Cargando…

The distinct clinical profile of chronically critically ill patients: a cohort study

INTRODUCTION: Our goal was to describe the epidemiology, clinical profiles, outcomes, and factors that might predict progression of critically ill patients to chronically critically ill (CCI) patients, a still poorly characterized subgroup. METHODS: We prospectively studied all patients admitted to...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Estenssoro, Elisa, Reina, Rosa, Canales, Héctor S, Saenz, María Gabriela, Gonzalez, Francisco E, Aprea, María M, Laffaire, Enrique, Gola, Victor, Dubin, Arnaldo
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2006
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1550940/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16784546
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cc4941
_version_ 1782129309025042432
author Estenssoro, Elisa
Reina, Rosa
Canales, Héctor S
Saenz, María Gabriela
Gonzalez, Francisco E
Aprea, María M
Laffaire, Enrique
Gola, Victor
Dubin, Arnaldo
author_facet Estenssoro, Elisa
Reina, Rosa
Canales, Héctor S
Saenz, María Gabriela
Gonzalez, Francisco E
Aprea, María M
Laffaire, Enrique
Gola, Victor
Dubin, Arnaldo
author_sort Estenssoro, Elisa
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Our goal was to describe the epidemiology, clinical profiles, outcomes, and factors that might predict progression of critically ill patients to chronically critically ill (CCI) patients, a still poorly characterized subgroup. METHODS: We prospectively studied all patients admitted to a university-affiliated hospital intensive care unit (ICU) between 1 July 2002 and 30 June 2005. On admission, we recorded epidemiological data, the presence of organ failure (multiorgan dysfunction syndrome (MODS)), underlying diseases (McCabe score), acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and shock. Daily, we recorded MODS, ARDS, shock, mechanical ventilation use, lengths of ICU and hospital stay (LOS), and outcome. CCI patients were defined as those having a tracheotomy placed for continued ventilation. Clinical complications and time to tracheal decannulation were registered. Predictors of progression to CCI were identified by logistic regression. RESULTS: Ninety-five patients (12%) fulfilled the CCI definition and, compared with the remaining 690 patients, these CCI patients were sicker (APACHE II, 21 ± 7 versus 18 ± 9 for non-CCI patients, p = 0.005); had more organ dysfunctions (SOFA 7 ± 3 versus 6 ± 4, p < 0.003); received more interventions (TISS 32 ± 10 versus 26 ± 8, p < 0.0001); and had less underlying diseases and had undergone emergency surgery more frequently (43 versus 24%, p = 0.001). ARDS and shock were present in 84% and 83% of CCI patients, respectively, versus 44% and 48% in the other patients (p < 0.0001 for both). CCI patients had higher expected mortality (38% versus 32%, p = 0.003), but observed mortality was similar (32% versus 35%, p = 0.59). Independent predictors of progression to CCI were ARDS on admission, APACHE II and McCabe scores (odds ratio (OR) 2.26, p < 0.001; OR 1.03, p < 0.01; and OR 0.34, p < 0.0001, respectively). Lengths of mechanical ventilation, ICU and hospital stay were 33 (24 to 50), 39 (29 to 55) and 55 (37 to 84) days, respectively. Tracheal decannulation was achieved at 40 ± 19 days. CONCLUSION: CCI patients were a severely ill population, in which ARDS, shock, and MODS were frequent on admission, and who suffered recurrent complications during their stay. However, their prognosis was equivalent to that of the other ICU patients. ARDS, APACHE II and McCabe scores were independent predictors of evolution to chronicity.
format Text
id pubmed-1550940
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2006
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-15509402006-08-22 The distinct clinical profile of chronically critically ill patients: a cohort study Estenssoro, Elisa Reina, Rosa Canales, Héctor S Saenz, María Gabriela Gonzalez, Francisco E Aprea, María M Laffaire, Enrique Gola, Victor Dubin, Arnaldo Crit Care Research INTRODUCTION: Our goal was to describe the epidemiology, clinical profiles, outcomes, and factors that might predict progression of critically ill patients to chronically critically ill (CCI) patients, a still poorly characterized subgroup. METHODS: We prospectively studied all patients admitted to a university-affiliated hospital intensive care unit (ICU) between 1 July 2002 and 30 June 2005. On admission, we recorded epidemiological data, the presence of organ failure (multiorgan dysfunction syndrome (MODS)), underlying diseases (McCabe score), acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and shock. Daily, we recorded MODS, ARDS, shock, mechanical ventilation use, lengths of ICU and hospital stay (LOS), and outcome. CCI patients were defined as those having a tracheotomy placed for continued ventilation. Clinical complications and time to tracheal decannulation were registered. Predictors of progression to CCI were identified by logistic regression. RESULTS: Ninety-five patients (12%) fulfilled the CCI definition and, compared with the remaining 690 patients, these CCI patients were sicker (APACHE II, 21 ± 7 versus 18 ± 9 for non-CCI patients, p = 0.005); had more organ dysfunctions (SOFA 7 ± 3 versus 6 ± 4, p < 0.003); received more interventions (TISS 32 ± 10 versus 26 ± 8, p < 0.0001); and had less underlying diseases and had undergone emergency surgery more frequently (43 versus 24%, p = 0.001). ARDS and shock were present in 84% and 83% of CCI patients, respectively, versus 44% and 48% in the other patients (p < 0.0001 for both). CCI patients had higher expected mortality (38% versus 32%, p = 0.003), but observed mortality was similar (32% versus 35%, p = 0.59). Independent predictors of progression to CCI were ARDS on admission, APACHE II and McCabe scores (odds ratio (OR) 2.26, p < 0.001; OR 1.03, p < 0.01; and OR 0.34, p < 0.0001, respectively). Lengths of mechanical ventilation, ICU and hospital stay were 33 (24 to 50), 39 (29 to 55) and 55 (37 to 84) days, respectively. Tracheal decannulation was achieved at 40 ± 19 days. CONCLUSION: CCI patients were a severely ill population, in which ARDS, shock, and MODS were frequent on admission, and who suffered recurrent complications during their stay. However, their prognosis was equivalent to that of the other ICU patients. ARDS, APACHE II and McCabe scores were independent predictors of evolution to chronicity. BioMed Central 2006 2006-06-19 /pmc/articles/PMC1550940/ /pubmed/16784546 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cc4941 Text en Copyright © 2006 Estenssoro et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research
Estenssoro, Elisa
Reina, Rosa
Canales, Héctor S
Saenz, María Gabriela
Gonzalez, Francisco E
Aprea, María M
Laffaire, Enrique
Gola, Victor
Dubin, Arnaldo
The distinct clinical profile of chronically critically ill patients: a cohort study
title The distinct clinical profile of chronically critically ill patients: a cohort study
title_full The distinct clinical profile of chronically critically ill patients: a cohort study
title_fullStr The distinct clinical profile of chronically critically ill patients: a cohort study
title_full_unstemmed The distinct clinical profile of chronically critically ill patients: a cohort study
title_short The distinct clinical profile of chronically critically ill patients: a cohort study
title_sort distinct clinical profile of chronically critically ill patients: a cohort study
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1550940/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16784546
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cc4941
work_keys_str_mv AT estenssoroelisa thedistinctclinicalprofileofchronicallycriticallyillpatientsacohortstudy
AT reinarosa thedistinctclinicalprofileofchronicallycriticallyillpatientsacohortstudy
AT canaleshectors thedistinctclinicalprofileofchronicallycriticallyillpatientsacohortstudy
AT saenzmariagabriela thedistinctclinicalprofileofchronicallycriticallyillpatientsacohortstudy
AT gonzalezfranciscoe thedistinctclinicalprofileofchronicallycriticallyillpatientsacohortstudy
AT apreamariam thedistinctclinicalprofileofchronicallycriticallyillpatientsacohortstudy
AT laffaireenrique thedistinctclinicalprofileofchronicallycriticallyillpatientsacohortstudy
AT golavictor thedistinctclinicalprofileofchronicallycriticallyillpatientsacohortstudy
AT dubinarnaldo thedistinctclinicalprofileofchronicallycriticallyillpatientsacohortstudy
AT estenssoroelisa distinctclinicalprofileofchronicallycriticallyillpatientsacohortstudy
AT reinarosa distinctclinicalprofileofchronicallycriticallyillpatientsacohortstudy
AT canaleshectors distinctclinicalprofileofchronicallycriticallyillpatientsacohortstudy
AT saenzmariagabriela distinctclinicalprofileofchronicallycriticallyillpatientsacohortstudy
AT gonzalezfranciscoe distinctclinicalprofileofchronicallycriticallyillpatientsacohortstudy
AT apreamariam distinctclinicalprofileofchronicallycriticallyillpatientsacohortstudy
AT laffaireenrique distinctclinicalprofileofchronicallycriticallyillpatientsacohortstudy
AT golavictor distinctclinicalprofileofchronicallycriticallyillpatientsacohortstudy
AT dubinarnaldo distinctclinicalprofileofchronicallycriticallyillpatientsacohortstudy