Brazilian Research in Intensive Care Network

For decades, most critical care patients have survived hospitalisation, supporting increased attention on the long-term critical illness recovery. The term 'Post-Intensive Care Syndrome' was coined in 2012 to raise awareness of long-term impairment in physical, cognitive and/or mental health after critical illness. However, the incidence of these impairments has persisted over the past decade, reaching as high as 60% and remains a major public health problem.Aiming to set a research agenda to address evidence gaps in critical illness recovery over the next 10 years, we invited key international opinion leaders from diverse clinical and methodological backgrounds to a roundtable meeting in June 2024 to assess the progress of post-critical illness recovery research and outline a future research agenda to address the unmet needs of critical illness survivors over the next decade.An early outcome from the meeting was to conduct a thematic analysis of critical care recovery literature, which highlighted the need for effective expectation management, ongoing patient support and education throughout recovery, integration between inpatient and community care, caregiver support and opportunities to reconnect with the intensive care unit.Participants identified conceptual challenges concerning current terminology and scope, population heterogeneity and phenotyping, and outcome definitions. Methodological challenges were identified around study design, with a call to shift to contemporary trial designs, incorporating qualitative methods. Translation into clinical practice will require interdisciplinary engagement.The roundtable concluded that a roadmap should be developed to guide clinical and research efforts over the coming decade, with the aim of developing a precision recovery approach.

Critical illnesses such as sepsis and acute respiratory distress syndrome lead to millions of deaths globally, with a higher burden in low- and middle-income countries. Conducting multicentric clinical studies is essential to help minimize the burden of critical illnesses, particularly in areas where their impact is greater. However, conducting large-scale multicentric studies is challenging, and most large multicentric studies in critical care are from high-income countries, which limits their relevance in other contexts. This highlights the need for collaborative research networks in low- and middle-income countries to better address local needs. The Brazilian Research in Intensive Care Network (BRICNet) was created by a group of intensivists and researchers in 2007 and is dedicated to being the leading organization in Brazil for conducting collaborative clinical research to improve care for critically ill patients. BRICNet focuses on investigator-initiated and collaborative studies relevant to global intensive care, with a special emphasis on Brazilian context. Its mission includes advancing research methodology, scientific writing, and conducting large-scale multicenter studies to fill knowledge gaps in critical care. Since its creation, the network has published 71 articles, including 15 randomized controlled trials and 14 observational studies, many of them in collaboration with major Brazilian institutions and international networks. This review aims to critically assess the achievements of BRICNet, highlighting its high-impact publications, international partnerships, and capacity building, which have significantly contributed to the field of intensive care. Looking ahead, we also identify barriers and solutions for sustainable growth.

Purpose: We assessed long-term outcomes in intensive care unit (ICU) survivors with acute kidney injury (AKI) submitted to intermittent or continuous renal replacement therapy (RRT) for comparisons between groups. Methods: The multicenter prospective cohort study included 195 adult ICU survivors with an ICU stay >72 h in 10 ICUs that had at least one episode of AKI treated with intermittent RRT (IRRT) or continuous RRT (CRRT) during ICU stay. The main outcomes were mortality and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Hospital readmissions and physical dependence were also assessed. Results: Regarding RRT, 83 (42.6%) patients received IRRT and 112 (57.4%) received CRRT. Despite the similarity regarding sociodemographic characteristics, pre-ICU state of health and type of admission between groups, the risk of death (23.5% vs 42.7%; P < .001), the prevalence of sepsis (60.7%) and acute respiratory distress syndrome (17%) were higher at ICU admission among CRRT patients. The severity of critical illness was higher among CRRT patients, regarding the need for mechanical ventilation (75.0% vs 50.6%, P = .002) and vasopressors (91.1% vs 63.9%, P < .001). One year after ICU discharge, 67 of 195 ICU survivors died (34.4%) and, after adjustment for confounders, there were no significant differences in mortality when comparing IRRT and CRTT patients (34.9% vs 33.9%; P = .590), on HRQoL in both physical (41.9% vs 42.2%; P = .926) and mental dimensions (57.6% vs 56.6%; P = .340), and on the number of hospital readmissions and physical dependence. Conclusions: Our study suggests that among ICU survivors RRT modality (IRRT vs CRRT) in the ICU does not impact long-term outcomes after ICU discharge.

A hegemonia do idioma na ciência Considere a seguinte situação fictícia: você acaba de escrever o manuscrito principal de um estudo que, desde a concepção até a análise final, levou mais de 4 anos para ser concluído. Agora, você precisa tentar publicá-lo em uma revista científica respeitada para divulgar suas descobertas para um público amplo […]

RESUMO Contexto A traqueobronquite associada ao ventilador é uma condição comum entre pacientes ventilados invasivamente em unidades de terapia intensiva, para a qual se desconhece atualmente a melhor estratégia de tratamento. Desenhamos o estudo VATICAN (Ventilator-Associated Tracheobronchitis Initiative to Conduct Antibiotic Evaluation) para avaliar se uma estratégia de tratamento antibiótico de espera vigilante não é inferior ao tratamento antibiótico de rotina para traqueobronquite associada ao ventilador em relação aos dias sem ventilador mecânico. Métodos O VATICAN é um estudo randomizado, controlado, aberto e multicêntrico de não inferioridade. Os pacientes com suspeita de traqueobronquite associada ao ventilador sem evidência de pneumonia associada ao ventilador ou instabilidade hemodinâmica devido a uma provável infecção serão designados para uma estratégia de espera vigilante, sem administração profilática de antimicrobianos contra traqueobronquite associada ao ventilador e prescrição de antimicrobianos somente em casos de pneumonia associada ao ventilador, sepse ou choque séptico, ou outro diagnóstico infeccioso, ou para uma estratégia de tratamento antimicrobiano de rotina por 7 dias. O desfecho primário será o número de dias sem ventilador mecânico em 28 dias, e um desfecho secundário importante será a sobrevida sem pneumonia associada ao ventilador. Por meio de uma estrutura de intenção de tratar com análise de sensibilidade por protocolo, a análise do desfecho primário abordará a não inferioridade com margem de 20%, o que se traduz em uma diferença de 1,5 dia sem ventilador. Outras análises seguirão uma estrutura de análise de superioridade. Conclusão O VATICAN seguirá todos os padrões éticos nacionais e internacionais. O objetivo é publicar o estudo em um periódico geral de alta visibilidade e apresentá-lo em conferências de cuidados intensivos e doenças infecciosas para divulgação. Estes resultados provavelmente serão imediatamente aplicáveis à beira do leito após a conclusão do estudo e fornecerão informações com baixo risco de viés para o desenvolvimento de diretrizes.

ABSTRACT Passive acoustic monitoring (PAM) has become increasingly popular in monitoring biodiversity. It produces large amounts of data and can provide a foundation for understanding the long-term consequences of environmental degradation. However, extracting biological information from such extensive datasets can be challenging and requires advanced computational skills. Herein, we introduce a streamlined workflow for detecting acoustic signals of three critically endangered birds: Cherry-throated Tanager (Nemosia rourei), Alagoas Antwren (Myrmotherula snowi), and Blue-eyed Ground-dove (Columbina cyanopis). As these species are among the world’s most endangered birds, locating new populations is a top priority. We chose potential templates based on the acoustic parameters of the vocal repertoire and evaluated their performance using soundscapes with known composition (gold standard data). To evaluate the efficiency of the templates, we used precision and recall metrics and found that achieving high precision rates comes at the cost of recall rates. Although we used gold standard data to calibrate our algorithm, large-scale validations have revealed the limitations as some templates have exhibited significantly lower precision values. The use of binomial models helped reset precision values to 90%. Our workflow can process large amounts of data efficiently, helping to monitor populations of these critically endangered species, locate new populations and evaluate population dynamics.

RationaleRecent reports suggest that patients with severe coronavirus disease (COVID-19) often experience long-term consequences of the infection. However, studies on intensive care unit (ICU) survivors are underrepresented.ObjectivesWe aimed to explore 12-month clinical outcomes after critical COVID-19, describing the longitudinal progress of disabilities, frailty status, frequency of cognitive impairment, and clinical events (rehospitalization, institutionalization, and falls).MethodsWe performed a prospective cohort study of survivors of COVID-19 ICU admissions in Sao Paulo, Brazil. We assessed patients every 3 months for 1 year after hospital discharge and obtained information on 15 activities of daily living (basic, instrumental, and mobility activities), frailty, cognition, and clinical events.ResultsWe included 428 patients (mean age of 64 yr, 61% required invasive mechanical ventilation during ICU stay). The number of disabilities peaked at 3 months compared with the pre–COVID-19 period (mean difference, 2.46; 99% confidence interval, 1.94–2.99) and then decreased at 12 months (mean difference, 0.67; 99% confidence interval, 0.28–1.07). At 12-month follow-up, 12% of patients were frail, but half of them presented frailty only after COVID-19. The prevalence of cognitive symptoms was 17% at 3 months and progressively decreased to 12.1% (P = 0.012 for trend) at the end of 1 year. Clinical events occurred in all assessments.ConclusionsAlthough a higher burden of disabilities and cognitive symptoms occurred 3 months after hospital discharge of critical COVID-19 survivors, a significant improvement occurred during the 1-year follow-up. However, one-third of the patients remained in worse conditions than their pre–COVID-19 status.

BackgroundUp to 30% of hospitalised patients with COVID-19 require advanced respiratory support, including high-flow nasal cannulas (HFNC), non-invasive mechanical ventilation (NIV), or invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). We aimed to describe the clinical characteristics, outcomes and risk factors for failing non-invasive respiratory support in patients treated with severe COVID-19 during the first two years of the pandemic in high-income countries (HICs) and low middle-income countries (LMICs).MethodsThis is a multinational, multicentre, prospective cohort study embedded in the ISARIC-WHO COVID-19 Clinical Characterisation Protocol. Patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection who required hospital admission were recruited prospectively. Patients treated with HFNC, NIV, or IMV within the first 24 h of hospital admission were included in this study. Descriptive statistics, random forest, and logistic regression analyses were used to describe clinical characteristics and compare clinical outcomes among patients treated with the different types of advanced respiratory support.ResultsA total of 66,565 patients were included in this study. Overall, 82.6% of patients were treated in HIC, and 40.6% were admitted to the hospital during the first pandemic wave. During the first 24 h after hospital admission, patients in HICs were more frequently treated with HFNC (48.0%), followed by NIV (38.6%) and IMV (13.4%). In contrast, patients admitted in lower- and middle-income countries (LMICs) were less frequently treated with HFNC (16.1%) and the majority received IMV (59.1%). The failure rate of non-invasive respiratory support (i.e. HFNC or NIV) was 15.5%, of which 71.2% were from HIC and 28.8% from LMIC. The variables most strongly associated with non-invasive ventilation failure, defined as progression to IMV, were high leukocyte counts at hospital admission (OR [95%CI]; 5.86 [4.83–7.10]), treatment in an LMIC (OR [95%CI]; 2.04 [1.97–2.11]), and tachypnoea at hospital admission (OR [95%CI]; 1.16 [1.14–1.18]). Patients who failed HFNC/NIV had a higher 28-day fatality ratio (OR [95%CI]; 1.27 [1.25–1.30]).ConclusionsIn the present international cohort, the most frequently used advanced respiratory support was the HFNC. However, IMV was used more often in LMIC. Higher leucocyte count, tachypnoea, and treatment in LMIC were risk factors for HFNC/NIV failure. HFNC/NIV failure was related to worse clinical outcomes, such as 28-day mortality.Trial registration This is a prospective observational study; therefore, no health care interventions were applied to participants, and trial registration is not applicable.