scholarly journals Central Line Access is Predictive of Diagnostic Blood Loss and Transfusion in the Surgical Intensive Care Unit

Author(s):  
Brian D Adkins ◽  
Abe Deanda ◽  
Judy A Trieu ◽  
Srinivas Polineni ◽  
Anthony O Okorodudu ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Diagnostic laboratory testing (DLT) is a source of blood loss in critically ill patients. Approximately half of patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) present with anemia, with the remainder developing a multifactorial anemia with etiologies including central venous catheter (CVC) placement. Consequently, about a third of ICU patients require red blood cell (RBC) transfusion, a practice associated with poorer clinical outcomes. Our objectives were to characterize DLT blood loss in the surgical intensive care unit (SICU), and its relationship with anemia, RBC transfusion, and CVC placement.Methods: An observational study was performed by retrospective chart review of patients admitted to a SICU over 1-year. The number of DLT blood draws, average volume of blood drawn, and estimated discard volume were recorded along with clinical and laboratory findings. Results: A cohort of 292 patients (mean age 62.2 years, male to female ratio 1.5) underwent 299 hospitalizations with an average daily DLT blood loss of 14.3 mL (229.5 mL per admission). Among admissions, 51.2% presented with anemia and 95.3% were anemic at discharge, with 32% of patients receiving an RBC transfusion. Patients with greater DLT-associated blood loss had lower discharge hemoglobin (p=<0.001). Admissions requiring CVC (49.8%), demonstrated a significantly greater number of DLT blood draws, increased DLT-associated blood loss, higher rates of RBC transfusion, and an increased length of stay.Conclusions: Findings from this study suggest that DLT blood loss contributes to anemia in the SICU and the presence and duration of CVC leads to increased testing, blood loss, anemia, and is predictive of RBC transfusion.

2020 ◽  
Vol 73 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Arpita Patel ◽  
Arielle Beauchesne ◽  
Nina Bredenkamp ◽  
Rumi McGloin ◽  
Sarah N Stabler ◽  
...  

ABSTRACTBackground: Critically ill patients often need vasopressors to treat hypotension related to septic shock and to maintain adequate systemic perfusion. Although the 2017 guidelines of the Surviving Sepsis Campaign recommend norepinephrine as first-line therapy, they also state that vasopressin may be considered as an adjunctive agent for patients with refractory shock. Limited evidence is available for directing optimal administration of vasopressin. As such, prescribing practices are not standardized and may vary according to the particular clinician, the clinical scenario, and various patient-specific factors.Objectives:To review the current practice of administering concomitant norepinephrine and vasopressin therapy to patients with septic shock, to describe variability in vasopressin administration, and to evaluate effects on patient safety in a medical-surgical intensive care unit (ICU).Methods: This single-centre retrospective chart review involved 100 adult patients admitted to the ICU who received vasopressin and norepinephrine for septic shock between April and December 2017. The data were analyzed with descriptive statistics.Results: The mean time to initiation of vasopressin was 12.0 (standard deviation [SD] 21.6) h after initiation of norepinephrine. The mean dose of norepinephrine at the time of vasopressin initiation was 29.5 (SD 19.7) μg/min. The mean vasopressin dose prescribed was 0.04 (SD 0.03) units/min, with a range of tapering and discontinuation regimens. The mean duration of vasopressin therapy was 49.1 (SD 65.2) h, and vasopressin was discontinued before norepinephrine in 49 of the patients. A total of 60 hypotensive events occurred after vasopressor discontinuation and were more common when vasopressin was discontinued before norepinephrine.Conclusions: Vasopressin dosing was comparable to that reported elsewhere; however, discontinuation practices were inconsistent. These results show that variability in the literature supporting vasopressin use has led to variability in vasopressin administration and discontinuation practices; however, correlation with improvement in clinical outcomes, such as mortality or ICU length of stay, is unclear, and further research is required to determine the ideal approach to vasopressin use.RÉSUMÉContexte : Les patients gravement malades nécessitent souvent un vasopresseur pour traiter l’hypotension liée au choc septique et pour préserver une perfusion systémique adéquate. Bien que les directives de 2017 de la campagne Surviving Sepsis recommandent la norepinephrine en guise de thérapie de première ligne, elles précisent également que la vasopressine pourrait être envisagée comme agent d’appoint pour les patients présentant des chocs réfractaires. Seules des données probantes limitées soutiennent l’administration optimale de la vasopressine. Les pratiques de prescription proprement dites ne sont pas standardisées et peuvent varier selon le clinicien, le scénario clinique et les divers facteurs particuliers au patient.Objectifs : Examiner la pratique actuelle d’administration de la norépinephrine concomitante à la thérapie de vasopressine aux patients ayant subi un choc septique, décrire la variabilité d’administration de la vasopressine et évaluer les effets sur la sécurité du patient dans une unite de soins intensifs (USI) médicale-chirurgicale.Méthodes : Cet examen rétrospectif unicentrique des dossiers portait sur 100 patients adultes admis dans une USI, ayant reçu de la vasopressine et de la norépinephrine en réponse à des chocs septiques entre avril et décembre 2017. Les données ont été analysées à l’aide de statistiques descriptives.Résultats : Le temps moyen du début de l’administration de la vasopressine était de 12 h (écart type [É.T.] 21,6) après le début de l’administration de la norépinephrine. La dose moyenne de norepinephrine au moment du début de l’administration de la vasopressine était de 29,5 (É.T. 19,7) μg/min. La dose moyenne de vasopressine prescrite était de 0,04 (É.T. 0,03) unités/min, avec une gamme de posologies dégressives et d’abandons. La durée moyenne de la thérapie à la vasopressine était de 49,1 h (É.T. 65,2), et 49 patients ont abandonné la vasopressine avant l’abandon de la norépinephrine. Un total de 60 événements hypotenseurs se sont produits après l’abandon du vasopresseur et ils étaient plus fréquents lors de l’abandon de la vasopressine précédant celui de la norépinephrine.Conclusions : Le dosage de vasopressine était comparable à celui indiqué dans d’autres études; cependant, les pratiques d’abandon étaient incohérentes. Ces résultats démontrent que l’indétermination de l’information publiée dans la littérature soutenant l’utilisation de la vasopressine a entraîné une fluctuation dans l’administration de la vasopressine et des pratiques d’abandon; cependant, la corrélation entre l’usage de la vasopressine et l’amélioration des résultats cliniques, comme la mortalité ou la durée du séjour en USI, n’est pas claire, et davantage de recherches sont nécessaires pour déterminer l’approche idéale à adopter à l’égard de l’utilisation de la vasopressine.


2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. S40-S41
Author(s):  
Mohammad H Al-Shaer ◽  
Eric Rubido ◽  
Daniel Lee ◽  
Kenneth Klinker ◽  
Charles Peloquin

Abstract Background Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is a powerful tool to optimize antibiotic exposure. It seldom has been used for β-lactams (BLs). We present our BL data in patients admitted to the surgical intensive care unit (SICU). Methods This retrospective study included SICU patients at UF Health (2016 and 2018) who received BL therapy and had TDM. Data collected included demographics, APACHE scores, platelet count, serum creatinine (Scr), infection source, cultures/susceptibilities, BL regimens, and plasma concentrations. Clinical cure was defined as resolution of infection-related symptoms at the end of therapy. Microbiologic eradication was defined as eradication of causative organism from the primary source out to 30 days after therapy. Pharmacokinetic and statistical analyses were performed on Phoenix v8.0 and JMP Pro v14. Results A total of 127 patients were included. Table 1 shows the baseline characteristics. The median age was 55 years, and weight was 83 kg. Eighty-three (65%) were male. P. aeruginosa was the most common isolated bacteria (n = 38). Lung was the most common source of infection (n = 50). Table 2 summarizes the median (IQR) doses, infusion times, calculated free trough concentrations (fCmin) of common BLs, and the reported minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs). Calculated median time above the MIC (fT > MIC) for 66 (52%) patients was 100%. A total of 99 (79%) patients had clinical cure and 67 (61%) patients had microbiologic eradication. For efficacy, the Cmin/MIC ratio predicted the microbiologic eradication in wound infections only (n = 15, OR 1.09 [95% CI 1.01–1.24]). Using stepwise regression, 1-unit increase fT > MIC and APACHE score was associated with 0.84 decrease (P = 0.03) and 0.62 increase (P = 0.004) in days of therapy, respectively. For safety, Figure 2 shows the increase in Scr vs. BL free area under the concentration–time curve from time zero to end of the dosing interval (fAUC0-tau). Cefepime fAUC0-tau predicted neurotoxicity (OR per 20 unit increase 1.08 [95% CI: 1.01–1.18]). Conclusion In SICU patients, increase in fT > MIC was associated with shorter treatment duration, and fAUC0-tau increase was associated with an increase in Scr and incidence of neurotoxicity. TDM is warranted in this population to optimize therapy. Disclosures All Authors: No reported Disclosures.


2014 ◽  
Vol 49 (3) ◽  
pp. 383-397 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rose K.L. Hata ◽  
Lois Han ◽  
Jill Slade ◽  
Asa Miyahira ◽  
ChristyAnne Passion ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document