Andrés Esteban

Bio: Andrés Esteban is an academic researcher from Carlos III Health Institute. The author has contributed to research in topics: Mechanical ventilation & ARDS. The author has an hindex of 61, co-authored 178 publications receiving 19123 citations. Previous affiliations of Andrés Esteban include European University of Madrid.

Epidemiology, Patterns of Care, and Mortality for Patients With Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome in Intensive Care Units in 50 Countries

Abstract: IMPORTANCE Limited information exists about the epidemiology, recognition, management, and outcomes of patients with the acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). OBJECTIVES To evaluate intensive ...

Characteristics and Outcomes in Adult Patients Receiving Mechanical Ventilation: A 28-Day International Study

Abstract: ContextThe outcome of patients receiving mechanical ventilation for particular indications has been studied, but the outcome in a large number of unselected, heterogeneous patients has not been reported.ObjectiveTo determine the survival of patients receiving mechanical ventilation and the relative importance of factors influencing survival.Design, Setting, and SubjectsProspective cohort of consecutive adult patients admitted to 361 intensive care units who received mechanical ventilation for more than 12 hours between March 1, 1998, and March 31, 1998. Data were collected on each patient at initiation of mechanical ventilation and daily throughout the course of mechanical ventilation for up to 28 days.Main Outcome MeasureAll-cause mortality during intensive care unit stay.ResultsOf the 15 757 patients admitted, a total of 5183 (33%) received mechanical ventilation for a mean (SD) duration of 5.9 (7.2) days. The mean (SD) length of stay in the intensive care unit was 11.2 (13.7) days. Overall mortality rate in the intensive care unit was 30.7% (1590 patients) for the entire population, 52% (120) in patients who received ventilation because of acute respiratory distress syndrome, and 22% (115) in patients who received ventilation for an exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Survival of unselected patients receiving mechanical ventilation for more than 12 hours was 69%. The main conditions independently associated with increased mortality were (1) factors present at the start of mechanical ventilation (odds ratio [OR], 2.98; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.44-3.63; P<.001 for coma), (2) factors related to patient management (OR, 3.67; 95% CI, 2.02-6.66; P<.001 for plateau airway pressure >35 cm H2O), and (3) developments occurring over the course of mechanical ventilation (OR, 8.71; 95% CI, 5.44-13.94; P<.001 for ratio of PaO2 to fraction of inspired oxygen <100).ConclusionSurvival among mechanically ventilated patients depends not only on the factors present at the start of mechanical ventilation, but also on the development of complications and patient management in the intensive care unit.

A comparison of four methods of weaning patients from mechanical ventilation. Spanish Lung Failure Collaborative Group.

Abstract: Background Weaning patients from mechanical ventilation is an important problem in intensive care units. Weaning is usually conducted in an empirical manner, and a standardized approach has not been developed. Methods We carried out a prospective, randomized, multicenter study involving 546 patients who had received mechanical ventilation for a mean (±SD) of 7.5±6.1 days and who were considered by their physicians to be ready for weaning. One hundred thirty patients had respiratory distress during a two-hour trial of spontaneous breathing. These patients were randomly assigned to undergo one of four weaning techniques: intermittent mandatory ventilation, in which the ventilator rate was initially set at a mean (±SD) of 10.0±2.2 breaths per minute and then decreased, if possible, at least twice a day, usually by 2 to 4 breaths per minute (29 patients); pressure-support ventilation, in which pressure support was initially set at 18.0±6.1 cm of water and then reduced, if possible, by 2 to 4 cm of water at le...

The Berlin definition of ARDS: An expanded rationale, justification, and supplementary material

Abstract: Our objective was to revise the definition of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) using a conceptual model incorporating reliability and validity, and a novel iterative approach with formal evaluation of the definition. The European Society of Intensive Care Medicine identified three chairs with broad expertise in ARDS who selected the participants and created the agenda. After 2 days of consensus discussions a draft definition was developed, which then underwent empiric evaluation followed by consensus revision. The Berlin Definition of ARDS maintains a link to prior definitions with diagnostic criteria of timing, chest imaging, origin of edema, and hypoxemia. Patients may have ARDS if the onset is within 1 week of a known clinical insult or new/worsening respiratory symptoms. For the bilateral opacities on chest radiograph criterion, a reference set of chest radiographs has been developed to enhance inter-observer reliability. The pulmonary artery wedge pressure criterion for hydrostatic edema was removed, and illustrative vignettes were created to guide judgments about the primary cause of respiratory failure. If no risk factor for ARDS is apparent, however, objective evaluation (e.g., echocardiography) is required to help rule out hydrostatic edema. A minimum level of positive end-expiratory pressure and mutually exclusive PaO2/FiO2 thresholds were chosen for the different levels of ARDS severity (mild, moderate, severe) to better categorize patients with different outcomes and potential responses to therapy. This panel addressed some of the limitations of the prior ARDS definition by incorporating current data, physiologic concepts, and clinical trials results to develop the Berlin definition, which should facilitate case recognition and better match treatment options to severity in both research trials and clinical practice.

Noninvasive Positive-Pressure Ventilation for Respiratory Failure after Extubation

Abstract: background The need for reintubation after extubation and discontinuation of mechanical ventilation is not uncommon and is associated with increased mortality. Noninvasive positivepressure ventilation has been suggested as a promising therapy for patients with respiratory failure after extubation, but a single-center, randomized trial recently found no benefit. We conducted a multicenter, randomized trial to evaluate the effect of noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation on mortality in this clinical setting. methods Patients in 37 centers in eight countries who were electively extubated after at least 48 hours of mechanical ventilation and who had respiratory failure within the subsequent 48 hours were randomly assigned to either noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation by face mask or standard medical therapy. results A total of 221 patients with similar baseline characteristics had been randomly assigned to either noninvasive ventilation (114 patients) or standard medical therapy (107 patients) when the trial was stopped early, after an interim analysis. There was no difference between the noninvasive-ventilation group and the standard-therapy group in the need for reintubation (rate of reintubation, 48 percent in both groups; relative risk in the noninvasive-ventilation group, 0.99; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.76 to 1.30). The rate of death in the intensive care unit was higher in the noninvasive-ventilation group than in the standard-therapy group (25 percent vs. 14 percent; relative risk, 1.78; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.03 to 3.20; P=0.048), and the median time from respiratory failure to reintubation was longer in the noninvasive-ventilation group (12 hours vs. 2 hours 30 minutes, P=0.02). conclusions Noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation does not prevent the need for reintubation or reduce mortality in unselected patients who have respiratory failure after extubation.

Global strategy for the diagnosis, management, and prevention of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: GOLD executive summary.

Abstract: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) remains a major public health problem. It is the fourth leading cause of chronic morbidity and mortality in the United States, and is projected to rank fifth in 2020 in burden of disease worldwide, according to a study published by the World Bank/World Health Organization. Yet, COPD remains relatively unknown or ignored by the public as well as public health and government officials. In 1998, in an effort to bring more attention to COPD, its management, and its prevention, a committed group of scientists encouraged the U.S. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and the World Health Organization to form the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD). Among the important objectives of GOLD are to increase awareness of COPD and to help the millions of people who suffer from this disease and die prematurely of it or its complications. The first step in the GOLD program was to prepare a consensus report, Global Strategy for the Diagnosis, Management, and Prevention of COPD, published in 2001. The present, newly revised document follows the same format as the original consensus report, but has been updated to reflect the many publications on COPD that have appeared. GOLD national leaders, a network of international experts, have initiated investigations of the causes and prevalence of COPD in their countries, and developed innovative approaches for the dissemination and implementation of COPD management guidelines. We appreciate the enormous amount of work the GOLD national leaders have done on behalf of their patients with COPD. Despite the achievements in the 5 years since the GOLD report was originally published, considerable additional work is ahead of us if we are to control this major public health problem. The GOLD initiative will continue to bring COPD to the attention of governments, public health officials, health care workers, and the general public, but a concerted effort by all involved in health care will be necessary.

The Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3)

Abstract: Importance Definitions of sepsis and septic shock were last revised in 2001. Considerable advances have since been made into the pathobiology (changes in organ function, morphology, cell biology, biochemistry, immunology, and circulation), management, and epidemiology of sepsis, suggesting the need for reexamination. Objective To evaluate and, as needed, update definitions for sepsis and septic shock. Process A task force (n = 19) with expertise in sepsis pathobiology, clinical trials, and epidemiology was convened by the Society of Critical Care Medicine and the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine. Definitions and clinical criteria were generated through meetings, Delphi processes, analysis of electronic health record databases, and voting, followed by circulation to international professional societies, requesting peer review and endorsement (by 31 societies listed in the Acknowledgment). Key Findings From Evidence Synthesis Limitations of previous definitions included an excessive focus on inflammation, the misleading model that sepsis follows a continuum through severe sepsis to shock, and inadequate specificity and sensitivity of the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria. Multiple definitions and terminologies are currently in use for sepsis, septic shock, and organ dysfunction, leading to discrepancies in reported incidence and observed mortality. The task force concluded the term severe sepsis was redundant. Recommendations Sepsis should be defined as life-threatening organ dysfunction caused by a dysregulated host response to infection. For clinical operationalization, organ dysfunction can be represented by an increase in the Sequential [Sepsis-related] Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score of 2 points or more, which is associated with an in-hospital mortality greater than 10%. Septic shock should be defined as a subset of sepsis in which particularly profound circulatory, cellular, and metabolic abnormalities are associated with a greater risk of mortality than with sepsis alone. Patients with septic shock can be clinically identified by a vasopressor requirement to maintain a mean arterial pressure of 65 mm Hg or greater and serum lactate level greater than 2 mmol/L (>18 mg/dL) in the absence of hypovolemia. This combination is associated with hospital mortality rates greater than 40%. In out-of-hospital, emergency department, or general hospital ward settings, adult patients with suspected infection can be rapidly identified as being more likely to have poor outcomes typical of sepsis if they have at least 2 of the following clinical criteria that together constitute a new bedside clinical score termed quickSOFA (qSOFA): respiratory rate of 22/min or greater, altered mentation, or systolic blood pressure of 100 mm Hg or less. Conclusions and Relevance These updated definitions and clinical criteria should replace previous definitions, offer greater consistency for epidemiologic studies and clinical trials, and facilitate earlier recognition and more timely management of patients with sepsis or at risk of developing sepsis.

Acute Kidney Injury Network: report of an initiative to improve outcomes in acute kidney injury

Abstract: Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a complex disorder for which currently there is no accepted definition. Having a uniform standard for diagnosing and classifying AKI would enhance our ability to manage these patients. Future clinical and translational research in AKI will require collaborative networks of investigators drawn from various disciplines, dissemination of information via multidisciplinary joint conferences and publications, and improved translation of knowledge from pre-clinical research. We describe an initiative to develop uniform standards for defining and classifying AKI and to establish a forum for multidisciplinary interaction to improve care for patients with or at risk for AKI. Members representing key societies in critical care and nephrology along with additional experts in adult and pediatric AKI participated in a two day conference in Amsterdam, The Netherlands, in September 2005 and were assigned to one of three workgroups. Each group's discussions formed the basis for draft recommendations that were later refined and improved during discussion with the larger group. Dissenting opinions were also noted. The final draft recommendations were circulated to all participants and subsequently agreed upon as the consensus recommendations for this report. Participating societies endorsed the recommendations and agreed to help disseminate the results. The term AKI is proposed to represent the entire spectrum of acute renal failure. Diagnostic criteria for AKI are proposed based on acute alterations in serum creatinine or urine output. A staging system for AKI which reflects quantitative changes in serum creatinine and urine output has been developed. We describe the formation of a multidisciplinary collaborative network focused on AKI. We have proposed uniform standards for diagnosing and classifying AKI which will need to be validated in future studies. The Acute Kidney Injury Network offers a mechanism for proceeding with efforts to improve patient outcomes.