The identification of anaerobic metabolism in critically ill patients is a challenging task. Observational studies have suggested that the ratio of venoarterial PCO2 (Pv–aCO2) to arteriovenous oxygen content difference (Ca–vO2) might be a good surrogate for respiratory quotient (RQ). Yet Pv–aCO2/Ca–vO2 might be increased by other factors, regardless of anaerobic metabolism. At present, comparisons between Pv–aCO2/Ca–vO2 and RQ have not been performed. We sought to compare these variables during stepwise hemorrhage and hemodilution. Since anemia predictably produces augmented Pv–aCO2 and decreased Ca–vO2, our hypothesis was that Pv–aCO2/Ca–vO2 might be an inadequate surrogate for RQ. This is a subanalysis of a previously published study. In anesthetized and mechanically ventilated sheep (n = 16), we compared the effects of progressive hemodilution and hemorrhage by means of expired gases analysis. There were comparable reductions in oxygen consumption and increases in RQ in the last step of hemodilution and hemorrhage. The increase in Pv–aCO2/Ca–vO2 was higher in hemodilution than in hemorrhage (1.9 ± 0.2 to 10.0 ± 0.9 vs. 1.7 ± 0.2 to 2.5 ± 0.1, P < 0.0001). The increase in Pv–aCO2 was lower in hemodilution (6 ± 0 to 10 ± 1 vs. 6 ± 0 to 17 ± 1 mmHg, P < 0.0001). Venoarterial CO2 content difference and Ca–vO2 decreased in hemodilution and increased in hemorrhage (2.6 ± 0.3 to 1.2 ± 0.1 vs. 2.8 ± 0.2 to 6.9 ± 0.5, and 3.4 ± 0.3 to 1.0 ± 0.3 vs. 3.6 ± 0.3 to 6.8 ± 0.3 mL/dL, P < 0.0001 for both). In hemodilution, Pv–aCO2/Ca–vO2 increased before the fall in oxygen consumption and the increase in RQ. Pv–aCO2/Ca–vO2 was strongly correlated with Hb (R 2 = 0.79, P < 0.00001) and moderately with RQ (R 2 = 0.41, P < 0.0001). A multiple linear regression model found Hb, RQ, base excess, and mixed venous oxygen saturation and PCO2 as Pv–aCO2/Ca–vO2 determinants (adjusted R 2 = 0.86, P < 0.000001). In hemodilution, Pv–aCO2/Ca–vO2 was considerably increased, irrespective of the presence of anaerobic metabolism. Pv–aCO2/Ca–vO2 is a complex variable, which depends on several factors. As such, it was a misleading indicator of anaerobic metabolism in hemodilution.

Socioeconomic variables impact health outcomes but have rarely been evaluated in critical illness. Low- and middle-income countries bear the highest burden of sepsis and also have significant health inequities. In Argentina, public hospitals serve the poorest segment of the population, while private institutions serve patients with health coverage. Our objective was to analyze differences in mortality between public and private hospitals, using Sepsis-3 definitions. This is a multicenter, prospective cohort study including patients with sepsis admitted to 49 Argentine ICUs lasting 3 months, beginning on July 1, 2016. Epidemiological, clinical, and socioeconomic status variables and hospital characteristics were compared between patients admitted to both types of institutions. Of the 809 patients included, 367 (45%) and 442 (55%) were admitted to public and private hospitals, respectively. Those in public institutions were younger (56 ± 18 vs. 64 ± 18; p < 0.01), with more comorbidities (Charlson score 2 [0–4] vs. 1 [0–3]; p < 0.01), fewer education years (7 [7–12] vs. 12 [10–16]; p < 0.01), more frequently unemployed/informally employed (30% vs. 7%; p < 0.01), had similar previous self-rated health status (70 [50–90] vs. 70 [50–90] points; p = 0.30), longer pre-admission symptoms (48 [24–96] vs. 24 [12–48] h; p < 0.01), had been previously evaluated more frequently in any healthcare venue (28 vs. 20%; p < 0.01), and had higher APACHE II, SOFA, lactate levels, and mechanical ventilation utilization. ICU admission as septic shock was more frequent in patients admitted to public hospitals (47 vs. 35%; p < 0.01), as were infections caused by multiresistant microorganisms. Sepsis management in the ICU showed no differences. Twenty-eight-day mortality was higher in public hospitals (42% vs. 24%; p < 0.01) as was hospital mortality (47% vs. 30%; p < 0.01). Admission to a public hospital was an independent predictor of mortality together with comorbidities, lactate, SOFA, and mechanical ventilation; in an alternative prediction model, it acted as a correlate of pre-hospital symptom duration and infections caused by multiresistant microorganisms. Patients in public hospitals belonged to a socially disadvantaged group and were sicker at admission, had septic shock more frequently, and had higher mortality. Unawareness of disease severity and delays in the health system might be associated with late admission. This marked difference in outcome between patients served by public and private institutions constitutes a state of health inequity.

Intensive care medicine is a relatively young discipline that has rapidly grown into a full-fledged medical subspecialty. Intensivists are responsible for managing an ever-increasing number of patients with complex, life-threatening diseases. Several factors may influence their performance, including age, training, experience, workload, and socioeconomic context. The aim of this study was to examine individual- and work-related aspects of the Latin American intensivist workforce, mainly with academic appointments, which might influence the quality of care provided. In consequence, we conducted a cross-sectional study of intensivists at public and private academic and nonacademic Latin American intensive care units (ICUs) through a web-based electronic survey submitted by email. Questions about personal aspects, work-related topics, and general clinical workflow were incorporated. Our study comprised 735 survey respondents (53% return rate) with the following country-specific breakdown: Brazil (29%); Argentina (19%); Chile (17%); Uruguay (12%); Ecuador (9%); Mexico (7%); Colombia (5%); and Bolivia, Peru, Guatemala, and Paraguay combined (2%). Latin American intensivists were predominantly male (68%) young adults (median age, 40 [IQR, 35–48] years) with a median clinical ICU experience of 10 (IQR, 5–20) years. The median weekly workload was 60 (IQR, 47–70) h. ICU formal training was between 2 and 4 years. Only 63% of academic ICUs performed multidisciplinary rounds. Most intensivists (85%) reported adequate conditions to manage patients with septic shock in their units. Unsatisfactory conditions were attributed to insufficient technology (11%), laboratory support (5%), imaging resources (5%), and drug shortages (5%). Seventy percent of intensivists participated in research, and 54% read scientific studies regularly, whereas 32% read no more than one scientific study per month. Research grants and pharmaceutical sponsorship are unusual funding sources in Latin America. Although Latin American intensivists are mostly unsatisfied with their income (81%), only a minority (27%) considered changing to another specialty before retirement. Latin American intensivists constitute a predominantly young adult workforce, mostly formally trained, have a high workload, and most are interested in research. They are under important limitations owing to resource constraints and overt dissatisfaction. Latin America may be representative of other world areas with similar challenges for intensivists. Specific initiatives aimed at addressing these situations need to be devised to improve the quality of critical care delivery in Latin America.