Citations

Clear

27 citation(s) found for "Diedrich, Daniel".

Practice of Intubation of the Critically Ill at Mayo Clinic
Seisa, Mohamed O. , Heise, Katherine J., Busack, Kyle D., Loftsgard, Theodore O. , Schroeder, Darrell R. , Diedrich, Daniel A. , Smischney, Nathan J. , Schroeder, Darrell

Mayo Clinic

Journal of Intensive Care Medicine | February 8, 2017 | Volume: 34 | Issue: 3 | Pages: 204-211

10.1177/0885066617691495 | PMID 28173733 Get It

Objective: To describe the practice of intubation of the critically ill at a single academic institution, Mayo Clinic’s campus in Rochester, Minnesota, and to report the incidence of immediate postintubation complications. Patients and Methods: Critically ill adult (≥18 years) patients admitted to a medical–surgical intensive care unit from January 1, 2013, to December 31, 2014, who required endotracheal intubation included. Results: The final cohort included 420 patients. The mean age at intubation was 62.9 ± 16.3 years, with 58% (244) of the cohort as male. The most common reason for intubation was respiratory failure (282 [67%]). The most common airway device used was video laryngoscopy (204 [49%]). Paralysis was used in 264 (63%) patients, with ketamine as the most common sedative (194 [46%]). The most common complication was hypotension (170 [41%]; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 35.7-45.3) followed by hypoxemia (74 [17.6%]; 95% CI: 14.1-21.6), with difficult intubation occurring in 20 (5%; 95% CI: 2.9-7.3). Conclusion: We found a high success rate of first-pass intubation in critically ill patients (89.8%), despite the procedure being done primarily by trainees 92.6% of the time; video was the preferred method of laryngoscopy (48.6%). Although our difficult intubation (4.8%) and complication rates typically associated with the act of intubation such as aspiration (1.2%; 95% CI: 0.4-2.8) and esophageal intubation (0.2%; 95% CI: 0.01-1.3) are very low compared to other published rates (8.09%), postintubation hypotension (40.5%) and hypoxemia (17.6%) higher.
Elevated Modified Shock Index Within 24 Hours of ICU Admission Is an Early Indicator of Mortality in the Critically Ill
Seisa, Mohamed O. , Heise, Katherine J., Schroeder, Darrell R. , Weister, Timothy J. , Diedrich, Daniel A. , Smischney, Nathan J. , Schroeder, Darrell

Mayo Clinic

Journal of Intensive Care Medicine | November 22, 2016 | Volume: 33 | Issue: 10 | Pages: 582-588

10.1177/0885066616679606 | PMID 27879296 Get It

Purpose: To assess whether exposure to modified shock index (MSI) in the first 24 hours of intensive care unit (ICU) admission is associated with increased in-hospital mortality. Methods: Adult critically ill patients were included in a case–control design with 1:2 matching. Cases (death) and controls (alive) were abstracted by a reviewer blinded to exposure status (MSI). Cases were matched to controls on 3 factors—age, end-stage renal disease, and ICU admission diagnosis. Results: Eighty-three cases and 159 controls were included. On univariate analysis, lorazepam administration (odds ratio [OR]: 5.75, confidence interval [CI] = 2.28-14.47; P ≤ .01), shock requiring vasopressors (OR: 3.62, CI = 1.77-7.40; P ≤ .01), maximum MSI (OR: 2.77 per unit, CI = 1.63-4.71; P ≤ .001), and elevated acute physiologic and chronic health evaluation (APACHE) III score at 1 hour (OR: 1.41 per 10 units, CI = 1.19-1.66; P ≤ .001) were associated with mortality. Maximum MSI (OR: 1.93 per unit, CI = 1.07-3.48, P = .03) and APACHE III score at 1 hour (OR: 1.29 per 10 units, CI = 1.09-1.53; P = .003) remained significant with mortality in the multivariate analysis. The optimal cutoff point for high MSI and mortality was 1.8. Conclusion: Critically ill patients who demonstrate an elevated MSI within the first 24 hours of ICU admission have a significant mortality risk. Given that MSI is easily calculated at the bedside, clinicians may institute interventions earlier which could improve survival.
Survey on the Current State of Endotracheal Intubation Among the Critically Ill
Seisa, Mohamed O. , Gondhi, Venkatesh, Demirci, Onur , Diedrich, Daniel A. , Smischney, Nathan J. , Kashyap, Rahul

Mayo Clinic

Journal of Intensive Care Medicine | June 13, 2016 | Volume: 33 | Issue: 6 | Pages: 354-360

10.1177/0885066616654452 | PMID 27298389 Get It

Objectives: In the last decade, the practice of intubation in the intensive care unit (ICU) has evolved. To further examine the current intubation practice in the ICU, we administered a survey to critical care physicians. Design: Cross-sectional survey study design. Setting: Thirty-two academic/nonacademic centers nationally and internationally. Measurements and Main Results: The survey was developed among a core group of physicians with the assistance of the Survey Research Center at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota. The survey was pilot tested for functionality and reliability. The response rate was 82 (51%) of 160 among the 32 centers. Although propofol was the induction drug of choice, there was a significant difference with actual ketamine use and those who indicated a preference for it (ketamine: 52% vs 61%; P < .001). The most common airway device used for intubation was direct laryngoscopy (Miller laryngoscope blade) at 56 (68%) followed by video laryngoscopy at 26 (32%). Most (>90%) indicated that they have a difficult airway cart, but only 55 (67%) indicated they have a documented plan to handle a difficult airway with even lower results for documented review of adverse events (49%). Conclusion: Although propofol was the induction drug of choice, ketamine was a medication that many preferred to use, possibly relating to the fact that the most common complication postintubation is hypotension. Direct laryngoscopy remains the primary airway device for endotracheal intubation. Finally, although the majority stated they had a difficult airway cart available, most did not have a documented plan in place when encountering a difficult airway or a documented process to review adverse events surrounding intubation.
Incidence of and Risk Factors For Post-Intubation Hypotension in the Critically Ill
Demirci, Onur , Diedrich, Daniel A. , Barbara, David W. , Sandefur, Benjamin J. , Trivedi, Sangita , McGarry, Sean D. , Smischney, Nathan J. , Kashyap, Rahul

Mayo Clinic

Medical Science Monitor | April 12, 2016 | Volume: 22 | Issue: No issue available | Pages: 346-355

10.12659/msm.895919 | PMID 26831818 Get It

Rapid-Sequence Intubation
Stollings, Joanna L. , Diedrich, Daniel A. , Oyen, Lance J., Brown, Daniel R.

Mayo Clinic

Annals of Pharmacotherapy | January 21, 2014 | Volume: 48 | Issue: 1 | Pages: 62-76

10.1177/1060028013510488 | PMID 24259635 Get It

Objective: To summarize published data regarding the steps of rapid-sequence intubation (RSI); review premedications, induction agents, neuromuscular blockers (NMB), and studies supporting use or avoidance; and discuss the benefits and deficits of combinations of induction agents and NMBs used when drug shortages occur. Data Source: A search of Medline databases (1966–October 2013) was conducted. Study Selection and Data Extraction: Databases were searched using the terms rapid-sequence intubation, fentanyl, midazolam, atropine, lidocaine, phenylephrine, ketamine, propofol, etomidate thiopental, succinylcholine, vecuronium, atracurium, and rocuronium. Citations from publications were reviewed for additional references. Data Synthesis: Data were reviewed to support the use or avoidance of premedications, induction agents, and paralytics and combinations to consider when drug shortages occur. Conclusions: RSI is used to secure a definitive airway in often uncooperative, nonfasted, unstable, and/or critically ill patients. Choosing the appropriate premedication, induction drug, and paralytic will maximize the success of tracheal intubation and minimize complications.
Images in Anesthesiology: Vertebral Osteomyelitis
Barbara, David W. , Diedrich, Daniel A. , Whalen, Francis X. , Smith, Benjamin Carl

Mayo Clinic

Anesthesiology | August 10, 2012 | Volume: 118 | Issue: 2 | Pages: 443-443

10.1097/aln.0b013e31826901b7 | PMID 22878459 Get It

Analytic Reviews: Propofol Infusion Syndrome in the ICU
Diedrich, Daniel A. , Brown, Daniel R.

Mayo Clinic

Journal of Intensive Care Medicine | April 4, 2011 | Volume: 26 | Issue: 2 | Pages: 59-72

10.1177/0885066610384195 | PMID 21464061 Get It

Propofol is an alkylphenol derivative named 2, 6, diisopropylphenol and is a potent intravenous short-acting hypnotic agent. It is commonly used as sedation, as well as an anesthetic agent in both pediatric and adult patient populations. There have been numerous case reports describing a constellation of findings including metabolic derangements and organ system failures known collectively as propofol infusion syndrome (PRIS). Although there is a high mortality associated with PRIS, the precise mechanism of action has yet to be determined. The best preventive measure for this syndrome is awareness and avoidance of clinical scenarios associated with development of PRIS. There is no established treatment for PRIS; care is primarily supportive in nature and may include the full array of advanced cardiopulmonary support, including extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). This article reviews the reported cases of PRIS and describes the current understanding of the underlying pathophysiology and treatment options.