Lascarrou, Jean-Baptiste

ImportanceUnderstanding the relationship between patients’ clinical characteristics and outcomes is fundamental to medicine. When critically ill patients die after withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy (WLST), the inability to observe the potential for recovery with continued aggressive care could bias future clinical decisions and research.ObjectiveTo quantify the frequency with which experts consider patients who died after WLST following resuscitated cardiac arrest to have had recovery potential if life-sustaining therapy had been continued.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis prospective cohort study included comatose adult patients (aged ≥18 years) treated following resuscitation from cardiac arrest at a single academic medical center between January 1, 2010, and July 31, 2022. Patients with advanced directives limiting critical care or who experienced cardiac arrest of traumatic or neurologic etiology were excluded. An international cohort of experts in post-arrest care based on clinical experience and academic productivity was identified. Experts reviewed the cases between August 24, 2022, and February 11, 2024.ExposurePatients who died after WLST.Main Outcome and MeasuresThree or more experts independently estimated recovery potential for each patient had life-sustaining treatment been continued, using a 7-point numerical ordinal scale. In the primary analysis, which involved the patient cases with death after WLST, a 1% or greater estimated recovery potential was considered to be clinically meaningful. In secondary analyses, thresholds of 5% and 10% estimated recovery probability were explored.ResultsA total of 2391 patients (median [IQR] age, 59 [48-69] years; 1455 men [60.9%]) were included, of whom 714 (29.9%) survived to discharge. Cases of uncertain outcome (1431 patients [59.8%]) in which WLST preceded death were reviewed by 38 experts who rendered 4381 estimates of recovery potential. In 518 cases (36.2%; 95% CI, 33.7%-38.7%), all experts believed that recovery potential was less than 1% if life-sustaining therapies had been continued. In the remaining 913 cases (63.8%; 95% CI, 61.3%-66.3%), at least 1 expert believed that recovery potential was at least 1%. In 227 cases (15.9%; 95% CI, 14.0%-17.9%), all experts agreed that recovery potential was at least 1%, and in 686 cases (47.9%; 95% CI, 45.3%-50.6%), expert estimates differed at this threshold.Conclusions and RelevanceIn this cohort study of comatose patients resuscitated from cardiac arrest, most who died after WLST were considered by experts to have had recovery potential. These findings suggest that novel solutions to avoiding deaths based on biased prognostication or incomplete information are needed.

Abstract Rationale Cardiovascular instability/collapse is a common peri-intubation event in patients who are critically ill. Objectives To identify potentially modifiable variables associated with peri-intubation cardiovascular instability/collapse (i.e., systolic arterial pressure <65 mm Hg [once] or <90 mm Hg for >30 minutes; new/increased vasopressor requirement; fluid bolus >15 ml/kg, or cardiac arrest). Methods INTUBE (International Observational Study to Understand the Impact and Best Practices of Airway Management In Critically Ill Patients) was a multicenter prospective cohort study of patients who were critically ill and undergoing tracheal intubation in a convenience sample of 197 sites from 29 countries across five continents from October 1, 2018, to July 31, 2019. Measurements and Main Results A total of 2,760 patients were included in this analysis. Peri-intubation cardiovascular instability/collapse occurred in 1,199 out of 2,760 patients (43.4%). Variables associated with this event were older age (odds ratio [OR], 1.02; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02–1.03), higher heart rate (OR, 1.008; 95% CI, 1.004–1.012), lower systolic blood pressure (OR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.98–0.99), lower oxygen saturation as measured by pulse oximetry/Fi O2 before induction (OR, 0.998; 95% CI, 0.997–0.999), and the use of propofol as an induction agent (OR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.05–1.57). Patients with peri-intubation cardiovascular instability/collapse were at a higher risk of ICU mortality with an adjusted OR of 2.47 (95% CI, 1.72–3.55), P < 0.001. The inverse probability of treatment weighting method identified the use of propofol as the only factor independently associated with cardiovascular instability/collapse (OR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.02–1.49). When administered before induction, vasopressors (OR, 1.33; 95% CI, 0.84–2.11) or fluid boluses (OR, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.96–1.44) did not reduce the incidence of cardiovascular instability/collapse. Conclusions Peri-intubation cardiovascular instability/collapse was associated with an increased risk of both ICU and 28-day mortality. The use of propofol for induction was identified as a modifiable intervention significantly associated with cardiovascular instability/collapse. Clinical trial registered with clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03616054).