Modulating body temperature, mostly through the use of antipyretics, is a commonly employed therapeutic intervention in medical practice. However, emerging evidence suggests that hyperthermia could serve as an adjuvant therapy for patients with infection. We performed a narrative review to explore the application of therapeutic hyperthermia in the treatment of infection. A number of studies have been performed in the pre-antibiotic era, enrolling patients with neurosyphilis and gonococcal infections, with reported cure rates at around 60%–80%. We have outlined the potential molecular and immunological mechanisms explaining the possible beneficial effects of therapeutic hyperthermia. For some pathogens increased temperature exerts a direct negative effect on virulence; however, it is presumed that temperature driven activation of the immune system is probably the most important factor affecting microbial viability. Lastly, we performed a review of modern-era studies where modulation of body temperature has been used as a treatment strategy. In trials of therapeutic hypothermia in patients with infection worse outcomes have been observed in the hypothermia group. Use of antipyretics has not been associated with any improvement in clinical outcomes. In modern-era therapeutic hyperthermia achieved by physical warming has been studied in one pilot trial, and better survival was observed in the hyperthermia group. To conclude, currently there is not enough data to support the use of therapeutic hyperthermia outside clinical trials; however, available studies are in favor of at least a temperature tolerance strategy for non-neurocritical patients.

Introduction: The rapid use of an automated external defibrillator (AED) is crucial for increased survival after an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). Many factors could play a role in limiting the chance of an AED use. We aimed to verify the situation regarding AED legislation, the AED mapping system and first responders (FRs) equipped with an AED across European countries. Methods: We performed a survey across Europe entitled “European Study about AED Use by Lay Rescuers” (ENSURE), asking the national coordinators of the European Registry of Cardiac Arrest (EuReCa) program to complete it. Results: Nineteen European countries replied to the survey request for a population covering 128,297,955 inhabitants. The results revealed that every citizen can use an AED in 15 countries whereas a training certificate was required in three countries. In one country, only EMS personnel were allowed to use an AED. An AED mapping system and FRs equipped with an AED were available in only 11 countries. The AED use rate was 12–59% where AED mapping and FR systems were implemented, which was considerably higher than in other countries (0–7.9%), reflecting the difference in OHCA survival. Conclusions: Our survey highlighted a heterogeneity in AED legislation, AED mapping systems and AED use in Europe, which was reflected in different AED use and survival.

Background and Objectives: Survival with favorable neurologic outcomes after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) remains elusive. Post-cardiac arrest syndrome (PCAS) involves myocardial and neurological injury, ischemia-reperfusion response, and underlying pathology. Neurologic injury is a crucial determinant of survival and functional outcomes, with damage caused by free radicals among the responsible mechanisms. This study explores the feasibility of adding intravenous vitamin C to the treatment of OHCA survivors, aiming to mitigate PCAS. Vitamin C, a nutrient with antioxidative and free radical-scavenging properties, is often depleted in critically ill patients. Materials and Methods: This randomized, double-blinded trial was conducted at a tertiary-level university hospital with adult OHCA survivors. Participants received either standard care or the addition of 1.5 g of intravenous vitamin C every 12 h for eight consecutive doses. Neurologic injury was assessed using neuron-specific enolase (NSE) levels, with additional clinical and laboratory outcomes, such as enhanced neuroprognostication factors, inflammatory markers, and cardiac parameters. Results: NSE levels were non-significantly higher in patients who received vitamin C compared to the placebo group (55.05 µg/L [95% confidence interval (CI) 26.7–124.0] vs. 39.4 µg/L [95% CI 22.6–61.9], p > 0.05). Similarly, a non-significantly greater proportion of patients in the vitamin C group developed myoclonus in the first 72 h. We also observed a non-significantly shorter duration of mechanical ventilation, fewer arrhythmias, and reduced length of stay in the intensive care unit in the group of patients who received vitamin C (p = 0.031). However, caution is warranted in interpretation of our results due to the small number of participants. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that intravenous vitamin C should not be used outside of clinical trials for OHCA survivors. Due to the small sample size and conflicting results, further research is needed to determine the potential role of vitamin C in post-cardiac arrest care.

Background: Traditionally, patients who are critically ill with infection and fever have been treated with antipyretics or even physically cooled. Presumed benefits of the reduction of body temperature are mostly based on decreased metabolic demands. However, it has been shown that decreasing body temperature in patients who are critically ill is not associated with improvement in treatment outcomes. Additionally, there is some data to support the use of temperature modulation (therapeutic hyperthermia) as an adjuvant treatment strategy in patients with infection. Objective: This study aims to determine the effect of body temperature on the course of intensive care unit (ICU) treatment of patients who are mechanically ventilated with pneumonia, sepsis, and positive tracheal aspirates on admission. Methods: We performed a single-center retrospective study. Core body temperature was measured in all patients. We analyzed associations between average temperatures in the first 48 hours after admission to ICU and ICU treatment parameters. Additionally, patients were divided into three groups: patients with negative tracheal aspirates 1 week after ICU admission (P-N group), patients with a different pathogen in tracheal aspirates 1 week after ICU admission (P-HAP group), and patients with a persisting pathogen in tracheal aspirates 1 week after ICU admission (P-P group). Differences in body temperature and interventions aimed at temperature modulation were determined. Results: We observed a significantly higher average temperature in the first 48 hours after admission to ICU in patients who survived to hospital discharge compared to nonsurvivors (mean 37.2 °C, SD 1 °C vs mean 36.9 °C, SD 1.6 °C; P=.04). We observed no associations between average temperatures in the first 48 hours after ICU admission and days of mechanical ventilation in the first 7 days of treatment (ρ=–0.090; P=.30), the average maximum daily requirement for noradrenaline in the first 7 days of treatment (ρ=–0.029; P=.80), average maximum FiO2 in the first 7 days of ICU treatment (ρ=0.040; P=.70), and requirement for renal replacement therapy in the first 7 days of ICU treatment (mean 37.3 °C, SD 1.4 °C vs mean 37.0 °C, SD 1.3 °C; P=.23). In an additional analysis, we observed a significantly greater use of paracetamol in the P-N group (mean 1.0, SD 1.1 g vs mean 0.4, SD 0.7 g vs mean 0.4, SD 0.8 g; P=.009), a trend toward greater use of active cooling in the first 24 hours after ICU admission in the P-N group (n=11, 44% vs n=14, 33.3% vs n=16, 32%; P=.57), and no other significant differences in parameters of ICU treatment between patient groups. Conclusions: We observed better survival in patients who developed higher body temperatures in the first 48 hours after admission to the ICU; however, we observed no changes in other treatment parameters. Similarly, we observed greater use of paracetamol in patients with negative tracheal aspirates 1 week after ICU admission. Our results support the strategy of temperature tolerance in patients who are intubated with pneumonia and sepsis.

The need for temperature modulation (mostly cooling) in critically ill patients is based on the expected benefits associated with decreased metabolic demands. However, evidence-based guidelines for temperature management in a majority of critically ill patients with fever are still lacking. The aim of our retrospective single-site observational study was to determine the differences in ICU treatment between patients in whom their temperature remained within the target temperature range for ≥25% of time (inTT group) and patients in whom their temperature was outside the target temperature range for <24% of time (outTT group). We enrolled 76 patients undergoing invasive mechanical ventilation for respiratory failure associated with sepsis. We observed no significant differences in survival, mechanical ventilation settings and duration, vasopressor support, renal replacement therapy and other parameters of treatment. Patients in the inTT group were significantly more frequently cooled with the esophageal cooling device, received a significantly lower cumulative dose of acetaminophen and significantly more frequently developed a presence of multidrug-resistant pathogens. In our study, achieving a better temperature control was not associated with any improvement in treatment parameters during ICU stay. A lower prevalence of multidrug-resistant pathogens in patients with higher body temperatures opens a question of a pro-pyrexia approach with an aim to achieve better patient outcomes.