Background: Awake proning in spontaneously breathing patients with hypoxemic acute respiratory failure was applied during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic to improve oxygenation while avoiding tracheal intubation. An updated systematic review and meta-analysis on the topic was published.Methods: The Clinical practice committee (CPC) of the Scandinavian Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine (SSAI) assessed the clinical practice guideline "Awake proning in patients with COVID-19-related hypoxemic acute respiratory failure: A rapid practice guideline" for possible endorsement. The Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch and Evaluation (AGREE) II tool was used.Results: Four out of six SSAI CPC members completed the appraisal. The individual domain totals were: Scope and Purpose 90%; Stakeholder Involvement 89%; Rigour of Development 74%; Clarity of Presentation 85%; Applicability 75%; Editorial Independence 98%; Overall Assessment 79%.Conclusion: The SSAI CPC endorses the clinical practice guideline "Awake proning in patients with COVID-19-related hypoxemic acute respiratory failure: A rapid practice guideline". This guideline serves as a useful decision aid for clinicians caring for critically ill patients with COVID-19-related acute hypoxemic respiratory failure and can be used to provide guidance on use of prone positioning in this group of patients.

PurposeTo provide consensus recommendations regarding hemodynamic data reporting in studies investigating fluid responsiveness and fluid challenge (FC) use in the intensive care unit (ICU).MethodsThe Executive Committee of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM) commissioned and supervised the project. A panel of 18 international experts and a methodologist identified main domains and items from a systematic literature, plus 2 ancillary domains. A three-step Delphi process based on an iterative approach was used to obtain the final consensus. In the Delphi 1 and 2, the items were selected with strong (>= 80% of votes) or week agreement (70-80% of votes), while the Delphi 3 generated recommended (>= 90% of votes) or suggested (80-90% of votes) items (RI and SI, respectively).ResultsWe identified 5 main domains initially including 117 items and the consensus finally resulted in 52 recommendations or suggestions: 18 RIs and 2 SIs statements were obtained for the domain "ICU admission", 11 RIs and 1 SI for the domain "mechanical ventilation", 5 RIs for the domain "reason for giving a FC", 8 RIs for the domain pre- and post-FC "hemodynamic data", and 7 RIs for the domain "pre-FC infused drugs". We had no consensus on the use of echocardiography, strong agreement regarding the volume (4 ml/kg) and the reference variable (cardiac output), while weak on administration rate (within 10 min) of FC in this setting.ConclusionThis consensus found 5 main domains and provided 52 recommendations for data reporting in studies investigating fluid responsiveness in ICU patients.

 Background:  This Rapid Practice Guideline (RPG) aimed to provide evidence‑based recommendations for ketamine analgo-sedation (monotherapy and adjunct) versus non-ketamine sedatives or usual care in adult intensive care unit (ICU) patients on invasive mechanical ventilation (iMV) and to identify knowledge gaps for future research.

 Methods:  The RPG panel comprised 23 multinational multidisciplinary panelists, including a patient representative. An up-to-date systematic review and meta-analysis constituted the evidence base. The Grading Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach, and the evidence-to-decision framework were used to assess the certainty of evidence and to move from evidence to decision/recommendation. The panel provided input on the balance of the desirable and undesirable effects, certainty of evidence, patients' values and preferences, costs, resources, equity, feasibility, acceptability, and research priorities.

 Results:  Data from 17 randomized clinical trials (n=898) and 9 observational studies (n=1934) were included. There was considerable uncertainty about the desirable and undesirable effects of ketamine monotherapy for analgo-sedation. The evidence was very low certainty and downgraded for risk of bias, indirectness, and inconsistency. Uncertainty or variability in values and preferences were identified. Costs, resources, equity, and acceptability were considered varied. Adjunctive ketamine therapy had no effect on mortality (within 28 days) (relative risk [RR] 0.99; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.76 to 1.27; low certainty), and may slightly reduce iMV duration (days) (mean difference [MD] -0.05 days; 95% CI -0.07 to -0.03; low certainty), and uncertain effect on the cumulative dose of opioids (mcg/kg/h morphine equivalent) (MD -11.6; 95% CI -20.4 to -2.7; very low certainty). Uncertain desirable effects (cumulative dose of sedatives and vasopressors) and undesirable effects (adverse event rate, delirium, arrhythmia, hepatotoxicity, hypersalivation, use of physical restraints) were also identified. A possibility of important uncertainty or variability in patient-important outcomes led to a balanced effect that favored neither the intervention nor the comparison. Cost, resources, and equity were considered varied.

 Conclusion:  The RPG panel provided two conditional recommendations and suggested (1) against using ketamine as monotherapy analgo-sedation in critically ill adults on iMV when other analgo-sedatives are available; and (2) using ketamine as an adjunct to non-ketamine usual care sedatives (e.g., opioids, propofol, dexmedetomidine) or continuing with non-ketamine usual care sedatives alone. Large-scale trials should provide additional evidence.

BackgroundWhen caring for mechanically ventilated adults with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure (AHRF), clinicians are faced with an uncertain choice between ventilator modes allowing for spontaneous breaths or ventilation fully controlled by the ventilator. The preferences of clinicians managing such patients, and what motivates their choice of ventilator mode, are largely unknown. To better understand how clinicians preferences may impact the choice of ventilatory support for patients with AHRF, we issued a survey to an international network of intensive care unit (ICU) researchers.MethodsWe distributed an online survey with 32 broadly similar and interlinked questions on how clinicians prioritise spontaneous or controlled ventilation in invasively ventilated patients with AHRF of different severity, and which factors determine their choice.ResultsThe survey was distributed to 1337 recipients in 12 countries. Of these, 415 (31%) completed the survey either fully (52%) or partially (48%). Most respondents were identified as medical specialists (87%) or physicians in training (11%). Modes allowing for spontaneous ventilation were considered preferable in mild AHRF, with controlled ventilation considered as progressively more important in moderate and severe AHRF. Among respondents there was strong support (90%) for a randomised clinical trial comparing spontaneous with controlled ventilation in patients with moderate AHRF.ConclusionsThe responses from this international survey suggest that there is clinical equipoise for the preferred ventilator mode in patients with AHRF of moderate severity. We found strong support for a randomised trial comparing modes of ventilation in patients with moderate AHRF.

This rapid practice guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for the use of awake proning in adult patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19. The panel included 20 experts from 12 countries, including one patient representative, and used a strict conflict of interest policy for potential financial and intellectual conflicts of interest. Methodological support was provided by the guidelines in intensive care, development, and evaluation (GUIDE) group. Based on an updated systematic review, and the grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) method we evaluated the certainty of evidence and developed recommendations using the Evidence-to-Decision framework. We conducted an electronic vote, requiring >80% agreement amongst the panel for a recommendation to be adopted. The panel made a strong recommendation for a trial of awake proning in adult patients with COVID-19 related hypoxemic acute respiratory failure who are not invasively ventilated. Awake proning appears to reduce the risk of tracheal intubation, although it may not reduce mortality. The panel judged that most patients would want a trial of awake proning, although this may not be feasible in some patients and some patients may not tolerate it. However, given the high risk of clinical deterioration amongst these patients, awake proning should be conducted in an area where patients can be monitored by staff experienced in rapidly detecting and managing clinical deterioration. This RPG panel recommends a trial of awake prone positioning in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19.

PurposeExploratory study to evaluate the association of different phenotypes of right ventricular (RV) involvement and mortality in the intensive care unit (ICU) in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).MethodsPost-hoc analysis of longitudinal data from the multicenter ECHO-COVID observational study in ICU patients who underwent at least two echocardiography examinations. Echocardiography phenotypes were acute cor pulmonale (ACP, RV cavity dilatation with paradoxical septal motion), RV failure (RVF, RV cavity dilatation and systemic venous congestion), and RV dysfunction (tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion & LE; 16 mm). Accelerated failure time model and multistate model were used for analysis.ResultsOf 281 patients who underwent 948 echocardiography studies during ICU stay, 189 (67%) were found to have at least 1 type of RV involvements during one or several examinations: ACP (105/281, 37.4%), RVF (140/256, 54.7%) and/or RV dysfunction (74/255, 29%). Patients with all examinations displaying ACP had survival time shortened by 0.479 [0.284-0.803] times when compared to patients with all examinations depicting no ACP (P = 0.005). RVF showed a trend towards shortened survival time by a factor of 0.642 [0.405-1.018] (P = 0.059), whereas the impact of RV dysfunction on survival time was inconclusive (P = 0.451). Multistate analysis showed that patients might transit in and out of RV involvement, and those who exhibited ACP in their last critical care echocardiography (CCE) examination had the highest risk of mortality (hazard ratio (HR) 3.25 [2.38-4.45], P < 0.001).ConclusionRV involvement is prevalent in patients ventilated for COVID-19 ARDS. Different phenotypes of RV involvement might lead to different ICU mortality, with ACP having the worst outcome.

Background: Guidelines endorse self-reported functional capacity for preoperative cardiovascular assessment, although evidence for its predictive value is inconsistent. We hypothesised that self-reported effort tolerance improves prediction of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) after noncardiac surgery.

Methods: This is an international prospective cohort study (June 2017 to April 2020) in patients undergoing elective noncardiac surgery at elevated cardiovascular risk. Exposures were (i) questionnaire-estimated effort tolerance in metabolic equivalents (METs), (ii) number of floors climbed without resting, (iii) self-perceived cardiopulmonary fitness compared with peers, and (iv) level of regularly performed physical activity. The primary endpoint was in-hospital MACE consisting of cardiovascular mortality, non-fatal cardiac arrest, acute myocardial infarction, stroke, and congestive heart failure requiring transfer to a higher unit of care or resulting in a prolongation of stay on ICU/intermediate care (≥24 h). Mixed-effects logistic regression models were calculated.

Results: In this study, 274 (1.8%) of 15 406 patients experienced MACE. Loss of follow-up was 2%. All self-reported functional capacity measures were independently associated with MACE but did not improve discrimination (area under the curve of receiver operating characteristic [ROC AUC]) over an internal clinical risk model (ROC AUCbaseline 0.74 [0.71-0.77], ROC AUCbaseline+4METs 0.74 [0.71-0.77], ROC AUCbaseline+floors climbed 0.75 [0.71-0.78], AUCbaseline+fitnessvspeers 0.74 [0.71-0.77], and AUCbaseline+physical activity 0.75 [0.72-0.78]).

Conclusions: Assessment of self-reported functional capacity expressed in METs or using the other measures assessed here did not improve prognostic accuracy compared with clinical risk factors. Caution is needed in the use of self-reported functional capacity to guide clinical decisions resulting from risk assessment in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery.

Clinical trial registration: NCT03016936.

The specific granule glycoprotein olfactomedin-4 (Olfm4) marks a subset (1-70%) of human neutrophils and the Olfm4-high (Olfm4-H) proportion has been found to correlate with septic shock severity. The aim of this study was to decipher proteomic differences between the subsets in healthy individuals, hypothesizing that Olfm4-H neutrophils have a proteomic profile distinct from that of Olfm4 low (Olfm4-L) neutrophils. We then extended the investigation to septic shock. A novel protocol for the preparation of fixed, antibody-stained, and sorted neutrophils for LC-MS/MS was developed. In healthy individuals, 39 proteins showed increased abundance in Olfm4-H, including the small GTPases Rab3d and Rab11a. In Olfm4-L, 52 proteins including neutrophil defensin alpha 4, CXCR1, Rab3a, and S100-A7 were more abundant. The data suggest differences in important neutrophil proteins that might impact immunological processes. However, in vitro experiments revealed no apparent difference in the ability to control bacteria nor produce oxygen radicals. In subsets isolated from patients with septic shock, 24 proteins including cytochrome b-245 chaperone 1 had significantly higher abundance in Olfm4-H and 30 in Olfm4-L, including Fc receptor proteins. There was no correlation between Olfm4-H proportion and septic shock severity, but plasma Olfm4 concentration was elevated in septic shock. Thus, the Olfm4-H and Olfm4-L neutrophils have different proteomic profiles, but there was no evident functional significance of the differences in septic shock.