METHODS: In this post hoc analysis of the EFFORT Protein trial, we investigated the effect of high versus usual protein dose (≥ 2.2 vs. ≤ 1.2 g/kg body weight/day) on time-to-discharge alive from the hospital (TTDA) and 60-day mortality and in different subgroups in critically ill patients with AKI as defined by the Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) criteria within 7 days of ICU admission. The associations of protein dose with incidence and duration of kidney replacement therapy (KRT) were also investigated.
RESULTS: Of the 1329 randomized patients, 312 developed AKI and were included in this analysis (163 in the high and 149 in the usual protein dose group). High protein was associated with a slower time-to-discharge alive from the hospital (TTDA) (hazard ratio 0.5, 95% CI 0.4-0.8) and higher 60-day mortality (relative risk 1.4 (95% CI 1.1-1.8). Effect modification was not statistically significant for any subgroup, and no subgroups suggested a beneficial effect of higher protein, although the harmful effect of higher protein target appeared to disappear in patients who received kidney replacement therapy (KRT). Protein dose was not significantly associated with the incidence of AKI and KRT or duration of KRT.
CONCLUSIONS: In critically ill patients with AKI, high protein may be associated with worse outcomes in all AKI stages. Recommendation of higher protein dosing in AKI patients should be carefully re-evaluated to avoid potential harmful effects especially in patients who were not treated with KRT.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03160547) on May 17th 2017.
AIMS: We aimed to perform a meta-analysis of randomized trials investigating the effect of colchicine in patients with COVID-19.
MATERIALS & METHODS: We systematically searched electronic databases and clinical trial registries (up to October 17, 2021) for eligible studies. The outcomes of interest were all-cause mortality and duration of hospital stay. Meta-analysis with the random-effects model was used to estimate the pooled odds ratio (OR) of mortality and 95% confidence interval (CI). The pooled standardized mean difference of duration of hospital stay with 95% CI between colchicine users and non-colchicine users was estimated using Cohen's d index.
RESULTS: The meta-analyses revealed no significant difference in the odds of mortality (pooled OR = 0.76; 95% CI: 0.53-1.07), but a significant reduction in the duration of hospital stay with the use of colchicine (pooled standardized mean difference = -0.59; 95% CI: -1.06 to -0.13).
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: The ability of colchicine to reduce the length of stay in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 is consistent with its potential to prevent clinical deterioration via inhibition of NLRP3 inflammasome. Nevertheless, such beneficial effects of colchicine did not translate into mortality benefits in patients with COVID-19.
DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and Cochrane Central were searched from inception to February 10, 2023.
STUDY SELECTION: RCTs evaluating the effect of enteral or IV glutamine supplementation alone in severe adult burn patients were included.
DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently extracted data on study characteristics, burn injury characteristics, description of the intervention between groups, adverse events, and clinical outcomes.
DATA SYNTHESIS: Random effects meta-analyses were performed to estimate the pooled risk ratio (RR). Trial sequential analyses (TSA) for mortality and infectious complications were performed. Ten RCTs (1,577 patients) were included. We observed no significant effect of glutamine supplementation on overall mortality (RR, 0.65, 95% CI, 0.33-1.28; p = 0.21), infectious complications (RR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.63-1.09; p = 0.18), or other secondary outcomes. In subgroup analyses, we observed no significant effects based on administration route or burn severity. We did observe a significant subgroup effect between single and multicenter RCTs in which glutamine significantly reduced mortality and infectious complications in singe-center RCTs but not in multicenter RCTs. However, TSA showed that the pooled results of single-center RCTs were type 1 errors and further trials would be futile.
CONCLUSIONS: Glutamine supplementation, regardless of administration, does not appear to improve clinical outcomes in severely adult burned patients.
DESIGN: A post hoc subgroup analysis of the effect of higher protein dosing in critically ill patients with high nutritional risk (EFFORT Protein): an international, multicenter, pragmatic, registry-based randomized trial.
SETTING: Eighty-five adult ICUs across 16 countries.
PATIENTS: Patients with obesity defined as a body mass index (BMI) greater than or equal to 30 kg/m 2 ( n = 425).
INTERVENTIONS: In the primary study, patients were randomized into a high-dose (≥ 2.2 g/kg/d) or usual-dose protein group (≤ 1.2 g/kg/d).
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Protein intake was monitored for up to 28 days, and outcomes (time to discharge alive [TTDA], 60-d mortality, days of mechanical ventilation [MV], hospital, and ICU length of stay [LOS]) were recorded until 60 days post-randomization. Of the 1301 patients in the primary study, 425 had a BMI greater than or equal to 30 kg/m 2 . After adjusting for sites and covariates, we observed a nonsignificant slower rate of TTDA with higher protein that ruled out a clinically important benefit (hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.58-1.05; p = 0.10). We found no evidence of difference in TTDA between protein groups when subgroups with different classes of obesity or patients with and without various nutritional and frailty risk variables were examined, even after the removal of patients with baseline acute kidney injury. Overall, 60-day mortality rates were 31.5% and 28.2% in the high protein and usual protein groups, respectively (risk difference, 3.3%; 95% CI, -5.4 to 12.1; p = 0.46). Duration of MV and LOS in hospital and ICU were not significantly different between groups.
CONCLUSIONS: In critically ill patients with obesity, higher protein doses did not improve clinical outcomes, including those with higher nutritional and frailty risk.
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to determine if a clinical pathway (CPW) for inpatient paediatric asthma would reduce average length of stay (ALOS), improve asthma management and decrease cost.
METHODS: A quasi-experimental, pre-post study was used to evaluate the CPW effectiveness. Paediatric inpatients aged 5-18 years old, admitted for acute asthma exacerbation from September 2015 to April 2016 were prospectively recruited. Data from patients admitted from January-July 2015 were used as control. CPW training was carried out in August 2015 using standardised modules. Direct admission cost from the provider's prospective was calculated. Outcomes compared were differences in ALOS, discharge medication, readmission within 28 days of discharge and cost.
RESULTS: ALOS is 26 hours lower in the CPW group for severe exacerbations and underlying uncontrolled asthma (19.2 hours) which is clinically significant as patients have shorter hospital stay. More newly-diagnosed intermittent asthmatics were discharged with relievers in the CPW group (p-value 0.006). None of the patients in the CPW group had readmissions (p-value 0.16). Mean treatment cost for patients in the intervention group is higher at RM843.39 (SD ±48.99, versus RM779.21 SD±44.33).
CONCLUSION: This study found that management using a CPW may benefit asthmatic patients with uncontrolled asthma admitted with severe exacerbation. Further studies will be needed to explore CPW's impact on asthma management starting from the emergency department.