Current opinion in critical care
-
Curr Opin Crit Care · Oct 2024
ReviewLong-term outcomes in critically ill patients with acute respiratory failure.
This review aims to explore the latest evidence on long-term outcomes in patients admitted to the ICU because of acute respiratory failure (ARF). ⋯ There is not much data on the long-term outcomes of patients who have survived ARF. More follow-up studies should be conducted, especially in centers providing higher levels of costly care (e.g. ECMO). Randomized controlled trials on interventions for ARF should include patient-centered long-term outcomes in addition to mortality rates. The high mortality rates associated with ARF mandate collaboration among multiple centers to achieve an adequate sample size for studying the long-term outcomes of survivors.
-
For augmented intelligence (AI) tools to realize their potential, critical care clinicians must ensure they are designed to improve long-term outcomes. This overview is intended to align professionals with the state-of-the art of AI. ⋯ Plans for long-term management of ICU survivors must account for the development of a holistic follow-up system that incorporates AI across multiple platforms. A tiered post-ICU screening program may be established wherein AI tools managed by ICU follow-up clinics provide appropriate assistance without human intervention in cases with less pathology and refer severe cases to expert treatment.
-
The purpose of this review is to investigate the long-term outcomes of cancer patients who experience sepsis or septic shock. ⋯ As cancer is becoming a chronic disease, there is an urgent need for studies on the quality of life of cancer patients who have experienced sepsis. The relationship between sepsis and cancer extends beyond its impact on the progression of cancer, as sepsis might also contribute to the development of cancer.
-
Curr Opin Crit Care · Oct 2024
ReviewSubgroup analyses and heterogeneity of treatment effects in randomized trials: a primer for the clinician.
To date, most randomized clinical trials in critical care report neutral overall results. However, research as to whether heterogenous responses underlie these results and give opportunity for personalized care is gaining momentum but has yet to inform clinical practice guidance. Thus, we aim to provide an overview of methodological approaches to estimating heterogeneity of treatment effects in randomized trials and conjecture about future paths to application in patient care. ⋯ There is an increasing interest in approaches that can identify heterogeneity in treatment effects from randomized clinical trials, extending beyond traditional subgroup analyses. While prospective validation in further studies is still needed, these approaches are promising tools for design, interpretation, and implementation of clinical trial results.