Current opinion in critical care
-
Curr Opin Crit Care · Aug 2022
Review Meta AnalysisUpdate on vitamin C administration in critical illness.
Several studies have recently explored the effects of intravenous vitamin C in sepsis. We aimed to summarize their findings to provide perspectives for future research. ⋯ The effect of intravenous vitamin C in critically ill patients has yet to be determined and might be dose-dependent. Clinical studies of very high or mega doses of vitamin C are justified by preclinical data.
-
The modern cardiac intensive care unit (CICU) has evolved into a high-intensity unit that cares for critically ill patients. Despite this transformation, changes to the staffing model and organizational structure in these specialized units have only recently begun to meet these challenges. We describe the most recent evidence which will inform future CICU staffing models. ⋯ Although the preponderance of data suggests improved outcomes with a closed, intensivist staffed CICU model, future multicenter studies are needed to better define the ideal staffing models for the contemporary CICU.
-
Curr Opin Crit Care · Aug 2022
ReviewChallenges and advances in nutrition for the critically ill child.
Malnutrition remains prevalent in critically ill children and is associated with worse clinical outcomes. Conversely, nutrition provision has been associated with improved survival. Nutritional challenges must be addressed to guide best nutrition practices for the critically ill child. In this narrative review, we summarize findings from research published between July 2020 and January 2022 on nutrition in critically ill children. Findings from these articles build on previous work to guide next steps in both research and clinical practice in this cohort. ⋯ Research continues to support early initiation and advancement of enteral nutrition. Achieving nutritional adequacy is challenging, but research associated with the timing and dosing of enteral nutrition, alternative methods of enteral nutrition delivery and the use of adjuncts are expanding our understanding of best practices for this cohort. Areas for further research continue to be the use of measured energy requirements, protein dosing and inclusion of functional outcomes to assess the benefit of nutritional interventions.
-
Curr Opin Crit Care · Aug 2022
ReviewOutcomes in cardiogenic shock: the role of surrogate endpoints.
Early revascularization, invasive hemodynamic profiling, and initiation of temporary mechanical circulatory support (MCS) have all become routine components of cardiogenic shock (CS) management. Despite this evolution in clinical practice, patient selection and timing of treatment initiation remain a significant barrier to achieving sustained improvement in CS outcomes. Recent efforts to standardize CS management, through the development of treatment algorithms, have relied heavily on surrogate endpoints to drive therapeutic decisions. The present review aims to provide an overview of the basis of evidence for those surrogate endpoints commonly employed in clinical trials and CS management algorithms. ⋯ Although further validation is necessary, multiple clinical, hemodynamic, and biochemical markers have demonstrated utility as surrogate endpoints in CS, and will undoubtedly assist physicians in clinical decision-making.
-
Curr Opin Crit Care · Aug 2022
ReviewMechanical circulatory support in the treatment of cardiogenic shock.
Cardiogenic shock is a condition that is characterized by end-organ hypoperfusion secondary to reduced cardiac output, and is associated with substantial mortality. The mainstay of therapy for cardiogenic shock is reversal of the underlying cause, and concomitant supportive care with vasoactive medications (vasopressors and inotropes). Patients who continue to deteriorate despite these measures may require mechanical circulatory support (MCS). Here, we review the devices available for MCS, and their associated benefits and risks. ⋯ Various devices for MCS in cardiogenic shock are available, but routine use is not supported by high-quality randomized evidence. Given the resources required for initiation of MCS, use of these treatments should be limited to centers experienced in advanced cardiac care, and future research should focus on what role (if any) these devices have in clinical practice.