Multicenter Validation of a Risk Index for Mortality, Intensive Care Unit Stay, and Overall Hospital Length of Stay After Cardiac Surgery

Circulation ◽  
1995 ◽  
Vol 91 (3) ◽  
pp. 677-684 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jack V. Tu ◽  
Susan B. Jaglal ◽  
C. David Naylor
Keyword(s):  
Intensive Care Unit ◽  
Cardiac Surgery ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
Length Of Stay ◽  
Intensive Care Unit Stay ◽  
Risk Index ◽  
Hospital Length ◽  
Hospital Length Of Stay ◽  
Multicenter Validation

scholarly journals Sedative use of Dexmedetomidine vs. Propofol after Cardiac Surgery: A critical review and meta-analysis.

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hesham Abowali ◽  
Matteo Paganini ◽  
Garrett A Enten ◽  
Ayman Elbadawi ◽  
Enrico Camporesi
Keyword(s):  
Intensive Care Unit ◽  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Cardiac Surgery ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
Length Of Stay ◽  
Hospital Length ◽  
Time Dependent ◽  
Hospital Length Of Stay ◽  
Ventilation Time ◽  
Mechanical Ventilation Time

Abstract Abstract Background : The use of dexmedetomidine for sedation post-cardiac surgery is controversial compared to the use of propofol. Methods : A computerized search on Medline, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality databases was performed for up to July 2019. Trials evaluating the efficacy of dexmedetomidine versus propofol in the postoperative sedation of cardiac surgery patients were selected. Primary study outcomes were classified as time-dependent (mechanical ventilation time; time to extubation; length of stay in the intensive care unit and the hospital) and non-time dependent (delirium, bradycardia, and hypotension). Results : Our final analysis included 11 RCTs published between 2003 and 2019 and involved a total of 1184 patients. Time to extubation was significantly reduced in the dexmedetomidine group (Standardized Mean Difference (SMD) = -0.61, 95% Confidence Interval (CI): -1.06 to -0.16, p=0.008), however no difference in mechanical ventilation time was observed (SMD= -0.72, 95% CI: -1.60 to 0.15, N.S.). Moreover, the dexmedetomidine group showed a significant reduction in Intensive Care Unit length of stay (SMD= -0.70, 95% CI: -0.98 to -0.42, p=0.0005) this did not translate into a reduced hospital length of stay (SMD= -1.13, 95% CI: -2.43 to 0.16, N.S). For non-time dependent factors: incidence of delirium was unaffected between groups (OR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.43 to 1.06, N.S.), while the propofol group of patients had higher rates of bradycardia (OR: 3.39, 95% CI: 1.20 to 9.55, p=0.020) and hypotension (OR: 1.68, 95% CI: 1.09 to 2.58, p=0.017). Conclusion : Despite the ICU time advantages afforded by dexmedetomidine over propofol, the former does not contribute to an overall reduction in hospital length of stay or an overall improvement in postoperative outcomes for heart valve surgery and CABG patients. Time-dependent outcomes confounded by several factors including variability in staff, site-protocols, and complication rates between individual surgical cases. Keywords: dexmedetomidine; propofol; cardiac surgery; postoperative sedation.

Cardiac Safety of Clonidine and Quetiapine in Post-Cardiac Surgery Intensive Care Unit Patients

2021 ◽  
pp. 089719002110446
Author(s):  
Abdulrahman I. Alshaya ◽  
James F. Gilmore ◽  
Rebecca M. Nashett ◽  
Mary P. Kovacevic ◽  
Kevin M. Dube ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Intensive Care Unit ◽  
Cardiac Surgery ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
Length Of Stay ◽  
Hospital Length ◽  
Hospital Length Of Stay ◽  
Apache Ii Score ◽  
Cardiac Safety ◽  
Icu Patients ◽  
Safety Outcomes

Background: Clonidine and quetiapine are frequently used medications in the cardiac surgery intensive care unit (ICU). Objective: The purpose of this study is to assess the impact of clonidine compared to quetiapine on cardiac safety outcomes in adult cardiac surgery ICU patients. Methods: This was a single-center, retrospective observational analysis at a tertiary care, academic medical center. Results: One hundred and sixty-one cardiac surgery patients who were administered clonidine or quetiapine during their ICU stay were included between June 2015 and May 2017. The major endpoint of this study was a cardiac safety composite of bradycardia, hypotension, and QTc prolongation. Minor endpoints included ICU and hospital length of stay, and in-hospital mortality. There were 115 patients included in the clonidine arm and 46 patients in the quetiapine arm. There was no difference between groups with regard to the major endpoint (30.43% vs 33.15%; P < .8). There was a shorter ICU and hospital length of stay in the clonidine arm compared to quetiapine P < .0001. All other endpoints were not statistically significant. Conclusion: Patients who received clonidine tended to have undergone less complex procedures, be younger, and have a lower APACHE II score than patients who received quetiapine. The incidence of composite cardiac safety outcomes was not different in clonidine compared to quetiapine in cardiac surgery ICU patients.

scholarly journals Restrictive Versus Liberal Red Blood Cell Transfusion for Cardiac Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 3821-3821
Author(s):  
Babikir Kheiri ◽  
Ahmed Abdalla ◽  
Mohamed Osman ◽  
Tarek Haykal ◽  
Sai Chintalapati ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Intensive Care Unit ◽  
Cardiac Surgery ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
Length Of Stay ◽  
Clinical Research ◽  
Hospital Length ◽  
Hospital Length Of Stay ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Rbc Transfusion ◽  
Research Institute

Abstract Introduction:Patients undergoing cardiac surgery are among the most common recipients of allogenic red blood cell (RBC) transfusions. However, whether restrictive RBC transfusion strategies for cardiac surgery achieve a similar clinical outcome in comparison with liberal strategies remains unclear. Methods:We searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Collaboration Central Register of Controlled Trials, and conference proceedings from inception to December 2017 for all randomized trials (RCTs). The primary outcome was mortality. Secondary outcomes were stroke, respiratory morbidity, renal morbidity, infections, myocardial infarction (MI), cardiac arrhythmia, gut morbidity, reoperation, intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (hours), and hospital length of stay (days). We calculated the risk ratios (RR) and weighted mean difference (MD) for the clinical outcomes using a random-effects model. Results:We included 9 RCTs with a total of 9,005 patients. There was no significant difference in mortality between groups (RR 1.03; 95% CI 0.74-1.45; P=0.86). In addition, there were no significant differences between groups in the clinical outcomes of infections (RR 1.09; 95% CI 0.94-1.26; P=0.26), stroke (RR 0.98; 95% CI 0.72-1.35; P=0.91), respiratory morbidity (RR 1.05; 95% CI 0.89-1.24; P=0.58), renal morbidity (RR 1.02; 95% CI 0.94-1.09; P=0.68), myocardial infarction (RR 1.00; 95% CI 0.80-1.24; P=0.99), cardiac arrhythmia (RR 1.05; 95% CI 0.88-1.26; P=0.56), gastrointestinal morbidity (RR 1.93; 95% CI 0.81-4.63; P=0.14), or reoperation (RR 0.90; 95% CI 0.67-1.20; P=0.46). There was a significant difference in the intensive care unit length of stay (hours) (MD 4.29; 95% CI: 2.19-6.39, P<0.01) favoring the liberal group. However, there was no significant difference in the hospital length of stay (days) (MD 0.15; 95% CI -0.18-0.48; P=0.38). Conclusion:This meta-analysis showed that restrictive strategies for RBC transfusion are as safe as liberal strategies in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. Key points: Restrictive strategies for red blood cell transfusion are as safe as liberal approaches in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. Longer duration of stay in the intensive care unit is more common in patients managed with a restrictive transfusion approach. However, the overall hospital length of stay appeared to be similar between both groups. Further studies are needed to ascertain threshold triggers for RBC transfusion. Figure. Figure. Disclosures Hassan: abott: Other: grant. Bhatt:American Heart Association Quality Oversight Committee: Other: chair; Boston VA Research Institute, Society of Cardiovascular Patient Care, TobeSof: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Medscape Cardiology: Consultancy; Regado Biosciences: Consultancy; Elsevier Practice Update Cardiology: Consultancy, trustee; cardax: Consultancy; Abbott, Amarin, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chiesi, Eisai, Ethicon, Forest Laboratories, Idorsia, Ironwood, Ischemix, Lilly, Medtronic, PhaseBio, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sanofi Aventis, Synaptic, The Medicines: Research Funding; Baim Institute for Clinical Research (formerly Harvard Clinical Research Institute, for the PORTICO trial, funded by St. Jude Medical, now Abbott), Cleveland Clinic, Duke Clinical Research Institute, Mayo Clinic, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, Population: Other: Data monitoring committee; American College of Cardiology; Unfunded Research: FlowCo, Merck, PLx Pharma, Takeda.: Other: trustee; ACC Accreditation Committee), Baim Institute for Clinical Research (formerly Harvard Clinical Research Institute; RE-DUAL PCI clinical trial steering committee funded by Boehringer Ingelheim), Belvoir Publications (Editor in Chief, Harvard Heart Letter),: Other: board member; American College of Cardiology (Senior Associate Editor, Clinical Trials and News, ACC.org: Honoraria.

scholarly journals Sedative Use of Dexmedetomidine vs. Propofol after Cardiac Surgery A Critical Review and Meta-Analysis.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hesham A. Abowali ◽  
Matteo Paganini ◽  
Garrett Enten ◽  
Ayman Elbadawi ◽  
Enrico Camporesi
Keyword(s):  
Intensive Care Unit ◽  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Cardiac Surgery ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
Length Of Stay ◽  
Hospital Length ◽  
Time Dependent ◽  
Hospital Length Of Stay ◽  
Ventilation Time ◽  
Mechanical Ventilation Time

Abstract Background The efficacy and safety of dexmedetomidine in sedation for postoperative cardiac surgeries are controversial when compared to propofol. Methods A computerized search on Medline, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality databases was performed through July 2019. Trials evaluating the efficacy of dexmedetomidine versus propofol in the sedation of postoperative cardiac surgery patients were selected. The primary study outcomes were divided into time-dependent (mechanical ventilation time; time to extubation; length of stay in the intensive care unit and the hospital) and non-time dependent (delirium, bradycardia, and hypotension). Results Our final analysis included 11 RCTs published between 2003 and 2019 and involved a total of 1184 patients. Time to extubation was significantly reduced in the dexmedetomidine group (Standardized Mean Difference (SMD) = -0.61, 95% Confidence Interval (CI): -1.06 to -0.16, p=0.008), however no difference in mechanical ventilation time was observed (SMD= -0.72, 95% CI: -1.60 to 0.15, N.S.). Moreover, the dexmedetomidine group showed a significant reduction in Intensive Care Unit length of stay (SMD= -0.70, 95% CI: -0.98 to -0.42, p=0.0005) this did not translate into a reduced hospital length of stay (SMD= -1.13, 95% CI: -2.43 to 0.16, N.S). For non-time dependent factors: incidence of delirium was unaffected between groups (OR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.43 to 1.06, N.S.), while the propofol group of patients had higher rates of bradycardia (OR: 3.39, 95% CI: 1.20 to 9.55, p=0.020) and hypotension (OR: 1.68, 95% CI: 1.09 to 2.58, p=0.017). Conclusion Despite the ICU time advantages afforded by dexmedetomidine over propofol, the former does not contribute to an overall reduction in hospital length of stay or an overall improvement in postoperative outcomes of heart valve surgery and CABG patients. Additionally, time-dependent outcomes are affected by several confounding factors, and more efforts are needed to analyze factors that could affect sedation in post-cardiac surgery patients and choose unbiased outcomes.

scholarly journals Postoperative delirium after cardiac surgery of elderly patients as an independent risk factor for prolonged length of stay in intensive care unit and in hospital

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea Kirfel ◽  
Jan Menzenbach ◽  
Vera Guttenthaler ◽  
Johanna Feggeler ◽  
Andreas Mayr ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Intensive Care Unit ◽  
Cardiac Surgery ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
Length Of Stay ◽  
Elderly Patients ◽  
Postoperative Delirium ◽  
Confusion Assessment Method ◽  
Assessment Method ◽  
Hospital Length Of Stay ◽  
Confusion Assessment

Abstract Background Postoperative delirium (POD) is a relevant and underdiagnosed complication after cardiac surgery that is associated with increased intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital length of stay (LOS). The aim of this subgroup study was to compare the frequency of tested POD versus the coded International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD) diagnosis of POD and to evaluate the influence of POD on LOS in ICU and hospital. Methods 254 elective cardiac surgery patients (mean age, 70.5 ± 6.4 years) at the University Hospital Bonn between September 2018 and October 2019 were evaluated. The endpoint tested POD was considered positive, if one of the tests Confusion Assessment Method for ICU (CAM-ICU) or Confusion Assessment Method (CAM), 4 'A's Test (4AT) or Delirium Observation Scale (DOS) was positive on one day. Results POD occurred in 127 patients (50.0%). LOS in ICU and hospital were significantly different based on presence (ICU 165.0 ± 362.7 h; Hospital 26.5 ± 26.1 days) or absence (ICU 64.5 ± 79.4 h; Hospital 14.6 ± 6.7 days) of POD (p < 0.001). The multiple linear regression showed POD as an independent predictor for a prolonged LOS in ICU (48%; 95%CI 31–67%) and in hospital (64%; 95%CI 27–110%) (p < 0.001). The frequency of POD in the study participants that was coded with the ICD F05.0 and F05.8 by hospital staff was considerably lower than tests revealed by the study personnel. Conclusion Approximately 50% of elderly patients who underwent cardiac surgery developed POD, which is associated with an increased ICU and hospital LOS. Furthermore, POD is highly underdiagnosed in clinical routine.

Hospital Length of Stay Among Patients Receiving Intermittent Versus Prolonged Piperacillin/Tazobactam Infusion in the Intensive Care Units

2017 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 134-141 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeannie D. Chan ◽  
Timothy H. Dellit ◽  
John B. Lynch
Keyword(s):  
Intensive Care Unit ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
Length Of Stay ◽  
Randomized Trials ◽  
Average Duration ◽  
Intermittent Infusion ◽  
Hospital Length ◽  
Hospital Length Of Stay ◽  
Inclusion Criteria ◽  
Prolonged Infusion

Objectives: We sought to evaluate clinical outcomes of intensive care unit (ICU) patients following a hospital-wide initiative of prolonged piperacillin/tazobactam (PIP/TAZ) infusion. Methods: Retrospective observational study of patients >18 years old who was hospitalized in the ICU receiving PIP/TAZ for >72 hours during the preimplementation (June 1, 2010 to May 31, 2011) and postimplementation (July 7, 2011 to June 30, 2014) periods. Results: There were 124 and 429 patients who met inclusion criteria with average age of 54.3 and 56.9 years, and average duration of PIP/TAZ therapy was 6.1 ± 2.8 days and 5.9 ± 3.4 days in the pre- and postimplementation period, respectively. Intensive care unit and hospital length of stay (LOS) following initiation of PIP/TAZ were 8.0 ± 8.4 days versus 6.4 ± 6.8 days and 26.3 ± 22.8 days versus 20.4 ± 16.1 days among patients in the pre- and postimplementation periods, respectively. Compared to patients who received intermittent PIP/TAZ infusion, the adjusted difference in ICU and hospital LOS was 0.6 ± 0.8 days (95% confidence interval [CI]: −0.9 to 2.1 days) and 5.6 ± 2.1 days (95% CI: 1.4 - 9.7 days) shorter among patients who received prolonged PIP/TAZ infusion. At hospital discharge, 19 (15.3%) intermittent infusion and 74 (17.2%) prolonged infusion recipients had died. In comparison to intermittent infusion recipients, the adjusted odds ratio for mortality was 1.17 (95% CI: 0.65-2.1) with prolonged infusion. Conclusion: Our study demonstrated a reduction in hospital LOS with prolonged PIP/TAZ infusion among critically ill patients. Randomized trials are needed to further validate these findings.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document