Lal, Amos

Abstract Rationale Mechanically ventilated intensive care unit patients receive sedatives based on clinician observations of arousal and motor activity with potential for negative consequences and poor mitigation of symptoms. Objectives To test the preliminary efficacy of patient self-managed sedative therapy compared to usual care of nurse-administered sedation on self-reported anxiety, duration of mechanical ventilation, and delirium incidence (CAM-ICU). Methods A two-group, open-label, randomized, multicenter clinical trial in 5 Midwestern hospitals enrolled 161 patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation who were willing and able to use a push-button device to self-administer sedation for up to 7 days. Patients were randomized 1:1 using center-stratified blocks to usual care (n = 81) or intervention (n = 80) with self-administered dexmedetomidine. Intervention patients were allowed 3 self-administered dexmedetomidine boluses per hour (0.25 mcg/kg) with 20-minute lock-outs. The initial basal infusion (0.2 mcg/kg/hr) was adjusted by nurses between 0.1-0.7 mcg/kg/hr based on patient-delivered boluses in the prior 2 hours. Analysis consisted of linear mixed-effects model for comparisons of anxiety ratings over time and duration of mechanical ventilation. Incidence of delirium was analyzed using generalized estimating equations. Measurement and Main Results Sample characteristics had a female (54.7%) and Caucasian preponderance (92.5%) with a median age of 62 years on protocol for a median of 88 hours. Nine intervention patients were extubated prior to protocol initiation. Patient self-reported three times daily anxiety ratings with a visual analog scale (VAS) ranged from 0-100 over time but were not significantly different between groups in either an intention-to-treat (ITT) or per protocol (PP) analysis (p = 0.94, p = 0.30 respectively). While intervention patients had shorter duration of MV [(mean 50.8(52.8) vs. usual care 68.7(58.2) hours), p = 0.02 ITT], PP analysis resulted in no difference between groups (mean 56.4 (53.0) vs. 68.7(58.2), p = 0.23). 10.2% of intervention patients developed new incidence of delirium vs. 8.5% of usual care which was not significantly different between groups by either ITT (p = 0.65) or PP analyses (p = 0.58). Conclusions Intervention patients had similar outcomes compared to usual care patients. Self-administration of sedative therapy is a safe, novel patient-centered intervention warranting further rigorous investigation for anxiety self-management.

Introduction Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is common and remains the leading infectious cause of death worldwide. Antibiotics remain the mainstay of treatment, but organisms are often not identified, necessitating empirical treatment. Current treatment guidelines recommend combination therapy with beta-lactams and macrolides or monotherapy with fluoroquinolones for non-severe CAP. However, rising antibiotic resistance and safety concerns have led to increased doxycycline use, despite limited evidence supporting its efficacy. Our goal is to conduct a pragmatic, open-label, randomised clinical trial comparing the effectiveness of azithromycin with that of doxycycline in combination with beta-lactam therapy in adult patients hospitalised for CAP. Methods and analysis Patients presenting to the emergency department or directly referred to the hospital with a clinical presentation concerning for CAP and need for hospitalisation are eligible. We plan to enrol 1120 adults hospitalised at six hospitals across four states, including rural, suburban and urban settings and academic and community hospitals. Randomisation will be 1:1 using an electronic health record (EHR)-embedded screening and randomisation tool triggered by the treating clinician’s orders for azithromycin or doxycycline. Outcomes will be ascertained pragmatically via EHR-based data retrieval and will not require additional study visits. Our primary outcome is days alive and out of the hospital through day 28. Secondary outcomes include oxygen-free days; a composite of a need for advanced respiratory support or in-hospital mortality with analyses of each component separately; an ordinal measure of clinical deterioration defined by a prespecified severity scale; and 60-day and 180-day mortality. Safety outcomes are the incidence of Clostridioides difficile infection and QT prolongation. Analyses will follow an intention-to-treat framework, with per-protocol analyses for sensitivity. The primary endpoint will be compared between groups using a stratified van Elteren test, with supportive analyses using proportional odds regression and analysis of covariance adjusted for key covariates. Ethics and dissemination The Mayo Clinic Institutional Review Board reviewed and approved this protocol with a waiver of written consent, requiring verbal consent to be obtained by the clinician initiating the antibiotics (IRB# 24–0 06 503). Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and international conference presentations. Trial registration number NCT07164131 .

Introduction Sepsis is a global health priority with nearly 50 million cases annually. Cardiovascular dysfunction is common, frequently manifesting as hypotension that persists despite fluid resuscitation. Most affected patients require the use of intravenous (IV) vasoactive agents, typically necessitating intensive care unit (ICU)-level monitoring, invasive interventions and contributing substantially to healthcare costs. Midodrine, an oral alpha-1 agonist approved for orthostatic hypotension, has increasingly been used off-label as a vasopressor-sparing (reducing IV vasopressor use) strategy in sepsis, despite limited and inconsistent evidence. This pragmatic, randomised, open-label trial evaluates the efficacy and safety of midodrine in patients with sepsis-associated hypotension. We hypothesise that, compared with standard care, midodrine administration will reduce the duration of IV vasopressor use. Methods and analysis A total of 308 adult patients with sepsis-associated hypotension will be enrolled (154 per arm). The intervention group will, in addition to standard of care, receive enteral midodrine 10 mg three times daily. Outcomes will be ascertained pragmatically via electronic health record-based data retrieval and adjudicated by research coordinators blinded to treatment assignment. The primary outcome is time alive and off IV vasopressors in the first 28 days (in hours) after randomisation. Secondary outcomes include cumulative vasopressor exposure; use and duration of central venous access; cumulative fluid balance over the first 48 hours and up to 7 days of ICU stay; ICU and hospital length of stay; and ICU-, hospital-, and organ support-free days through day 28. Safety outcomes include adverse events potentially attributable to midodrine during hospitalisation including acute kidney injury. Primary analyses will follow an intention-to-treat framework, including all randomised participants according to their assigned treatment groups. Primary and secondary outcomes will be compared using a van Elteren test stratified by randomisation factors. A predefined secondary Bayesian analysis of the primary outcome will provide complementary estimates of treatment effect. Safety outcomes will be summarised descriptively without formal between-arm hypothesis testing. Ethics and dissemination The Mayo Clinic Institutional Review Board approved this protocol and required written informed consent from all participants (IRB# 24–0 00 121). Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and international conference presentations. Trial registration number NCT06319248 .

ABSTRACT Understanding clinical trajectories of sepsis patients is crucial for prognostication, resource planning, and to inform digital twin models of critical illness. This study aims to identify common clinical trajectories based on dynamic assessment of cardiorespiratory support using a validated electronic health record data that covers retrospective cohort of 19,177 patients with sepsis admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) of Mayo Clinic Hospitals over 8-year period. Patient trajectories were modeled from ICU admission up to 14 days using an unsupervised machine learning two-stage clustering method based on cardiorespiratory support in ICU and hospital discharge status. Of 19,177 patients, 42% were female with a median age of 65 (interquartile range [IQR], 55–76) years, The Acute Physiology, Age, and Chronic Health Evaluation III score of 70 (IQR, 56–87), hospital length of stay (LOS) of 7 (IQR, 4–12) days, and ICU LOS of 2 (IQR, 1–4) days. Four distinct trajectories were identified: fast recovery (27% with a mortality rate of 3.5% and median hospital LOS of 3 (IQR, 2–15) days), slow recovery (62% with a mortality rate of 3.6% and hospital LOS of 8 (IQR, 6–13) days), fast decline (4% with a mortality rate of 99.7% and hospital LOS of 1 (IQR, 0–1) day), and delayed decline (7% with a mortality rate of 97.9% and hospital LOS of 5 (IQR, 3–8) days). Distinct trajectories remained robust and were distinguished by Charlson Comorbidity Index, The Acute Physiology, Age, and Chronic Health Evaluation III scores, as well as day 1 and day 3 SOFA ( P < 0.001 ANOVA). These findings provide a foundation for developing prediction models and digital twin decision support tools, improving both shared decision making and resource planning.

Background and Objectives: Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) poses a significant threat to the clinical outcomes and hospital stays of mechanically ventilated patients, particularly those recovering from cardiac arrest. Given the already elevated mortality rates in cardiac arrest cases, the addition of VAP further diminishes the chances of survival. Consequently, a paramount focus on VAP prevention becomes imperative. This review endeavors to comprehensively delve into the nuances of VAP, specifically in patients requiring mechanical ventilation in post-cardiac arrest care. The overarching objectives encompass (I) exploring the etiology, risk factors, and pathophysiology of VAP, (II) delving into available diagnostic modalities, and (III) providing insights into the management options and recent treatment guidelines. Methods: A literature search was conducted using PubMed, MEDLINE, and Google Scholar databases for articles about VAP and Cardiac arrest. We used the MeSH terms “VAP”, “Cardiac arrest”, “postcardiac arrest syndrome”, and “postcardiac arrest syndrome”. The clinical presentation, diagnostic, and management strategies of VAP were summarized, and all authors reviewed the selection and decided which studies to include. Key Content and Findings: The incidence and mortality rates of VAP exhibit significant variability, yet a recurring pattern emerges, marked by prolonged hospitalization and exacerbated clinical outcomes. This pattern is attributed to the elevated incidence of drug-resistant infections and the delayed initiation of antimicrobial treatment. This review focuses on VAP, aiming to offer valuable insights into the efficient identification and management of this fatal complication in post-cardiac arrest patients. Conclusion: The prognosis for survival after cardiac arrest is already challenging, and the outlook becomes even more daunting when complicated by VAP. The timely diagnosis of VAP and initiation of antibiotics pose considerable challenges, primarily due to the invasive nature of obtaining high-quality samples and the time required for speciation and identification of antimicrobial sensitivity. The controversy surrounding prophylactic antibiotics persists, but promising new strategies have been proposed; however, they are still awaiting well-designed clinical trials.

Purpose: This study evaluated the predictive value of SCAI shock staging for mortality in patients with sepsis and septic shock admitted to the medical ICU. Materials and Methods: This is a single-center historical cohort study. We analyzed data for adults (≥ 18-year-old) admitted to the medical ICU at Mayo Clinic St. Mary’s campus with sepsis between June 1, 2018, and December 31, 2021. Sepsis was identified using the Sepsis-III criteria. Patients were stratified based on SCAI shock staging. Our primary outcome was all-cause 30-day mortality. Results: We identified 3,079 eligible adult patients with sepsis or septic shock. The distribution of SCAI shock stages A through E was 9%, 12%, 25%, 49%, and 5%, respectively. The overall 30-day mortality was 24%. There was progression in all outcomes including ICU, hospital and 30-day mortality across SCAI shock stages. However, only SCAI shock stages D and E, had statistically significant adjusted HRs of 1.6 and 3, respectively. When compared to SOFA score, SCAI shock staging performed similarly in predicting ICU mortality with no statistically significant difference in AUCs, p-value of 0.07. Conclusions: Our results support the use of SCAI shock staging in critically ill medical patients with sepsis and septic shock for risk stratification. We propose that the SCAI shock staging may be used as a universal system for grading the severity of shock in critically ill patients regardless of etiology.

ObjectiveAvacopan, an activated complement factor 5 receptor antagonist, has been approved as adjunct therapy for severe active antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody–associated vasculitis (AAV). Current evidence supports the management of AAV presenting with diffuse alveolar hemorrhage (DAH) by administering glucocorticoids combined with either rituximab or cyclophosphamide in addition to supportive care. The role of avacopan in patients with DAH as a primary severe disease manifestation of AAV has not been well established. Furthermore, concerns remain regarding timely access to avacopan, the best glucocorticoid tapering regimen, and long‐term efficacy and safety of the drug. We sought to identify clinical features and outcomes of patients presenting with DAH secondary to AAV who received avacopan in addition to glucocorticoids and rituximab or cyclophosphamide.MethodsWe performed a retrospective cohort study of all consecutive patients presenting with DAH as part of active severe granulomatosis with polyangiitis or microscopic polyangiitis. Demographic and clinical characteristics were collected at presentation and follow‐up.ResultsFifteen patients met inclusion criteria and were observed for a median time of 17 weeks (interquartile range [IQR] 6–37 weeks) after initiation of avacopan. Patients were predominantly female and White, had never smoked, and were a median age of 66 years (IQR 52–72 years) at diagnosis. The majority had newly diagnosed severe AAV with renal involvement. Three patients progressed to respiratory failure. The timing of avacopan introduction and patterns of glucocorticoid tapers varied widely in this cohort. Two serious adverse events related to infection were observed, including one opportunistic infection leading to the patient's death, although neither was directly attributed to avacopan administration.ConclusionWe describe the clinical course of patients who presented with the severe AAV disease manifestation of DAH and received avacopan as adjunct therapy. Most patients achieved remission during follow‐up, and adverse events, including infection, were observed.