Ramelteon is Not Associated With Improved Outcomes Among Critically Ill Delirious Patients: A Single-Center Retrospective Cohort Study

2019 ◽  
Vol 60 (3) ◽  
pp. 289-297 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robyn Thom ◽  
Melissa Bui ◽  
Bernard Rosner ◽  
Polina Teslyar ◽  
Nomi Levy-Carrick ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
Critically Ill ◽  
Retrospective Cohort Study ◽  
Retrospective Cohort ◽  
Single Center ◽  
Improved Outcomes

scholarly journals Cancer Is an Independent Risk Factor for Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome in Critically Ill Patients: A Single Center Retrospective Cohort Study

2021 ◽  
pp. 088506662110054
Author(s):  
Kevin Ho ◽  
Joshua Gordon ◽  
Kevin T. Litzenberg ◽  
Matthew C. Exline ◽  
Joshua A. Englert ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factor ◽  
Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome ◽  
Cohort Study ◽  
Critically Ill ◽  
Retrospective Cohort Study ◽  
Critically Ill Patients ◽  
Retrospective Cohort ◽  
Independent Risk Factor ◽  
Distress Syndrome ◽  
Single Center

Background: Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) is a frequent cause of respiratory failure in intensive care unit (ICU) patients and results in significant morbidity and mortality. ARDS often develops as a result of a local or systemic inflammatory insult. Cancer can lead to systemic inflammation but whether cancer is an independent risk factor for developing ARDS is unknown. We hypothesized that critically ill cancer patients admitted to the ICU were at increased risk for the diagnosis of ARDS. Methods: Retrospective cohort study of critically ill patients admitted between July 2017 and December 2018 at an academic medical center in Columbus, Ohio. The primary outcome was the association of patients with malignancy and the diagnosis of ARDS in a multivariable logistic regression model with covariables selected a priori informed through the construction of a directed acyclic graph. Results: 412 ARDS cases were identified with 166 of those patients having active cancer. There was an association between cancer and ARDS, with an odds ratio (OR) of 1.55 (95% CI 1.26-1.92, P < 0.001). When adjusted for our pre-specified confounding variables, the association remained statistically significant (OR 1.57, 95% CI 1.15-2.13, P = 0.004). In an unadjusted pre-specified subgroup analysis, hematologic malignancy (OR 1.81, 95% CI 1.30-2.53, P < 0.001) was associated with increased odds of developing ARDS while non-metastatic solid tumors (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.31-0.85, P = 0.01) had statistically significant negative association. Cancer patients with ARDS had a significantly higher ICU (70.5% vs 39.8%, P < 0.001) and hospital (72.9% vs 40.7%, P < 0.001) mortality compared to ARDS patients without active malignancy. Conclusion: In this single center retrospective cohort study, cancer was found to be an independent risk factor for the diagnosis of ARDS in critically ill patients. To our knowledge, we are the first report an independent association between cancer and ARDS in critically ill patients.

scholarly journals Proton pump inhibitors versus histamine-2 receptor blockers for stress ulcer prophylaxis in patients with sepsis: a retrospective cohort study

2021 ◽  
Vol 49 (6) ◽  
pp. 030006052110251
Author(s):  
Minqiang Huang ◽  
Ming Han ◽  
Wei Han ◽  
Lei Kuang
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Cohort Study ◽  
Hospital Mortality ◽  
Critically Ill ◽  
Proton Pump ◽  
Retrospective Cohort Study ◽  
Retrospective Cohort ◽  
Stress Ulcer ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Ulcer Prophylaxis

Objective We aimed to compare the efficacy and risks of proton pump inhibitor (PPI) versus histamine-2 receptor blocker (H2B) use for stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP) in critically ill patients with sepsis and risk factors for gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB). Methods In this retrospective cohort study, we used the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care III Clinical Database to identify critically ill adult patients with sepsis who had at least one risk factor for GIB and received either an H2B or PPI for ≥48 hours. Propensity score matching (PSM) was conducted to balance baseline characteristics. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Results After 1:1 PSM, 1056 patients were included in the H2B and PPI groups. The PPI group had higher in-hospital mortality (23.8% vs. 17.5%), GIB (8.9% vs. 1.6%), and pneumonia (49.6% vs. 41.6%) rates than the H2B group. After adjusting for risk factors of GIB and pneumonia, PPI use was associated with a 1.28-times increased risk of in-hospital mortality, 5.89-times increased risk of GIB, and 1.32-times increased risk of pneumonia. Conclusions Among critically ill adult patients with sepsis at risk for GIB, SUP with PPIs was associated with higher in-hospital mortality and higher risk of GIB and pneumonia than H2Bs.

The effects of propofol on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation oxygenator exchange

2021 ◽  
pp. 039139882110160
Author(s):  
Kelsey L Browder ◽  
Ayesha Ather ◽  
Komal A Pandya
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation ◽  
Cumulative Dose ◽  
Retrospective Cohort Study ◽  
Retrospective Cohort ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Ecmo Support ◽  
Single Center ◽  
Membrane Oxygenation ◽  
Vv Ecmo

The objective of this study was to determine if propofol administration to veno-venous (VV) extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) patients was associated with more incidents of oxygenator failure when compared to patients who did not receive propofol. This was a single center, retrospective cohort study. The primary outcome of the study is oxygenator exchanges per ECMO day in patients who received propofol versus those who did not receive propofol. Patients were 18 years or older on VV-ECMO support between January 1, 2015 and January 31, 2018. Patients were excluded if they required ECMO support for less than 48 h or greater than 21 days. There were five patients in the propofol arm that required oxygenator exchanges and seven patients in the control arm. The total number of oxygenator exchanges per ECMO day was not significantly different between groups ( p = 0.50). When comparing those who required an oxygenator exchange and those who did not, there was no difference in the cumulative dose of propofol received per ECMO hour (0.64 mg/kg/h vs 0.96 mg/kg/h; p = 0.16). Propofol use in patients on VV-ECMO does not appear to increase the number of oxygenator exchanges.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document