Brotfain, Evgeni

Objective: This retrospective observational study conducted in a general ICU aimed to evaluate the hemodynamic impact of IV paracetamol by monitoring blood pressure, urine output, and core temperature post-administration. Design: The study was designed as a retrospective observational study in a general ICU setting. Setting: The study was conducted in a general intensive care unit (ICU). Patients: Data from 498 patients receiving IV paracetamol in various clinical contexts were analyzed. Interventions: Patients received IV paracetamol for analgesia and fever reduction as part of their clinical care. Measurements and main results: The study analyzed the hemodynamic effects of IV paracetamol by monitoring blood pressure, urine output, and core temperature post-administration. A significant decrease in mean systolic and diastolic blood pressure values was observed across different patient subgroups, notably 45–60 min post-infusion. An increase in noradrenaline dosage and a decrease in urine output indicated a decline in end-organ perfusion following IV paracetamol administration. Multivariate analysis identified associations between clinical factors (such as general anesthesia and cardiac conditions) and changes in blood pressure. Conclusions: While IV paracetamol remains a valuable therapeutic option for pain and fever management, especially in hypertensive patients with specific conditions like traumatic brain injury and cerebral vascular accident, careful monitoring, and individualized dosing strategies are recommended in critically ill patients to maintain hemodynamic stability and optimize clinical outcomes. These findings contribute to enhancing our understanding of IV paracetamol hemodynamic effects and inform evidence-based practices for its use in ICU settings.

Background: For patients undergoing abdominal surgery, postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) are a major source of morbidity and mortality. The use of point-of-care ultrasonography (POCUS), and specifically POCUS of the lungs, has seen many advancements in recent years. Objectives: We hypothesize that perioperative lung ultrasonography can be used as a predictor for PPCs. Methods: In a Single, 1000 beds, trauma level I medical center, patients presenting for elective intra-abdominal surgery with no severe pulmonary or cardiac diseases were evaluated preoperatively with a standardized 12-point lung ultrasound exam. A second identical exam was performed after surgery in the post-anesthesia care unit. PPCs were also documented. All lung ultrasound exams were presented to a blinded researcher and a lung ultrasound score (LUS) was calculated. Statistical analysis comparing pre- and postoperative LUS and PPC scores were performed. Results: A total of 61 patients were evaluated. The pre-surgery median LUS was 0 (in the range of 0–6) and the post-surgery median LUS was 3 (in the range of 0–14). The pre- to postsurgical LUS delta was 3.4 (standard deviation of 3.3). A postoperative LUS of 6 or more was defined as “high.” A High LUS did not correlate with prolonged post-anesthesia care unit or hospital stay, prolonged oxygen support, or number of desaturation events. Conclusion: For elective abdominal surgery in relatively healthy patients, preoperative LUS usually begins at a normal level and becomes worse after general anesthesia. However, this difference in LUS is not significantly associated with clinically relevant postoperative pulmonary complications such as prolonged oxygen therapy, pneumonia, and noninvasive or invasive mechanical ventilation. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT05502926. Summary: This paper explores the use of point-of-care ultrasonography as a predictor for postoperative pulmonary complications. The findings suggest that while the lung ultrasound score worsens with general anesthesia, the differences are not significantly associated with postoperative pulmonary complications.

Patients undergoing abdominal oncologic surgical procedures require particular surgical and anesthesiologic considerations. Traditional pain management, such as opiate treatment, continuous epidural analgesia, and non-opioid drugs, may have serious side effects in this patient population. We evaluated erector spinae plane (ESP) blocks for postoperative pain management following elective oncologic abdominal surgeries. In this single-center, prospective, and randomized study, we recruited 100 patients who underwent elective oncological abdominal surgery between December 2020 and January 2022 at Soroka University Medical Center in Beer Sheva, Israel. We compared postoperative pain levels in patients who were treated with a preincisional ESP block in addition to traditional pain management with intravenous opioids, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and acetaminophen, compared to patients who were only given traditional pain management (control). Patients who were treated with a preincisional ESP block demonstrated significantly lower Visual Analog Scale scores at 60 minutes and 4, 8, and 12 hours following the surgery, compared to the control group ( p < 0.001 ). Accordingly, patients in the ESP group required less morphine from 60 minutes to 12 hours after surgery, but they required increased non-opioid postoperative analgesia management at 4, 8, and 12 hours after surgery ( p from 0.002 to <0.001) compared to the control group. In this study, we found ESP blocks to be a safe, technically simple, and effective treatment for postoperative pain management after elective oncologic abdominal procedures.

Critically ill patients with severe hypoxemia are often treated in the intensive care unit (ICU) with inhaled nitric oxide (iNO). These patients are at higher risk when they require intrahospital transportation. In this study, we collected clinical and laboratory data from 221 patients who were hospitalized in the general ICU and treated with iNO at Soroka Medical Center, Israel, between January 2010 and December 2019. We retrospectively compared the 65 patients who received iNO during intrahospital transportation to the 156 patients who received iNO without transportation. Among critically ill patients who were transported while being administered iNO, only one patient had an adverse event (atrial fibrillation) on transport. We found that maximal iNO dosage during ICU stay, duration of mechanical ventilation, and percent of vasopressor support were the only independent risk factors for ICU mortality in both study groups. No difference in primary outcome of ICU mortality rate was found between the critically ill patients treated with iNO during intrahospital transportation and those who were treated with iNO but not transported during the ICU stay. We anticipate that this study will advise clinical decision-making in the ICU, especially when treating patients who are administered iNO.