Introduction: Our objectives are to identify the incidence of hypophosphatemia and the associated risk factors. We also want to establish intravenous replacement therapy that is effective for ICU patients. Methods: A prospective observational study assessing adults admitted to ICU in between March and May 2009. All patients without baseline phosphate level and renal failure were excluded. They were evaluated for the occurrence of common risk factors. Association with independent variables that includes age, gender and BMI were verified. Evaluation of IV replacement therapy was done in the treated patients. Results: From 50 patients that were reviewed, nine were excluded. There were 66% male and 34% female with mean age 46.88±17.89. The mean ICU stay was 8.00±6.41 days. The incidence of hypophosphatemia was 29% (n=12/41). Gender and
creatinine clearance was found to be significantly different between normophosphatemia and
hypophosphatemia patients. There was no significant association for each potential risk factor and the number of risk factors (≥3) with the incidence of hypophosphatemia. Multi-linear regression analysis showed that lactate, creatinine clearance and pH were significant predictors to the serum levels. A significant difference of mean serum phosphate was seen after repletion by total dose of 10, 20 and 40 mmols in the treatment subgroups. Conclusions: The incidence of hypophosphatemia in our ICU was high and comparable to previous studies. None of the commonly reported risk factors is associated with hypophosphatemia in this studied population. Among all significant correlated variables, only pH was found to be a significant predictor for serum phosphate. Baseline phosphate level may guide the initial replacement dose to prevent delay in normalization of serum levels.
We report a case of sudden hypoxaemia after intubation in a patient who had smoked a few hours prior to a surgical procedure. The cause of his desaturation was not related to bronchial secretions, bronchospasm or obstruction of the upper airways but most likely due to reduced oxygen saturation in the body prior to surgery. We managed to secure the airway and prevent prolonged desaturation by instituting remedial measures. Our conclusion is that cessation of smoking is very important and need to be emphasized in all patients having surgery under general anaesthesia. This applies to emergency cases as well.
High frequency oscillating ventilation (HFOV) provides a rescue therapy for patients with refractory hypoxaemia in severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). HFOV utilizes high mean airway pressures to maintain an open lung and low tidal volumes at a high frequency that allows for adequate ventilation while at the same time preventing alveolar overdistension. This seems to be an ideal lung protective ventilation strategies to prevent ventilator-induced lung injury (VILI)2. We reported a case of severe extrapulmonary ARDS secondary to acute lymphoblastic leukaemia responding to the use of HFOV.
Introduction and Objectives: The intensive care unit (ICU) is an uncomfortable and stressful environment for patients. The use of adequate sedation and analgesia is important to reduce stress to patients. The aim of this study was to compare a relatively new sedative agent, dexmedetomidine to current sedative agent used, propofol in the provision of sedation and analgesia, their effects on haemodynamic and respiratory parameters and cost involved on post open heart surgery patients. Materials and Methods: A prospective, randomized single-blinded trial was conducted on post open heart surgery patients in the ICU of the Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia (HUSM). Thirty two patients were randomized to dexmedetomidine or propofol groups. Analgesic requirement, haemodynamic and respiratory parameters, and extubation time were measured and compared. Mean rate of infusion to achieve adequate sedation were used to calculate the cost involved in the use of these two agents. Results: Patients sedated with dexmedetomidine required significantly lower dose of morphine compared to propofol [mean (sd): 12.80 (2.61) versus 15.86 (1.87) mg/kg/min, p=0.00]. Mean heart rate was also significantly lower in dexmedetomidine group compared to propofol group [mean (CI): 74.48 (70.38,78.59) versus 83.85 (79.61,88.09) per minutes, p=0.00]. However there were no significant differences in the other parameters between the two groups. Cost involved the use of dexmedetomidine was slightly higher compared to propofol (RM 9.57 versus RM8.94 per hour). Discussion and Conclusions: Dexmedetomidine is comparable to propofol in the provision of sedation, and its effect on haemodynamic and respiratory parameters. However it has added advantages in the provision of analgesia, and caused a significant reduction in heart rate. This is beneficial in these patients by reducing myocardial oxygen demand, and hence subsequent ischaemia and infarction. However, further larger studies are needed to evaluate the effect of dexmedetomidine on perioperative cardiac morbidity and mortality.