Search

Aim The primary aim was to ascertain long-term rates of atrial fibrillation (AF) recurrence in this all-comer patient population undergoing elective electrical cardioversion (DCR). Secondary aims included procedural DCR success, clinical predictors of long-term maintenance of sinus rhythm (SR) and AF related hospitalizations.Material and Methods A retrospective cohort study was conducted. Consecutive patients (n=316) undergoing elective DCR were included.Results Successful immediate reversion to SR was attained in 266 (84 %) of patients. 224 (84 %) patients were followed up for a median period of 3.5 years (IQR 2.7–4.3). Most patients (150 [67 %]) had recurrence of AF / flutter at a median time of 240 days. Clinical predictors of AF recurrence included a history of AF (HR 0.63, p=0.038) and a dilated left atrium (HR 4.13, p=0.048). Maintenance of SR was associated with fewer unplanned hospitalizations for AF (HR 3.25, pConclusion There was high procedural success post DCR. However, long-term rates of AF recurrence were high, and AF recurrences were associated with increased hospitalizations. These findings underscore the importance of clinical vigilance and multi-modal management as part of a comprehensive and effective rhythm control strategy.

Objective: The accuracy of different non-invasive body temperature measurement methods in intensive care unit (ICU) patients is uncertain. We aimed to study the accuracy of three commonly used methods. Design: Prospective observational study. Setting: ICUs of two tertiary Australian hospitals. Participants: Critically ill patients admitted to the ICU. Interventions: Invasive (intravascular and intra-urinary bladder catheter) and non-invasive (axillary chemical dot, tympanic infrared, and temporal scanner) body temperature measurements were taken at study inclusion and every 4 hours for the following 72 hours. Main outcome measures: Accuracy of non-invasive body temperature measurement methods was assessed by the Bland–Altman approach, accounting for repeated measurements and significant explanatory variables that were identified by regression analysis. Clinical adequacy was set at limits of agreement (LoA) of 1C compared with core temperature. Results: We studied 50 consecutive critically ill patients who were mainly admitted to the ICU after cardiac surgery. From over 375 observations, invasive core temperature (mostly pulmonary artery catheter) ranged from 33.9C to 39C. On average, the LoA between invasive and non-invasive measurements methods were about 3C. The temporal scanner showed the worst performance in estimating core temperature (bias, 0.66C; LoA, 1.23C, +2.55C), followed by tympanic infrared (bias, 0.44C; LoA, 1.73C, +2.61C) and axillary chemical dot methods (bias, 0.32°C; LoA, 1.64C, +2.28C). No methods achieved clinical adequacy even accounting for significant explanatory variables. Conclusions: The axillary chemical dot, tympanic infrared and temporal scanner methods are inaccurate measures of core temperature in ICU patients. These non-invasive methods appeared unreliable for use in ICU patients.

Common blood tests can help identify patients at risk of death, unplanned intensive care unit (ICU) admission, or rapid response team (RRT) call. We aimed to test whether early ICU-team review triggered by such laboratory tests (lab alert) is feasible, safe, and can alter physiological variables, clinical management, and clinical outcomes.In prospective pilot randomized controlled trial in surgical wards of a tertiary hospital, we studied patients admitted for24 h. We applied a previously validated risk assessment tool to each set of common laboratory tests to identify patients at risk and generate a "lab-alert". We randomly allocated such lab-alert patients to receive early ICU-team review (intervention) or usual care (control).We studied 205 patients (males 54.1%; average age 79 years; 103 randomized to intervention and 102 to usual care). Intervention patients were more likely to trigger RRT activation during their first lab-alert (10.7 vs. 2.0%; P 0.001) but less likely to receive an allied health referral (18.0% vs. 24.5%; p = 0.007). They were less likely to trigger RRT activation in the 24-h before subsequent alerts (18.4 vs. 22.4%; p = 0.008) and less likely to generate further alerts (204 vs. 320; p 0.001), but more likely to receive a not for resuscitation or endotracheal intubation status in the 24-h before subsequent alerts (26.6 vs. 17.3%; p = 0.05). Mortality at 24 h was 1.9% for the intervention group vs. 2.9% in the control group (p = 0.63). Finally, overall mortality was 19.4% for intervention patients vs. 23.5% for control patients (p = 0.50).Among surgical patients, lab alerts identify patients with a high mortality. Lab alert-triggered interventions are associated with more first alert-associated RRT activations; more changes in resuscitation status toward a more conservative approach; fewer subsequent alert-associated RRT activations; fewer subsequent alerts, and decreased allied health interventions (ANZCTRN12615000146594).