day 3 of hospitalization. Multivariable logistic regression models with random-effects by hospital were used to evaluate associations between patient and hospital characteristics and empiric receipt of broad-spectrum, compared to narrow-spectrum, Gram-negative antibiotics. Results 2,928,657 of 8,017,740 (37%) hospitalized adults received empiric Gram-negative antibiotics. Among 1,781,306 who received broad-spectrum therapy, 30% did not have a common infectious syndrome present-on-admission (pneumonia, urinary tract infection, sepsis, or bacteremia), or surgery or an ICU stay in the empiric window. Holding other factors constant, males were 22% more likely (aOR 1.22, 95% CI: 1.22–1.23), and all non-White racial groups were 6%-13% less likely (aOR range: 0.87–0.94), to receive broad-spectrum therapy. There were significant prescribing differences by region, with the highest adjusted odds of broad-spectrum therapy in the U.S. West South Central. Even after model adjustment, there remained substantial inter-hospital variability: among patients receiving empiric therapy, the probability of receiving broad-spectrum antibiotics varied as much as 34 + percentage-points due solely to the admitting hospital (95% interval of probabilities: 43% - 77%). Conclusions Empiric Gram-negative antibiotic use is highly variable across U.S. regions, and there is high, unexplained inter-hospital variability. Sex and racial disparities in the receipt of broad-spectrum therapy warrant further investigation.

No abstract