Showing papers by "Wolfgang G. Voelckel published in 2018"
TL;DR: In patients ≥60 years suffering from TBI, anticoagulation with DOACs appears to be safer than with VKA, and further studies are warranted to confirm this finding.
Abstract: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is the leading cause of death among trauma patients. Patients under antithrombotic therapy (ATT) carry an increased risk for intracranial haematoma (ICH) formation. There is a paucity of data about the role of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) among TBI patients. In this retrospective study, we investigated all TBI patients ≥60-years-old who were admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) from January 2014 until May 2017. Patients were grouped into those receiving vitamin K antagonists (VKA), platelet inhibitors (PI), DOACs and no antithrombotic therapy (no-ATT). One-hundred-eighty-six, predominantly male (52.7%) TBI patients with a median age of 79 years (range: 70–85 years) were enrolled in the study. Glasgow Coma Scale and S-100β were not different among the groups. Patients on VKA and DOACs had a higher Charlson Comorbidity Index compared to the PI group and no-ATT group (p = 0.0021). The VKA group received reversal agents significantly more often than the other groups (p < 0.0001). Haematoma progression in the follow-up cranial computed tomography (CCT) was lowest in the DOAC group. The number of CCT and surgical interventions were low with no differences between the groups. No relevant differences in ICU and hospital length of stay were observed. Mortality in the VKA group was significantly higher compared to DOAC, PI and no-ATT group (p = 0.047). Data from huge registry studies displayed higher efficacy and lower fatal bleeding rates for DOACs compared to VKAs. The current study revealed comparable results. Despite the fact that TBI patients on VKAs received reversal agents more often than patients on DOACs (84.4% vs. 24.2%, p < 0.001), mortality rate was significantly higher in the VKA group (p = 0.047). In patients ≥60 years suffering from TBI, anticoagulation with DOACs appears to be safer than with VKA. Anti-thrombotic therapy with VKA resulted in a worse outcome compared to DOACs and PI. Further studies are warranted to confirm this finding.
58 citations
TL;DR: Good general compliance with the recommendations of the current S3 guidelines is found in monitoring and the use of scores to detect delirium management in this high-risk patient group.
Abstract: Analgesia and sedation are key items in intensive care. Recently published S3 guidelines specifically address treatment of patients with elevated intracranial pressure. The Austrian Society of Anesthesiology, Resuscitation and Intensive Care Medicine carried out an online survey of neurointensive care units in Austria in order to evaluate the current state of practice in the areas of analgosedation and delirium management in this high-risk patient group. The response rate was 88%. Induction of anesthesia in patients with elevated intracranial pressure is carried out with propofol/fentanyl/rocuronium in >80% of the intensive care units (ICU), 60% use midazolam, 33.3% use esketamine, 13.3% use barbiturates and 6.7% use etomidate. For maintenance of analgosedation up to 72 h, propofol is used by 80% of the ICUs, followed by remifentanil (46.7%), sufentanil (40%) and fentanyl (6.7%). For long-term sedation, 86.7% of ICUs use midazolam, 73.3% sufentanil and 73.3% esketamine. For sedation periods longer than 7 days, 21.4% of ICUs use propofol. Reasons for discontinuing propofol are signs of rhabdomyolysis (92.9%), green urine, elevated liver enzymes (71.4% each) and elevated triglycerides (57.1%). Muscle relaxants are only used during invasive procedures. Inducing a barbiturate coma is rated as a last resort by 53.3% of respondents. The monitoring methods used are bispectral index (BIS™, 61.5% of ICUs), somatosensory-evoked potentials (SSEP, 53.8%), processed electroencephalography (EEG, 38.5%), intraparenchymal partial pressure of oxygen (pO2, 38.5%) and microdialysis (23.1%). Sedation and analgesia are scored using the Richmond agitation and sedation score (RASS, 86.7%), sedation agitation scale (SAS, 6.7%) or numeric rating scale (NRS, 50%) and behavioral pain scale (BPS, 42.9%), visual analogue scale (VAS), critical care pain observation tool (CCPOT, each 14.3%) and verbal rating scale (VRS, 7.1%). Delirium monitoring is done using the confusion assessment method for intensive care units (CAM-ICU, 46.2%) and intensive care delirium screening checklist (ICDSC, 7.7%). Of the ICUs 46.2% do not carry out delirium monitoring. We found good general compliance with the recommendations of the current S3 guidelines. Room for improvement exists in monitoring and the use of scores to detect delirium.
6 citations