• Yoann Launey, Nicolas Nesseler, Audren Le Cousin, Fanny Feuillet, Ronan Garlantezec, Yannick Mallédant, and Philippe Seguin.
• CHU de Rennes. Hôpital Pontchaillou. Pôle Anesthésie-SAMU-Urgences-Réanimations. 2, rue Henri Le Guilloux, 35033, Rennes, Cedex, France. yoann.launey@chu-rennes.fr.
• Crit Care. 2014 Jan 1;18(6):689.

IntroductionFever is associated with a poor outcome in severely brain-injured patients, and its control is one of the therapies used in this condition. But, fever suppression may promote infection, and severely brain-injured patients are frequently exposed to infectious diseases, particularly ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). Therefore, we designed a study to explore the role of a fever control protocol in VAP development during neuro-intensive care.MethodsAn observational study was performed on severely brain-injured patients hospitalized in a university ICU. The primary goal was to assess whether fever control was a risk factor for VAP in a prospective cohort in which a fever control protocol was applied and in a historical control group. Moreover, the density of VAP incidence was compared between the two groups. The statistical analysis was based on a competing risk model multivariate analysis.ResultsThe study included 189 brain-injured patients (intervention group, n = 98, and historical control group, n = 91). The use of a fever control protocol was an independent risk factor for VAP (hazard ratio 2.73, 95% confidence interval (1.38, 5.38; P = 0.005)). There was a significant increase in the incidence of VAP in patients treated with a fever control protocol (26.1 versus 12.5 VAP cases per 1000 days of mechanical ventilation). In cases in which a fever control protocol was applied for > 3 days, we observed a higher rate of VAP in comparison with the rate among patients treated for ≤ 3 days.ConclusionsFever control in brain-injured patients was a major risk factor for VAP occurrence, particularly when applied for > 3 days.

46 keywords...

hide…