XI. STRATEGIES FOR IMPROVING DIABETES CARE D iabetes is a chronic illness that requires continuing medical care and patient self-management education to prevent acute complications and to reduce the risk of long-term complications. Diabetes care is complex and requires that many issues, beyond glycemic control, be addressed. A large body of evidence exists that supports a range of interventions to improve diabetes outcomes. These standards of care are intended to provide clinicians, patients, researchers, payors, and other interested individuals with the components of diabetes care, treatment goals, and tools to evaluate the quality of care. While individual preferences, comorbidities, and other patient factors may require modification of goals, targets that are desirable for most patients with diabetes are provided. These standards are not intended to preclude more extensive evaluation and management of the patient by other specialists as needed. For more detailed information, refer to Bode (Ed.): Medical Management of Type 1 Diabetes (1), Burant (Ed): Medical Management of Type 2 Diabetes (2), and Klingensmith (Ed): Intensive Diabetes Management (3). The recommendations included are diagnostic and therapeutic actions that are known or believed to favorably affect health outcomes of patients with diabetes. A grading system (Table 1), developed by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and modeled after existing methods, was utilized to clarify and codify the evidence that forms the basis for the recommendations. The level of evidence that supports each recommendation is listed after each recommendation using the letters A, B, C, or E.

Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes

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.

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

To provide an update to “Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2012”. A consensus committee of 55 international experts representing 25 international organizations was convened. Nominal groups were assembled at key international meetings (for those committee members attending the conference). A formal conflict-of-interest (COI) policy was developed at the onset of the process and enforced throughout. A stand-alone meeting was held for all panel members in December 2015. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee served as an integral part of the development. The panel consisted of five sections: hemodynamics, infection, adjunctive therapies, metabolic, and ventilation. Population, intervention, comparison, and outcomes (PICO) questions were reviewed and updated as needed, and evidence profiles were generated. Each subgroup generated a list of questions, searched for best available evidence, and then followed the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system to assess the quality of evidence from high to very low, and to formulate recommendations as strong or weak, or best practice statement when applicable. The Surviving Sepsis Guideline panel provided 93 statements on early management and resuscitation of patients with sepsis or septic shock. Overall, 32 were strong recommendations, 39 were weak recommendations, and 18 were best-practice statements. No recommendation was provided for four questions. Substantial agreement exists among a large cohort of international experts regarding many strong recommendations for the best care of patients with sepsis. Although a significant number of aspects of care have relatively weak support, evidence-based recommendations regarding the acute management of sepsis and septic shock are the foundation of improved outcomes for these critically ill patients with high mortality.

https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2Fs00134-017-4683-6.pdf

Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2016

Objective:To provide an update to “Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2012.”Design:A consensus committee of 55 international experts representing 25 international organizations was convened. Nominal groups were assembled at key international meetings (for

Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2016.

Review of recent research on hepatitis C therapy for 54th annual meeting of the American association for the study of liver diseases

Patients with cirrhosis and concomitant coronary/valvular heart disease present a clinical dilemma. The therapeutic outcome of major cardiac surgery is significantly poorer in patients with cirrhosis compared with patients without cirrhosis. To address this, we aimed to identify associations between the severity of cirrhosis and post-cardiac surgical outcomes. A historical cohort analysis of patients undergoing cardiac surgery at the University of Alberta Hospital from January 2004 to December 2014 was used to identify and propensity score-match 60 patients with cirrhosis to 310 patients without cirrhosis. The relationships between cirrhosis and i) mortality, ii) postoperative complications, and iii) requirement of healthcare resources were evaluated. Ten-year mortality was significantly higher in cirrhotic patients compared with propensity score-matched non-cirrhotic patients (40% vs 20%; relative risk [RR], 2.0; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3 to 2.9; P = 0.001). Cirrhotic patients had more complications (63% vs 48%; RR, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.05 to 1.7; P = 0.02), longer median [interquartile range (IQR)] intensive care unit stays (5 [3–11] vs 2 [1–4] days; P < 0.001), time on mechanical ventilation (median [IQR] 2 [1–5] vs 1 [0.5–1.2] days; P < 0.001) and more frequently required renal replacement therapy (15% vs 6%; RR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.2 to 5.2; P = 0.02) postoperatively. After adjusting for other covariates, presence of cirrhosis (adjusted odds ratio, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.1 to 4.1) and intraoperative transfusion (adjusted odds ratio, 3.2; 95% CI, 1.6 to 6.3) were independently associated with increased mortality. Despite having low median model for end-stage liver disease scores, this small series of cirrhotic patients undergoing cardiac surgery had significantly higher mortality rates and required more organ support postoperatively than propensity score-matched non-cirrhotic patients. Impact de la cirrhose chez les patients subissant une chirurgie cardiaque : une etude de cohorte observationnelle et retrospective

https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s12630-019-01493-7.pdf

The impact of cirrhosis in patients undergoing cardiac surgery: a retrospective observational cohort study.

Acute kidney injury: A critical care perspective for orthotopic liver transplantation.

Intracranial hypertension (ICH) complicates roughly 25% of acute liver failure (ALF) patients with grade III/IV encephalopathy. Intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring is controversial due to complications in 5 to 20% and absence of documented mortality benefit.

/pdf/intracranial-pressure-monitoring-in-acute-liver-failure-a-567mzfor8h.pdf

Constantine J. Karvellas

Papers

The impact of cirrhosis in patients undergoing cardiac surgery: a retrospective observational cohort study.

Acute kidney injury: A critical care perspective for orthotopic liver transplantation.

Intracranial pressure monitoring in acute liver failure: a retrospective cohort study

Antibiotics in Acute Liver Failure (ALF)

Variation in the Care of Acute Liver Failure: A Survey of Intensive Care Professionals