Search

Background: This study presents a real-world scenario for prescription pattern, efficacy, and safety data on the current clinical use of intravenous fosfomycin in critically ill patients in Indian settings. Patients and methods: This was a retrospective cohort study conducted for a period of 10 months among critically ill patients admitted to hospital's critical care unit. The primary objective of the study was to analyze the prescription pattern of intravenous fosfomycin, and the secondary objective was to evaluate the safety profile and patient outcomes. Results: A total of 309 patients were enrolled, and they were diagnosed with bacteremia (45.3%), pneumonia (15.85%), septic shock (14.24%), and urinary tract infections (UTI) (13.91%). The average dose of fosfomycin given was 11.7 ± 4.06 gm/day. The average duration of the therapy was 4.85 ± 3.59 days with a median duration of 4 days. Fosfomycin was given at 8 hourly dosing frequency to maximum (45.6%) cases. Hypokalemia was the most observed adverse event. The overall survival was seen in 55% of patients. Conclusion: Our data suggest that UTI, infection caused by Escherichia coli, and a daily dose of >12 g were associated with better clinical outcomes. The overall survival of critically ill patients receiving fosfomycin was 55%. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim/objective/introduction: Cytokine storm or cytokine release syndrome (CRS) is inevitable in severe and critically ill patients with novel coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). This review aimed to discuss current therapeutic options for the management of CRS in COVID-19. Background: Cytokine storm is caused by the colossal release of proinflammatory cytokines [e.g., IL (interleukin)-2, IL-6, IL-8 TNF (tumor necrosis factor)-α, etc.] causing dysregulated, hyperimmune response. This immunopathogenesis leads to acute lung injury and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Targeting cytokine storm with the therapies that are already available in India with the support of published guidelines and consensus can assist in achieving a better outcome in COVID-19. Review results: We predominantly included published guidelines or consensus recommendations about the management of cytokine storm in COVID-19. From the existing literature evidence, it is observed that among the currently available agents, low-dose corticosteroids and heparin can be beneficial in managing cytokine storm. The use of serine protease inhibitors such as ulinastatin has been advised by some experts. Though therapies such as high-dose vitamin C and interleukin-6 inhibitors (e.g., tocilizumab) have been advised, the evidence regarding their use for cytokine storm in COVID-19 is limited. Therapies such as Janus kinase inhibitors (JAK) inhibitors and Neurokinin-1 receptor (NK-1) antagonists are still in research. Besides, pharmaceutical treatments, use of blood purification strategies, and convalescent plasma may be life-saving options in some of the critically ill COVID-19 patients. For these therapies, there is a need to generate further evidence to substantiate their use in CRS management. Conclusion: Current management of COVID-19 is preventive and supportive. Different therapies can be used to prevent and treat the cytokine storm. More research is needed for further supporting the use of these treatments in COVID-19. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and aim: Intensive-care practices and settings differ for India in comparison to other countries. While guidelines are available to direct the use of enteral nutrition (EN), there are no recommendations specific to nutritional management of EN in dysglycemic patients, specific to patients in Indian critical care settings. Advisory board meetings were arranged to develop the practice guidelines specific to the Indian context, for the use of EN in dysglycemic critically ill patients and to overcome challenges in this field. Materials and methods: Two advisory board meetings were organized to review various existing guidelines, meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), controlled trials and review articles, for their contextual relevance and strength. Three rounds of Delphi voting were done to arrive at consensus on certain recommendations. A systematic grading of practice guidelines by the advisory board was done based on strength of the consensus voting and reviewed supporting evidences. Results: Based on the literature review, the recommendations for developing the practice guidelines were made as per the grading criteria agreed upon by the advisory board. The recommendations were to address challenges regarding prediction and assessment of dysglycemia (DG), acceptable glycemic targets in such settings, general nutritional aspects pertaining to DG nutrition, and nutrition in various superspecialty cases in critical care settings, where DG is commonly encountered. Conclusion: This paper summarizes the optimum EN practices for managing DG in critically ill patients. The practical solutions to overcome the challenges in this field are presented as practice guidelines at the end of each section. These guidelines are expected to provide guidance for EN management in dysglycemic critically ill patients. These guidelines also outline the model glycemic control task force and its roles in nutrition care as well as an intensive care unit DG nutrition protocol. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aim: Intensive-care practices and settings may differ for India in comparison to other countries. While international guidelines are available to direct the use of enteral nutrition (EN), there are no recommendations specific to Indian settings. Advisory board meetings were arranged to develop the practice guidelines specific to Indian context, for the use of EN in critically ill patients and to overcome challenges in this field. Methods: Various existing guidelines, meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials, controlled trials, and review articles were reviewed for their contextual relevance and strength. A systematic grading of practice guidelines by advisory board was done based on strength of the supporting evidence. Wherever Indian studies were not available, references were taken from the international guidelines. Results: Based on the literature review, the recommendations for developing the practice guidelines were made as per the grading criteria agreed upon by the advisory board. The recommendations were to address challenges regarding EN versus parenteral nutrition; nutrition screening and assessment; nutrition in hemodynamically unstable; route of nutrition; tube feeding and challenges; tolerance; optimum calorie-protein requirements; selection of appropriate enteral feeding formula; micronutrients and immune-nutrients; standard nutrition in hepatic, renal, and respiratory diseases and documentation of nutrition practices. Conclusion: This paper summarizes the optimum nutrition practices for critically ill patients. The possible solutions to overcome the challenges in this field are presented as practice guidelines at the end of each section. These guidelines are expected to provide guidance in critical care settings regarding appropriate critical-care nutrition practices and to set up Intensive Care Unit nutrition protocols. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]