Epidemiology of intra-abdominal infection and sepsis in critically ill patients: “AbSeS”, a multinational observational cohort study and ESICM Trials Group Project

Purpose: To describe the epidemiology of intra-abdominal infection in an international cohort of ICU patients according to a new system that classifies cases according to setting of infection acquisition (community-acquired, early onset hospital-acquired, and late-onset hospital-acquired), anatomical disruption (absent or present with localized or diffuse peritonitis), and severity of disease expression (infection, sepsis, and septic shock). Methods: We performed a multicenter (n = 309), observational, epidemiological study including adult ICU patients diagnosed with intra-abdominal infection. Risk factors for mortality were assessed by logistic regression analysis. Results: The cohort included 2621 patients. Setting of infection acquisition was community-acquired in 31.6%, early onset hospital-acquired in 25%, and late-onset hospital-acquired in 43.4% of patients. Overall prevalence of antimicrobial resistance was 26.3% and difficult-to-treat resistant Gram-negative bacteria 4.3%, with great variation according to geographic region. No difference in prevalence of antimicrobial resistance was observed according to setting of infection acquisition. Overall mortality was 29.1%. Independent risk factors for mortality included late-onset hospital-acquired infection, diffuse peritonitis, sepsis, septic shock, older age, malnutrition, liver failure, congestive heart failure, antimicrobial resistance (either methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, vancomycin-resistant enterococci, extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing Gram-negative bacteria, or carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative bacteria) and source control failure evidenced by either the need for surgical revision or persistent inflammation. Conclusion: This multinational, heterogeneous cohort of ICU patients with intra-abdominal infection revealed that setting of infection acquisition, anatomical disruption, and severity of disease expression are disease-specific phenotypic characteristics associated with outcome, irrespective of the type of infection. Antimicrobial resistance is equally common in community-acquired as in hospital-acquired infection

The impact of genetic factors on response to anaesthetics

ABSTRACT In recent years, exceptional progress has been observed in pharmacogenetics, i.e. investigations of inherited conditioning of the organism's response to drugs or xenobiotics. On the other hand, modern molecular biology techniques have been implemented, making it possible to perform studies determining the involvement of genetic factors in differing responses to agents employed in general anaesthesia. Unexpected and incorrect response of the organism to the administration of specific anaesthetics is most commonly associated with a genetic defect of the metabolic pathway of a given agent or its receptor. The majority of agents used in anaesthesia are metabolised in the liver by the cytochrome P450 superfamily enzymes (CYPs) and phase II drug-metabolising enzymes: glutathione S-transferases (GSTs), sulphotransferases (SULTs), UDPglucuronosyltransferases (UGTs) and NAD(P)H:quinone oxidoreductase (NQO1). Propofol is presently widely used for gastrointestinal (GI) and several other procedures. Among genes associated with metabolism of the most commonly applied anaesthetics such as propofol and sevoflurane, the following ones can be mentioned: CYP2E1, CYP2B6, CYP2C9, GSTP1, UGT1A9, SULT1A1 and NQO1. Moreover, the basic mechanism of propofol action involves its interaction with an ionotropic receptor GABAA inhibiting transfer of nerve impulses. Molecular studies have shown that polymorphic changes in GABRG2 receptor gene turn out to be important in the propofol anaesthesia. Planning of optimal anaesthesia can be considerably assisted by the determination of genetic factors of prognostic value taking advantage of genotyping and making it possible to select anaesthetics and reduce risk of side effects as well as undesirable actions

The Influence of Geography, Religion, Religiosity and Institutional Factors on Worldwide End-of-Life Care for the Critically Ill: The WELPICUS Study.

To evaluate the association between provider religion and religiosity and consensus about end-of-life care and explore if geographical and institutional factors contribute to variability in practice. Using a modified Delphi method 22 end-of-life issues consisting of 35 definitions and 46 statements were evaluated in 32 countries in North America, South America, Eastern Europe, Western Europe, Asia, Australia and South Africa. A multidisciplinary, expert group from specialties treating patients at the end-of-life within each participating institution assessed the association between 7 key statements and geography, religion, religiosity and institutional factors likely influencing the development of consensus. Of 3049 participants, 1366 (45%) responded. Mean age of respondents was 45 ± 9 years and 55% were females. Following 2 Delphi rounds, consensus was obtained for 77 (95%) of 81 definitions and statements. There was a significant difference in responses across geographical regions. South African and North American respondents were more likely to encourage patients to write advance directives. Fewer Eastern European and Asian respondents agreed with withdrawing life-sustaining treatments without consent of patients or surrogates. While respondent's religion, years in practice or institution did not affect their agreement, religiosity, physician specialty and responsibility for end-of-life decisions did. Variability in agreement with key consensus statements about end-of-life care is related primarily to differences among providers, with provider-level variations related to differences in religiosity and specialty. Geography also plays a role in influencing some end-of-life practices. This information may help understanding ethical dilemmas and developing culturally sensitive end-of-life care strategies

The Influence of Geography, Religion, Religiosity and Institutional Factors on Worldwide End-of-Life Care for the Critically Ill: The WELPICUS Study

Purpose: To evaluate the association between provider religion and religiosity and consensus about end-of-life care and explore if geographical and institutional factors contribute to variability in practice. Materials and Methods: Using a modified Delphi method 22 end-of-life issues consisting of 35 definitions and 46 statements were evaluated in 32 countries in North America, South America, Eastern Europe, Western Europe, Asia, Australia and South Africa. A multidisciplinary, expert group from specialties treating patients at the end-of-life within each participating institution assessed the association between 7 key statements and geography, religion, religiosity and institutional factors likely influencing the development of consensus. Results: Of 3049 participants, 1366 (45%) responded. Mean age of respondents was 45 ± 9 years and 55% were females. Following 2 Delphi rounds, consensus was obtained for 77 (95%) of 81 definitions and statements. There was a significant difference in responses across geographical regions. South African and North American respondents were more likely to encourage patients to write advance directives. Fewer Eastern European and Asian respondents agreed with withdrawing life-sustaining treatments without consent of patients or surrogates. While respondent’s religion, years in practice or institution did not affect their agreement, religiosity, physician specialty and responsibility for end-of-life decisions did. Conclusions: Variability in agreement with key consensus statements about end-of-life care is related primarily to differences among providers, with provider-level variations related to differences in religiosity and specialty. Geography also plays a role in influencing some end-of-life practices. This information may help understanding ethical dilemmas and developing culturally sensitive end-of-life care strategies. </jats:sec