What are the risks for bad outcomes in patients admitted with influenza?

From a recent study:

Highlights

A history of OSAS/CSAS, myocardial infarction and BMI greater than 30 are risk factors for ICU admission.

Non-survivors suffer more often from diabetes mellitus and (pre-existent) renal failure.

ICU patients develop renal failure and bacterial/fungal co-infections more often.

Abstract

Purpose

While most influenza patients have a self-limited respiratory illness, 5–10% of hospitalized patients develop severe disease requiring ICU admission. The aim of this study was to identify influenza-specific factors associated with ICU admission and mortality. Furthermore, influenza-specific pulmonary bacterial, fungal and viral co-infections were investigated.

Methods

199 influenza patients, admitted to two academic hospitals in the Netherlands between 01-10-2015 and 01-04-2016 were investigated of which 45/199 were admitted to the ICU.

Results

A history of Obstructive/Central Sleep Apnea Syndrome, myocardial infarction, dyspnea, influenza type A, BMI greater than 30, the development of renal failure and bacterial and fungal co-infections, were observed more frequently in patients who were admitted to the ICU, compared with patients at the normal ward. Co-infections were evident in 55.6% of ICU-admitted patients, compared with 20.1% of patients at the normal ward, mainly caused by Staphylococcus aureus, Streptococcus pneumoniae, and Aspergillus fumigatus. Non-survivors suffered from diabetes mellitus and (pre-existent) renal failure more often.

Conclusions

The current study indicates that a history of OSAS/CSAS, myocardial infarction and BMI greater than 30 might be related to ICU admission in influenza patients. Second, ICU patients develop more pulmonary co-infections. Last, (pre-existent) renal failure and diabetes mellitus are more often observed in non-survivors.

Extending VTE prophylaxis post hospitalization for medical patients

This is not currently a recommended practice but it gets revisited from time to time. Here’s the latest systematic review and meta-analysis in PLOS Medicine. From the paper:

BACKGROUND:

The efficacy, safety, and clinical importance of extended-duration thromboprophylaxis (EDT) for prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in medical patients remain unclear. We compared the efficacy and safety of EDT in patients hospitalized for medical illness.

METHODS AND FINDINGS:

Electronic databases of PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from inception to March 21, 2019. We included randomized clinical trials (RCTs) reporting use of EDT for prevention of VTE. We performed trial sequential and cumulative meta-analyses to evaluate EDT effects on the primary efficacy endpoint of symptomatic VTE or VTE-related death, International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis (ISTH) major or fatal bleeding, and all-cause mortality. The pooled number needed to treat (NNT) to prevent one symptomatic or fatal VTE event and the number needed to harm (NNH) to cause one major or fatal bleeding event were calculated. Across 5 RCTs with 40,247 patients (mean age: 67-77 years, proportion of women: 48%-54%, most common reason for admission: heart failure), the duration of EDT ranged from 24-47 days. EDT reduced symptomatic VTE or VTE-related death compared with standard of care (0.8% versus 1.2%; risk ratio [RR]: 0.61, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.44-0.83; p = 0.002). EDT increased risk of ISTH major or fatal bleeding (0.6% versus 0.3%; RR: 2.04, 95% CI: 1.42-2.91; p less than 0.001) in both meta-analyses and trial sequential analyses. Pooled NNT to prevent one symptomatic VTE or VTE-related death was 250 (95% CI: 167-500), whereas NNH to cause one major or fatal bleeding event was 333 (95% CI: 200-1,000). Limitations of the study include variation in enrollment criteria, individual therapies, duration of EDT, and VTE detection protocols across included trials.

CONCLUSIONS:

In this systematic review and meta-analysis of 5 randomized trials, we observed that use of a post-hospital discharge EDT strategy for a 4-to-6-week period reduced symptomatic or fatal VTE events at the expense of increased risk of major or fatal bleeding. Further investigations are still required to define the risks and benefits in discrete medically ill cohorts, evaluate cost-effectiveness, and develop pathways for targeted implementation of this postdischarge EDT strategy.

This analysis does not make a good case for extending pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis beyond the period of hospitalization. Note that the ACCP guidelines recommend against this practice. According to those guidelines, post hospital continuation of pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis is recommended for only two situations: post major orthopedic surgery (10 days total minimum) and post cancer surgery (4 weeks).

ICU or stepdown for your DKA patient?

From a recent study:

Highlights

In some centers, all Diabetic Ketoacidosis (DKA) patients are admitted to ICU.

No difference in in-hospital mortality was found between DKA patients admitted to step-down units or ICU.

DKA patients admitted to step-down units had significantly lower costs than those admitted to ICU.

Hospitals should preferentially consider monitoring of DKA patients in step-down units.

Abstract

Purpose

There is wide variation in the utilization of Intensive Care Unit (ICU) beds for treatment and monitoring of adult patients with Diabetic Ketoacidosis (DKA). We sought to compare the outcomes and hospital costs of adult DKA patients admitted to ICUs as compared to those admitted to step-down units.

Materials and methods

We included consecutive adult patients from two hospitals with a diagnosis of DKA. Patients were either admitted to the ICU, or a step-down unit, which has a nurse-to-patient ratio of 2:1, but does not have capability for mechanical ventilation or administration of vasoactive agents. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality.

Results

We included 872 patients in the analysis. 71 (8.1%) were admitted to ICU, while 801 (91.9%) were admitted to a step-down unit. We found no difference in in-hospital mortality between patients admitted to the ICU and those admitted to the step-down unit (adjusted odds ratio [OR]: 1.14, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.87–2.64). Mean total hospital costs were significantly higher for patients admitted to the ICU ($20,428 vs. $6484, P less than 0.001).

Conclusions

Adult DKA patients admitted to a step-down unit had comparable in-hospital mortality and lower hospital costs as compared to those admitted to the ICU.

Delirium in hospitalized patients predicts readmission and other forms of increased post hospital utilization

Report here.

This is not surprising, since delirium in the hospital is often a sign of frailty.