Sepsis mortality is reported to be high worldwide, however recently the attributable fraction of mortality due to sepsis (AFsepsis) has been questioned. If improvements in treatment options are to be evaluated, it is important to know what proportion of deaths are potentially preventable or modifiable after a sepsis episode. The aim of the study was to establish the fraction of deaths directly related to the sepsis episode on the general wards and emergency departments. 839 patients were recruited over the two 24-h periods in 2016 and 2017. 521 patients fulfilled SEPSIS-3 criteria. 166 patients (32.4%) with sepsis and 56 patients (17.6%) without sepsis died within 90 days. Out of the 166 sepsis deaths 12 (7.2%) could have been directly related to sepsis, 28 (16.9%) possibly related and 96 (57.8%) were not related to sepsis. Overall AFsepsis was 24.1%. Upon analysis of the 40 deaths likely to be attributable to sepsis, we found that 31 patients (77.5%) had the Clinical Frailty Score ≥ 6, 28 (70%) had existing DNA-CPR order and 17 had limitations of care orders (42.5%).
Background: We aimed to identify the prevalence of acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure (AHRF) in the intensive care unit (ICU) and its associated mortality. The secondary aim was to describe ventilatory management as well as the use of rescue therapies. Methods: Multi-centre prospective study in nine hospitals in Wales, UK, over 2-month periods. All patients admitted to an ICU were screened for AHRF and followed-up until discharge from the ICU. Data were collected from patient charts on patient demographics, clinical characteristics, management and outcomes. Results: Out of 2215 critical care admissions, 886 patients received mechanical ventilation. A total of 197 patients met inclusion criteria and were recruited. Seventy (35.5%) were non-survivors. Non-survivors were significantly older, had higher SOFA scores and received more vasopressor support than survivors. Twenty-five (12.7%) patients who fulfilled the Berlin definition of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) during the ICU stay without impact on overall survival. Rescue therapies were rarely used. Analysis of ventilation showed that median Vt was 7.1 mL/kg PBW (IQR 5.9–9.1) and 21.3% of patients had optimal ventilation during their ICU stay. Conclusions: One in four mechanically ventilated patients have AHRF. Despite advances of care and better, but not optimal, utilisation of low tidal volume ventilation, mortality remains high.
Recent description of the microbiology of sepsis on the wards or information on the real-life antibiotic choices used in sepsis is lacking. There is growing concern of the indiscriminate use of antibiotics and omission of microbiological investigations in the management of septic patients. We performed a secondary analysis of three annual 24-h point-prevalence studies on the general wards across all Welsh acute hospitals in years 2016–2018. Data were collected on patient demographics, as well as radiological, laboratory and microbiological data within 48-h of the study. We screened 19,453 patients over the three 24 h study periods and recruited 1252 patients who fulfilled the entry criteria. 775 (64.9%) patients were treated with intravenous antibiotics. Only in 33.65% (421/1252) of all recruited patients did healthcare providers obtain blood cultures; in 25.64% (321/1252) urine cultures; in 8.63% (108/1252) sputum cultures; in 6.79% (85/1252) wound cultures; in 15.25% (191/1252) other cultures. Out of the recruited patients, 59.1% (740/1252) fulfilled SEPSIS-3 criteria. Patients with SEPSIS-3 criteria were significantly more likely to receive antibiotics than the non-septic cohort (p < 0.0001). In a multivariable regression analysis increase in SOFA score, increased number of SIRS criteria and the use of the official sepsis screening tool were associated with antibiotic administration, however obtaining microbiology cultures was not. Our study shows that antibiotics prescription practice is not accompanied by microbiological investigations. A significant proportion of sepsis patients are still at risk of not receiving appropriate antibiotics treatment and microbiological investigations; this may be improved by a more thorough implementation of sepsis screening tools.
Summary: We conducted a prospective observational service evaluation across the United Kingdom on the use of total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) for obstetric surgery between November 2022 and June 2023. The primary aim was to describe the incidence of TIVA for obstetric surgery within participating units, with secondary aims to describe maternal and neonatal postoperative recovery indicators. Of 184 maternity units in the United Kingdom, 30 (16%) contributed data to the service evaluation. There were 104 patients who underwent caesarean delivery under TIVA and 19 patients had TIVA for other reasons. Infusions of propofol and remifentanil were used in 100% and 84% of cases, respectively. Fifty‐nine out of 103 live neonates (57%) required some form of respiratory support. Of the neonates with recorded data, 73% and 17% had Apgar scores < 7 at 1 and 5 min respectively. No neonates were recorded to have Apgar scores < 7 at 10 min. Further prospective research is required to investigate the impact of obstetric TIVA on maternal and neonatal outcomes and inform best practice recommendations.
Summary: Introduction: Cancer complicates approximately 1 in 2000 pregnancies, with increasing incidence due to factors such as increased maternal age, obesity and advancements in antenatal testing. Anaesthetists play a crucial role in managing pregnant patients with cancer, both during delivery and in providing anaesthesia for oncological treatments. This review explores the challenges in anaesthetic management and specific considerations for common cancers encountered in pregnant patients. Methods: An electronic literature search was carried out using PubMed and Google Scholar to identify peer‐reviewed articles published in English from 1 January 1990 to 30 July 2024. Results: Two main areas were identified: anaesthetic management related to pregnancy and the peripartum period in patients with cancer; and oncological management during pregnancy. Current data suggest that pregnancy does not worsen cancer prognosis, but diagnosis and treatment are complicated by the overlap of cancer symptoms with physiological changes of pregnancy and concerns about the safety of diagnostic procedures and treatments. Ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging are preferred imaging modalities, while careful use of ionising radiation is advised. Treatment during pregnancy, including surgery, chemotherapy and radiotherapy is possible, with specific timing and modality considerations to ensure maternal and fetal safety. Anaemia, poor nutrition and preterm birth are significant concerns in managing pregnant patients with cancer. For operative births, neuraxial techniques are preferred, though general anaesthesia may be required in complex cases. Comprehensive multidisciplinary support, including psychosocial care, is essential for optimal outcomes. Oncological surgery during pregnancy should preferably be scheduled for the second trimester, with consideration for fetal monitoring and steroids. Regional anaesthesia should be utilised if possible and uteroplacental perfusion maintained. Increased risks of thromboembolism should be addressed postoperatively, along with psychological support. Discussion: Effective and safe anaesthetic management of cancer in pregnancy requires a multidisciplinary approach to balance maternal and fetal safety, with a focus on careful planning and individualised care.