Background: Cerebral infarction after aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage (SAH) is presumed to be due to cerebral vasospasm, defined as arterial lumen narrowing from days 3 to 14. Methods: We reviewed the computed tomography scans of 103 patients with aneurysmal SAH for radiographic cerebral infarction and controlled for other predictors of outcome. A blinded neuroradiologist reviewed the angiograms. Cerebral infarction from vasospasm was judged to be unlikely if it was visible on computed tomography within 2 calendar days of SAH or if angiography showed no vasospasm in a referable vessel, or both. Results: Cerebral infarction occurred in 29 (28%) of 103 patients with SAH. 18 patients had cerebral infarction that was unlikely to be due to vasospasm because it was visible on computed tomography by day 2 (6 (33%)) or because angiography showed no vasospasm in a referable artery (7 (39%)), or both (5 (28%)). In a multivariate model, cerebral infarction was significantly related to World Federation of Neurologic Surgeons grade (odds ratio (OR) 1.5/grade, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.1 to 2.01, p = 0.006) and SAH-Physiologic Derangement Score (PDS) .2 (OR 3.7, 95% CI 1.4 to 9.8, p = 0.01) on admission. Global cerebral oedema (OR 4.3, 95% CI 1.5 to 12.5, p = 0.007) predicted cerebral infarction. Patients with cerebral infarction detectable by day 2 had a higher SAH-PDS than patients with later cerebral infarction (p = 0.025). Conclusions : Many cerebral infarctions after SAH are unlikely to be caused by vasospasm because they occur too soon after SAH or because angiography shows no vasospasm in a referable artery, or both. Physiological derangement and cerebral oedema may be worthwhile targets for intervention to decrease the occurrence and clinical impact of cerebral infarction after SAH.

LOS after spontaneous brain hemorrhage is driven by medical complications even after the adoption of dedicated intensive care medical staff, pharmacist involvement, and evidence-based protocols for ICU care. Further alterations in care will be necessary to eliminate "preventable" complications and minimize LOS after brain hemorrhage.

The technique of awake intubation with prone patient self-positioning can be helpful for positioning morbidly obese patients before PCNL and has been safe and effective in properly selected patients. Efficacy of PCNL should not be impacted by obesity or prone positioning and morbidity minimized provided that surgical and anesthesia teams understand and safeguard against potential complications.

The aim of the intensive care unit team should be recognition of the patient at risk, use of necessary therapies (i.e., bronchodilators) as early as feasible, and treatment titrated to realistic endpoints as the acute illness progresses and subsequently resolves.

A ventilator, like most critical care devices, is simply a machine. However, it is not a “simple machine.” Over the past five decades, the means of delivering gases to patients have become more complex. This has led to an evolution of more than 30 critical care ventilators being used in the United States. The numerous modes of ventilation and our unfortunate attempt to reach a consensus on the terminology used when referring to mechanical ventilation presents a challenge to even the most skilled clinician. Mushin’s description of ventilators in his archetypal text is appreciated by many and addresses the classification scheme that can be adopted to the less‐sophisticated mechanical ventilator. An innumerable count of authors has used this classification method when writing about mechanical ventilator support. Today’s mechanical ventilators are designed to provide life support using an array of computerized logic systems, software utilities, and even artificial intelligence models to deliver gas to patients. This evolution of ventilators has led to a modernistic classification system to describe todayrsquo;s microprocessor‐controlled mechanical ventilator. A classification system that is specific and well defined is intended to enhance communications between clinicians. However, some respected organizations and clinicians have been reluctant to accept this new system for understanding mechanical ventilation despite its acceptance by leading members in the pulmonary and critical care medicine community.

No abstract

No abstract