Home - Critical Care Science (CCS)

ABSTRACT

Mechanical ventilation can be a life-saving intervention, but its implementation requires a multidisciplinary approach, with an understanding of its indications and contraindications due to the potential for complications. The management of mechanical ventilation should be part of the curricula during clinical training; however, trainees and practicing professionals frequently report low confidence in managing mechanical ventilation, often seeking additional sources of knowledge. Review articles, consensus statements and clinical practice guidelines have become important sources of guidance in mechanical ventilation, and although clinical practice guidelines offer rigorously developed recommendations, they take a long time to develop and can address only a limited number of clinical questions. The Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira and the Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisiologia sponsored the development of a joint statement addressing all aspects of mechanical ventilation, which was divided into 38 topics. Seventy-five experts from all regions of Brazil worked in pairs to perform scoping reviews, searching for publications on their specific topic of mechanical ventilation in the last 20 years in the highest impact factor journals in the areas of intensive care, pulmonology, and anesthesiology. Each pair produced suggestions and considerations on their topics, which were presented to the entire group in a plenary session for modification when necessary and approval. The result was a comprehensive document encompassing all aspects of mechanical ventilation to provide guidance at the bedside. In this article, we report the methodology used to produce the document and highlight the most important suggestions and considerations of the document, which has been made available to the public in Portuguese.

Abstract

Objective:

To describe fluid resuscitation practices in Brazilian intensive care units and to compare them with those of other countries participating in the Fluid-TRIPS.

Methods:

This was a prospective, international, cross-sectional, observational study in a convenience sample of intensive care units in 27 countries (including Brazil) using the Fluid-TRIPS database compiled in 2014. We described the patterns of fluid resuscitation use in Brazil compared with those in other countries and identified the factors associated with fluid choice.

Results:

On the study day, 3,214 patients in Brazil and 3,493 patients in other countries were included, of whom 16.1% and 26.8% (p < 0.001) received fluids, respectively. The main indication for fluid resuscitation was impaired perfusion and/or low cardiac output (Brazil: 71.7% versus other countries: 56.4%, p < 0.001). In Brazil, the percentage of patients receiving crystalloid solutions was higher (97.7% versus 76.8%, p < 0.001), and 0.9% sodium chloride was the most commonly used crystalloid (62.5% versus 27.1%, p < 0.001). The multivariable analysis suggested that the albumin levels were associated with the use of both crystalloids and colloids, whereas the type of fluid prescriber was associated with crystalloid use only.

Conclusion:

Our results suggest that crystalloids are more frequently used than colloids for fluid resuscitation in Brazil, and this discrepancy in frequencies is higher than that in other countries. Sodium chloride (0.9%) was the crystalloid most commonly prescribed. Serum albumin levels and the type of fluid prescriber were the factors associated with the choice of crystalloids or colloids for fluid resuscitation.

ABSTRACT

Immobility can cause several complications, including skeletal muscle atrophy and weakness, that influence the recovery of critically ill patients. This effect can be mitigated by early mobilization. Six key questions guided this research: Is early mobilization safe? Which patients are candidates for early mobilization? What are the contraindications? What is the appropriate dose, and how should it be defined? What results are obtained? What are the prognostic indicators for the use of early mobilization? The objective of this guideline was to produce a document that would provide evidence-based recommendations and suggestions regarding the early mobilization of critically ill adult patients, with the aim of improving understanding of the topic and making a positive impact on patient care. This guideline was based on a systematic review of articles conducted using the PICO search strategy, as recommended by the Guidelines Project of the Associação Médica Brasileira. Randomized clinical trials, prognostic cohort studies, and systematic reviews with or without meta-analysis were selected, and the evidence was classified according to the Oxford Center for Evidence-based Medicine Levels of Evidence. For all the questions addressed, enough evidence was found to support safe and well-defined early mobilization, with prognostic indicators that support and recommend the technique. Early mobilization is associated with better functional outcomes and should be performed whenever indicated. Early mobilization is safe and should be the goal of the entire multidisciplinary team.

ABSTRACT

Background:

Early reversion of sepsis-induced tissue hypoperfusion is essential for survival in septic shock. However, consensus regarding the best initial resuscitation strategy is lacking given that interventions designed for the entire population with septic shock might produce unnecessary fluid administration. This article reports the rationale, study design and analysis plan of the ANDROMEDA-2 study, which aims to determine whether a peripheral perfusion-guided strategy consisting of capillary refill time-targeted resuscitation based on clinical and hemodynamic phenotypes is associated with a decrease in a composite outcome of mortality, time to organ support cessation, and hospital length of stay compared to standard care in patients with early (< 4 hours of diagnosis) septic shock.

Methods:

The ANDROMEDA-2 study is a multicenter, multinational randomized controlled trial. In the intervention group, capillary refill time will be measured hourly for 6 hours. If abnormal, patients will enter an algorithm starting with pulse pressure assessment. Patients with pulse pressure less than 40mmHg will be tested for fluid responsiveness and receive fluids accordingly. In patients with pulse pressure > 40mmHg, norepinephrine will be titrated to maintain diastolic arterial pressure > 50mmHg. Patients who fail to normalize capillary refill time after the previous steps will be subjected to critical care echocardiography for cardiac dysfunction evaluation and subsequent management. Finally, vasopressor and inodilator tests will be performed to further optimize perfusion. A sample size of 1,500 patients will provide 88% power to demonstrate superiority of the capillary refill time-targeted strategy.

Conclusions:

If hemodynamic phenotype-based, capillary refill time-targeted resuscitation demonstrates to be a superior strategy, care processes in septic shock resuscitation can be optimized with bedside tools.