You searched for:"Glauco Adrieno Westphal"
We found (28) results for your search.Abstract
Crit Care Sci. 2024;36:e20240203en
DOI 10.62675/2965-2774.20240203-en
To assess whether the respiratory oxygenation index (ROX index) measured after the start of high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy can help identify the need for intubation in patients with acute respiratory failure due to coronavirus disease 2019.
This retrospective, observational, multicenter study was conducted at the intensive care units of six Brazilian hospitals from March to December 2020. The primary outcome was the need for intubation up to 7 days after starting the high-flow nasal cannula.
A total of 444 patients were included in the study, and 261 (58.7%) were subjected to intubation. An analysis of the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) showed that the ability to discriminate between successful and failed high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy within 7 days was greater for the ROX index measured at 24 hours (AUROC 0.80; 95%CI 0.76 - 0.84). The median interval between high-flow nasal cannula initiation and intubation was 24 hours (24 - 72), and the most accurate predictor of intubation obtained before 24 hours was the ROX index measured at 12 hours (AUROC 0.75; 95%CI 0.70 - 0.79). Kaplan-Meier curves revealed a greater probability of intubation within 7 days in patients with a ROX index ≤ 5.54 at 12 hours (hazard ratio 3.07; 95%CI 2.24 - 4.20) and ≤ 5.96 at 24 hours (hazard ratio 5.15; 95%CI 3.65 - 7.27).
The ROX index can aid in the early identification of patients with acute respiratory failure due to COVID-19 who will progress to the failure of high-flow nasal cannula supportive therapy and the need for intubation.
Abstract
Crit Care Sci. 2024;36:e20240210en
DOI 10.62675/2965-2774.20240210-en
Driving pressure has been suggested to be the main driver of ventilator-induced lung injury and mortality in observational studies of acute respiratory distress syndrome. Whether a driving pressure-limiting strategy can improve clinical outcomes is unclear.
To describe the protocol and statistical analysis plan that will be used to test whether a driving pressure-limiting strategy including positive end-expiratory pressure titration according to the best respiratory compliance and reduction in tidal volume is superior to a standard strategy involving the use of the ARDSNet low-positive end-expiratory pressure table in terms of increasing the number of ventilator-free days in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome due to community-acquired pneumonia.
The ventilator STrAtegy for coMmunIty acquired pNeumoniA (STAMINA) study is a randomized, multicenter, open-label trial that compares a driving pressure-limiting strategy to the ARDSnet low-positive end-expiratory pressure table in patients with moderate-to-severe acute respiratory distress syndrome due to community-acquired pneumonia admitted to intensive care units. We expect to recruit 500 patients from 20 Brazilian and 2 Colombian intensive care units. They will be randomized to a driving pressure-limiting strategy group or to a standard strategy using the ARDSNet low-positive end-expiratory pressure table. In the driving pressure-limiting strategy group, positive end-expiratory pressure will be titrated according to the best respiratory system compliance.
The primary outcome is the number of ventilator-free days within 28 days. The secondary outcomes are in-hospital and intensive care unit mortality and the need for rescue therapies such as extracorporeal life support, recruitment maneuvers and inhaled nitric oxide.
STAMINA is designed to provide evidence on whether a driving pressure-limiting strategy is superior to the ARDSNet low-positive end-expiratory pressure table strategy for increasing the number of ventilator-free days within 28 days in patients with moderate-to-severe acute respiratory distress syndrome. Here, we describe the rationale, design and status of the trial.
Abstract
Rev Bras Ter Intensiva. 2021;33(1):1-11
DOI 10.5935/0103-507X.20210001
To contribute to updating the recommendations for brain-dead potential organ donor management.
A group of 27 experts, including intensivists, transplant coordinators, transplant surgeons, and epidemiologists, answered questions related to the following topics were divided into mechanical ventilation, hemodynamics, endocrine-metabolic management, infection, body temperature, blood transfusion, and checklists use. The outcomes considered were cardiac arrests, number of organs removed or transplanted as well as function / survival of transplanted organs. The quality of evidence of the recommendations was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system to classify the recommendations.
A total of 19 recommendations were drawn from the expert panel. Of these, 7 were classified as strong, 11 as weak and 1 was considered a good clinical practice.
Despite the agreement among panel members on most recommendations, the grade of recommendation was mostly weak.
Abstract
Rev Bras Ter Intensiva. 2009;21(2):113-123
DOI 10.1590/S0103-507X2009000200001
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of implementing an institutional policy for detection of severe sepsis and septic shock. METHODS: Study before (stage I), after (stage II) with prospective data collection in a 195 bed public hospital.. Stage I: Patients with severe sepsis or septic shock were included consecutively over 15 months and treated according to the Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines. Stage II: In the 10 subsequent months, patients with severe sepsis or septic shock were enrolled based on an active search for signs suggesting infection (SSI) in hospitalized patients. The two stages were compared for demographic variables, time needed for recognition of at least two signs suggesting infection (SSI-Δt), compliance to the bundles of 6 and 24 hours and mortality. RESULTS: We identified 124 patients with severe sepsis or septic shock, 68 in stage I and 56 in stage II. The demographic variables were similar in both stages. The Δt-SSI was 34 ± 54 hours in stage I and 7 ± 8.4 hours in stage II (p <0.001). There was no difference in compliance to the bundles. In parallel there was significant reduction of mortality rates at 28 days (54.4% versus 30%, p <0.02) and hospital (67.6% versus 41%, p <0.003). CONCLUSION: The strategy used helped to identify early risk of sepsis and resulted in decreased mortality associated with severe sepsis and septic shock.
Abstract
Rev Bras Ter Intensiva. 2011;23(1):13-23
DOI 10.1590/S0103-507X2011000100004
Sepsis has a high incidence, mortality and cost and is the main cause of death in intensive care units. Early recognition and treatment have been clearly associated with a better prognosis. Establishing new guidelines is a fundamental step for improving treatment. Patients with clear signs of hypoperfusion should undergo hemodynamic optimization. This guideline addresses the main strategies in the literature that are clinically available.
Abstract
Rev Bras Ter Intensiva. 2015;27(3):190-192
DOI 10.5935/0103-507X.20150039
Abstract
Rev Bras Ter Intensiva. 2020;32(2):200-202
DOI 10.5935/0103-507X.20200034
Abstract
Rev Bras Ter Intensiva. 2021;33(2):206-218
DOI 10.5935/0103-507X.20210028
To describe fluid resuscitation practices in Brazilian intensive care units and to compare them with those of other countries participating in the Fluid-TRIPS.
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.
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.
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.