Effects of early rehabilitation therapy on patients with mechanical ventilation

BACKGROUND: For patients in intensive care unit(ICU), mechanical ventilation is an effective treatment to survive from acute illness and improve survival rates. However, long periods of bed rest and restricted physical activity can result in side effects. This study aimed to investigate the feasibility of early rehabilitation therapy in patients with mechanical ventilation.METHODS: A randomized controlled trial was carried out. Sixty patients, with tracheal intubation or tracheostomy more than 48 hours and less than 72 hours, were admitted to the ICU of the Affiliated Hospital of Medical College, Qingdao University, from May 2010 to May 2012. These patients were randomly divided into a rehabilitation group and a control group. In the rehabilitation group, rehabilitation therapy was performed twice daily, and the training time and intensity were adjusted according to the condition of the patients. Early rehabilitation therapy included heading up actively, transferring from the supine position to sitting position, sitting at the edge of the bed, sitting in chair, transferring from sitting to standing, and ambulating bedside. The patient's body mass index, days to first out of bed, duration of mechanical ventilation, length of ICU stay, APACHE II score, highest FiO2, lowest PaO2/FiO2 and hospital mortality of patients were all compared between the rehabilitation group and the control group. The differences between the two groups were compared using Student's t test.RESULTS: There was no significant difference in body mass index, APACHE II score, highest FiO2, lowest PaO2/FiO2 and hospital mortality between the rehabilitation group and the control group(P>0.05). Patients in the rehabilitation group had shorter days to first out of bed(3.8±1.2 d vs. 7.3±2.8 d; P=0.00), duration of mechanical ventilation(5.6±2.1 d vs. 12.7±4.1 d; P=0.005) and length of ICU stay(12.7±4.1 d vs. 15.2±4.5 d; P=0.01) compared with the control group.CONCLUSION: Early rehabilitation therapy was feasible and effective in improving the outcomes of patients with mechanical ventilation.

Use of Early Goal-Directed Therapy in the Emergency Department before and after the Sepsis Trilogy

The management of sepsis evolved recently with the publication of three large trials (referred to as the sepsis trilogy) investigating the efficacy of early goal-directed therapy (EGDT). Our goal was to determine if the publication of these trials has influenced the use of EGDT when caring for patients with severe sepsis and septic shock in the emergency department (ED). In February 2014, we surveyed a sample of board-certified emergency medicine physicians regarding their use of EGDT in the ED. A follow-up survey was sent after the publication of the sepsis trilogy. Data was analyzed using 95% confidence intervals to determine if there was a change in the use of EGDT following the publication of the above trials. Subgroup analyses were also performed with regard to academic affiliation and emergency department volume. Surveys were sent to 308 and 350 physicians in the pre-and post-publication periods, respectively. Overall, ED use of EGDT did not change with publication of the sepsis trilogy, 48.7% (CI 39.3% - 58.2%) before and 50.5% (CI 40.6% - 60.3%) after. Subgroup analysis revealed that academic-affiliated EDs significantly decreased EGDT use following the sepsis trilogy while nonacademic departments significantly increased EGDT use. Use of EGDT was significantly greater in community departments versus academic departments following the publication of the sepsis trilogy. There was no change overall in the use of EGDT protocols when caring for patients with severe sepsis and septic shock, but subgroup analyses revealed that academic departments decreased their use of EGDT while community departments increased use of EGDT. This may be due to varying rates of uptake of the medical literature between academic and community healthcare systems.

Monitoring of Tumor Response to Neoadjuvant Radio-Chemotherapy of Esophageal Carcinoma by F-18-FDG-PET

Introduction: For clinical assessment of neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy of esophageal cancer reliable in-vivo methods are necessary. Therefore, the capabilities of F-18-Fluorodesoxyglucose-PET in comparison to histomorphological grading of tumor regression were studied. Methods: In 33 patients with locally advanced esophageal carcinoma (uT3, uN0-1, cM0) F-18-FDG-PET was performed before and 2 weeks after radiochemotherapy. All tumors were resected by transthoracic en-bloc esophagectomy 3–4 weeks after induction therapy. A subgroup of 11 patients underwent weekly PET scan during neoadjuvant therapy. PET was performed in a dedicated scanner 1.3 h after administration of 370 MBq F-18-FDG. Data analysis based on maximum SUV data derived from individual regions of interest in pre- and posttherapeutic images. PET data were compared to histomorphological grading parameters for tumor regression whithin the resected tissues. Results: The comparison of histopathological tumor regression after neoadjuvant therapy and PET SUV di?erences showed a signi?cant χ2 P -value of 0.006. There was a signi?cant decrease 五笔字型计算机汉字输入技术 of the SUV data from 9.1±3.5 to 4.3±1.9 (P <0.0001). In therapy responders SUV was diminished by 59 % and in non-responders by 34 %. Longitudinal SUV measurement during neoadjuvant therapy showed a strong SUV decrease already after one and two weeks (P =0.021 and 0.003). Conclusion: The recent data of the FDG-PET follow-up after neoadjuvant therapy show that PET is able to predict therapy response. Longitudinal PET data advocate that it may be possible to recognize response also very early during radiochemotherapy.

Hepatic Perfusion Alterations in Septic Shock Patients： Impact of Early Goal-directed Therapy

Background： Early goal-directed therapy （EGDT） has become an important therapeutic management in early salvage stage of septic shock. However, splenic organs possibly remained hypoperfused and hypoxic despite fluid resuscitation. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of EGDT on hepatic perfusion in septic shock patients. Methods： A prospective observational study was carried out in early septic shock patients who were admitted to Intensive Care Unit within 24 h after onset and who met all four elements of the EGDT criteria after treatment with the standard EGDT procedure within 6 h between December 1, 2012 and November 30, 2013. The hemodynamic data were recorded, and oxygen metabolism and hepatic functions were monitored. An indocyanine green clearance test was applied to detect the hepatic perfusion. The patients＇ characteristics were compared before treatment （TO）, immediately after EGDT （T 1 ）, and 24 h after EGDT （T2）. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.org, NCT02060773. Results： Twenty-one patients were included in the study; however, the hepatic perfusion data were not included in the analysis for two patients： therefore, 19 patients were eligible for the study. Hemodynamics data, as monitored by pulse-indicator continuous cardiac output, were obtained from 16 patients. There were no significant differences in indocyanine green plasma disappearance rate （ICG-PDR） and 15-min retention rate （Rl 5） at TO （ 11.9 ±5.0%/min and 20.0 ±13.2%）, T1 （ 11.4 ± 5.1%/min and 23.6 ± 14.9%）, and T2 （ 11.0 ±4.5%/rain and 23.7 ± 15.3%） （all P 〉 0.05）. Both of the alterations of ICG-PDR and R l 5 showed no differences at TO, T1, and T2 in the patients of different subgroups that achieved different resuscitation goal numbers when elected （P 〉 0.05）.

Compliance with SEP-1 guidelines is associated with improved outcomes for septic shock but not for severe sepsis

Background: In 2018, the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services (CMS) issued a protocol for the treatment of sepsis. This bundle protocol, titled SEP-1 is a multicomponent 3 h and 6 h resuscitation treatment for patients with the diagnosis of either severe sepsis or septic shock. The SEP-1 bundle includes antibiotic administration, fluid bolus, blood cultures, lactate measurement, vasopressors for fluid-refractory hypotension, and a reevaluation of volume status. We performed a retrospective analysis of patients diagnosed with either severe sepsis or septic shock comparing mortality outcomes based on compliance with the updated SEP-1 bundle at a rural community hospital. Methods: Mortality outcome and readmission data were extracted from an electronic medical records database from January 1, 2019, to June 30, 2020. International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-10 codes were used to identify patients with either severe sepsis or septic shock. Once identified, patients were separated into four populations: patients with severe sepsis who met SEP-1, patients with severe sepsis who failed SEP-1, patients with septic shock who met SEP-1, and patients with septic shock who failed SEP-1. A patient who met bundle criteria (SEP-1 criteria) received each component of the bundle in the time allotted. Using chi-squared test of homogeneity, mortality outcomes for population proportions were investigated. Two sample proportion summary hypothesis test and 95% confidence intervals (CI) determined significance in mortality outcomes. Results: Out of our 1122 patient population, 437 patients qualified to be measured by CMS criteria. Of the 437 patients, 195 met the treatment bundle and 242 failed the treatment bundle. Upon comparing the two groups, we found the probable difference in mortality rate between the met(14.87%) and failed bundle(27.69%) groups to be significant(95% CI: 5.28-20.34, P = 0.0013). However, the driving force of this result lies in the subgroup of patients with severe sepsis with septic shock, which show a higher mortality rate compared to the subgroup with just severe sepsis. The difference was within the range of 3.31% to 29.71%. Conclusion: This study shows that with septic shock obtained a benefit, decreased mortality, when the SEP-1 bundle was met. However, meeting the SEP-1 bundle had no benefit for patients who had the diagnosis of severe sepsis alone. The significant difference in mortality, found between the met and failed bundle groups, is primarily due to the number of patients with septic shock, and whether or not those patients with septic shock met or failed the bundle.