Search

Background: Preoperative risk prediction in patients at elevated cardiovascular risk shows limited accuracy. Platelet to lymphocyte ratio (PLR) and neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) indicate systemic inflammation. Both have been investigated for outcome prediction in the field of oncology and cardiovascular medicine, as well as risk prediction of adverse cardiovascular events in non-surgical patients at increased cardiovascular risk.Methods: For this post-hoc analysis, we included all 38 coronary heart disease patients from the Leukocytes and Cardiovascular Perioperative Events cohort-1 study scheduled for elective non-cardiac surgery. We evaluated preoperative differential blood counts for association with major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) defined as the composite endpoint of death, myocardial ischemia, myocardial infarction, myocardial injury after non-cardiac surgery, or embolic or thrombotic stroke within 30 days after surgery. We used Youden's index to calculate cut-off values for PLR and NLR. Additive risk-predictive values were assessed using receiver operating characteristic curve and net reclassification (NRI) improvement analyses.Results: Patients with the composite endpoint MACCE had higher PLR and NLR (309 [206; 380] vs. 160 [132; 203], p = 0.001; 4.9 [3.5; 8.1] vs. 2.6 [2.2; 3.4]), p = 0.001). Calculated cut-offs for PLR > 204.4 and NLR > 3.1 were associated with increased risk of 30-day MACCE (OR 7, 95% CI [1.2; 44.7], p = 0.034; OR 36, 95% CI [1.8; 686.6], p = 0.001). Furthermore, NLR improved risk prediction in coronary heart disease patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery when combined with hs-cTnT or NT-proBNP (NRI total = 0.23, p = 0.008, NRI total = 0.26, p = 0.005).Conclusions: Both PLR and NLR were associated with perioperative cardiovascular adverse events in coronary heart disease patients. NLR proved to be of additional value for preoperative risk stratification. Both PLR and NLR could be used as inexpensive and broadly available tools for perioperative risk assessment.Trial Registration: NCT02874508, August 22, 2016. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background The β-lactamase inhibitor relebactam can restore imipenem activity against imipenem-nonsusceptible gram-negative pathogens. We evaluated imipenem/relebactam for treating imipenem-nonsusceptible infections. Methods Randomized, controlled, double-blind, phase 3 trial. Hospitalized patients with hospital-acquired/ventilator-associated pneumonia, complicated intraabdominal infection, or complicated urinary tract infection caused by imipenem-nonsusceptible (but colistin- and imipenem/relebactam-susceptible) pathogens were randomized 2:1 to 5–21 days imipenem/relebactam or colistin+imipenem. Primary endpoint: favorable overall response (defined by relevant endpoints for each infection type) in the modified microbiologic intent-to-treat (mMITT) population (qualifying baseline pathogen and ≥1 dose study treatment). Secondary endpoints: clinical response, all-cause mortality, and treatment-emergent nephrotoxicity. Safety analyses included patients with ≥1 dose study treatment. Results Thirty-one patients received imipenem/relebactam and 16 colistin+imipenem. Among mITT patients (n = 21 imipenem/relebactam, n = 10 colistin+imipenem), 29% had Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II scores >15, 23% had creatinine clearance <60 mL/min, and 35% were aged ≥65 years. Qualifying baseline pathogens: Pseudomonas aeruginosa (77%), Klebsiella spp. (16%), other Enterobacteriaceae (6%). Favorable overall response was observed in 71% imipenem/relebactam and 70% colistin+imipenem patients (90% confidence interval [CI] for difference, –27.5, 21.4), day 28 favorable clinical response in 71% and 40% (90% CI, 1.3, 51.5), and 28-day mortality in 10% and 30% (90% CI, –46.4, 6.7), respectively. Serious adverse events (AEs) occurred in 10% of imipenem/relebactam and 31% of colistin+imipenem patients, drug-related AEs in 16% and 31% (no drug-related deaths), and treatment-emergent nephrotoxicity in 10% and 56% (P =.002), respectively. Conclusions Imipenem/relebactam is an efficacious and well-tolerated treatment option for carbapenem-nonsusceptible infections. Clinical Trials Registration NCT02452047. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Severe sepsis and septic shock remain a major challenge, even in modern intensive care. In Germany, about 68,000 patients die annually because of septic diseases, characterized by a complex systemic inflammatory response. Causal treatment of the underlying infection is essential for successful management of sepsis, but the course can be positively influenced by supportive and adjuvant measures. The cholinergic anti-inflammatory pathway (CAP) represents a new approach to adjunctive therapy of septic diseases and can be pharmacologically activated by the acetylcholinesterase inhibitor physostigmine (Anticholium®). Promising effects can be found in several in vitro and in vivo models of sepsis, such as a reduction in pro-inflammatory cytokines and improved survival.Methods: Anticholium® per Se is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, monocentric trial to assess whether the CAP can be transferred from bench to bedside. In this pilot study, 20 patients with perioperative sepsis and septic shock as a result of intra-abdominal infection are enrolled. According to randomization, participants are treated with physostigmine salicylate (verum group) or 0.9% sodium chloride (placebo group) for up to 5 days. The mean Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score during treatment and subsequent intensive care of up to 14 days is used as surrogate outcome (primary endpoint). Secondary outcome measures include 30- and 90-day mortality. An embedded pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics study investigates plasma concentrations of physostigmine and its metabolite eseroline. Further analyses will contribute to our understanding of the role of various cytokines in the pathophysiology of human sepsis. A computer-generated list is used for block randomization.Discussion: This randomized, controlled, monocentric trial investigates for the first time the adjunctive use of physostigmine (Anticholium®) in patients with perioperative sepsis and septic shock and may be a pivotal step toward the clinical use in this indication.Trial Registration: EudraCT Number: 2012-001650-26 (entered 14 August 2012), ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03013322 (registered on 1 Jan 2017). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Although antiemetics are commonly used to prevent postoperative nausea or vomiting, the failure rate is appreciable and there is currently no generally accepted standard for rescue treatment of postoperative nausea or vomiting after failed prophylaxis. This prospective, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled, multicenter study was designed to test the hypothesis that intravenous amisulpride, a dopamine D2/D3-antagonist, is superior to placebo at treating established postoperative nausea or vomiting after failed prophylaxis.Methods: A total of 2,285 adult patients undergoing surgery under general inhalational anesthesia and receiving standard antiemetic prophylaxis were enrolled at 23 sites in Canada, France, Germany, and the United States. Of these, 702 patients experienced postoperative nausea or vomiting in the 24-h period after surgery and were randomized to receive a single dose of 5 or 10 mg intravenous amisulpride or matching placebo. The primary endpoint was complete response, defined as no emesis or rescue antiemetic use for 24 h after study drug administration, excluding emesis in the first 30 min. Secondary endpoints included incidence of emesis and rescue medication use, nausea burden, time to treatment failure, and length of stay in postanesthesia care unit and hospital.Results: Complete response occurred in significantly more patients receiving 10 mg amisulpride (96 of 230, 41.7%) than placebo (67 of 235, 28.5%), a 13.2% difference (95% CI, 4.6 to 21.8; odds ratio, 1.80; P = 0.006). A 5-mg dose of amisulpride did not show a significant benefit (80 of 237, 33.8%); the difference from placebo was 5.2% (95% CI, 3.1 to 13.6; odds ratio, 1.24; P = 0.109). The total number of adverse events recorded and proportion of patients with at least one adverse event were comparable between the placebo and amisulpride groups. No clinically relevant toxicities were observed.Conclusions: A single 10-mg dose of intravenous amisulpride was safe and more effective than placebo at treating established postoperative nausea or vomiting in patients failing postoperative nausea or vomiting prophylaxis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]