CRIS

Permanent URI for this communityhttps://investigadores.udd.cl/handle/123456789/1

Browse

Settings

Author: search.filters.author.Álvaro SalazarSubject: search.filters.subject.adult

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Loading...
    Thumbnail Image
    Some of the metrics are blocked by your 
    consent settings
    Item type:Publication,
    Outcomes of Sepsis and Septic Shock in Cancer Patients: Focus on Lactate
    (2021)
    LOPEZ HERNANDEZ, RENE RAMON  
    ;
    Rodrigo Pérez-Araos
    ;
    Fernanda Baus
    ;
    Camila Moscoso
    ;
    Álvaro Salazar
    <jats:p>The number of oncological patients (OP) admitted to intensive care units (ICU) for sepsis/septic shock has dramatically increased in recent years. The definition of septic shock has been modified, adding hyperlactatemia as a severity biomarker for mortality. However, it remains poorly reported in septic OP. We performed a retrospective analysis from a prospective database of sepsis/septic shock patients admitted to our ICU between September 2017 and September 2019 and followed until day 90. We identified 251 patients and 31.9% had active oncological comorbidity, mainly solid tumor (81.3%). Septic shock criteria were met for 112 (44.6%). Hyperlactatemia was observed in 136 (54.2%) patients and this was associated with a lower survival rate. Overall 90-day mortality was 15.1%. In OP vs. non-OP, hyperlactatemia was more frequent (65% vs. 49.1%, <jats:italic>p</jats:italic> = 0.013) and associated with lower survival (65.4% vs. 85.7%, <jats:italic>p</jats:italic> = 0.046). In OP, poor performance status was also associated with lower survival (HR 7.029 [1.998–24.731], <jats:italic>p</jats:italic> = 0.002) In an adjusted analysis, cancer was associated with lower 90-day survival (HR 2.690 [1.402–5.160], <jats:italic>p</jats:italic> = 0.003). In conclusion, septic OP remains a high mortality risk group in whom lactate levels and performance status could help with better risk stratification.</jats:p>
    Scopus© Citations 18  1
  • Loading...
    Thumbnail Image
    Some of the metrics are blocked by your 
    consent settings
    Item type:Publication,
    Continuous prolonged prone positioning in COVID-19-related ARDS: a multicenter cohort study from Chile
    (2022)
    Rodrigo A. Cornejo
    ;
    Jorge Montoya
    ;
    Abraham I. J. Gajardo
    ;
    GRAF SANTOS, JERÓNIMO  
    ;
    Leyla Alegría
    <jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:sec> <jats:title>Background</jats:title> <jats:p>Prone positioning is currently applied in time-limited daily sessions up to 24 h which determines that most patients require several sessions. Although longer prone sessions have been reported, there is scarce evidence about the feasibility and safety of such approach. We analyzed feasibility and safety of a continuous prolonged prone positioning strategy implemented nationwide, in a large cohort of COVID-19 patients in Chile.</jats:p> </jats:sec><jats:sec> <jats:title>Methods</jats:title> <jats:p>Retrospective cohort study of mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients with moderate-to-severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), conducted in 15 Intensive Care Units, which adhered to a national protocol of continuous prone sessions  ≥ 48 h and until PaO<jats:sub>2</jats:sub>:FiO<jats:sub>2</jats:sub> increased above 200 mm Hg. The number and extension of prone sessions were registered, along with relevant physiologic data and adverse events related to prone positioning. The cohort was stratified according to the first prone session duration: Group A, 2–3 days; Group B, 4–5 days; and Group C, &gt; 5 days. Multivariable regression analyses were performed to assess whether the duration of prone sessions could impact safety.</jats:p> </jats:sec><jats:sec> <jats:title>Results</jats:title> <jats:p>We included 417 patients who required a first prone session of 4 (3–5) days, of whom 318 (76.3%) received only one session. During the first prone session the main adverse event was grade 1–2 pressure sores in 97 (23.9%) patients; severe adverse events were infrequent with 17 non-scheduled extubations (4.2%). 90-day mortality was 36.2%. Ninety-eight patients (24%) were classified as group C; they exhibited a more severe ARDS at baseline, as reflected by lower PaO<jats:sub>2</jats:sub>:FiO<jats:sub>2</jats:sub> ratio and higher ventilatory ratio, and had a higher rate of pressure sores (44%) and higher 90-day mortality (48%). However, after adjustment for severity and several relevant confounders, prone session duration was not associated with mortality or pressure sores.</jats:p> </jats:sec><jats:sec> <jats:title>Conclusions</jats:title> <jats:p>Nationwide implementation of a continuous prolonged prone positioning strategy for COVID-19 ARDS patients was feasible. Minor pressure sores were frequent but within the ranges previously described, while severe adverse events were infrequent. The duration of prone session did not have an adverse effect on safety.</jats:p> </jats:sec>
    Scopus© Citations 17  1
  • Loading...
    Thumbnail Image
    Some of the metrics are blocked by your 
    consent settings
    Item type:Publication,
    Scopus© Citations 10  1