Arnaud Delahaye

Induced Hypothermia in Severe Bacterial Meningitis: A Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE Despite advances in care, mortality and morbidity remain high in adults with acute bacterial meningitis, particularly when due to Streptococcus pneumoniae. Induced hypothermia is beneficial in other conditions with global cerebral hypoxia. OBJECTIVE To test the hypothesis that induced hypothermia improves outcome in patients with severe bacterial meningitis. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS An open-label, multicenter, randomized clinical trial in 49 intensive care units in France, February 2009-November 2011. In total, 130 patients were assessed for eligibility and 98 comatose adults (Glasgow Coma Scale [GCS] score of ≤8 for <12 hours) with community-acquired bacterial meningitis were randomized. INTERVENTIONS Hypothermia group received a loading dose of 4°C cold saline and were cooled to 32°C to 34°C for 48 hours. The rewarming phase was passive. Controls received standard care. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Primary outcome measure was the Glasgow Outcome Scale score at 3 months (a score of 5 [favorable outcome] vs a score of 1-4 [unfavorable outcome]). All patients received appropriate antimicrobial therapy and vital support. Analyses were performed on an intention-to-treat basis. The data and safety monitoring board (DSMB) reviewed severe adverse events and mortality rate every 50 enrolled patients. RESULTS After inclusion of 98 comatose patients, the trial was stopped early at the request of the DSMB because of concerns over excess mortality in the hypothermia group (25 of 49 patients [51%]) vs the control group (15 of 49 patients [31%]; relative risk [RR], 1.99; 95% CI, 1.05-3.77; P = .04). Pneumococcal meningitis was diagnosed in 77% of patients. Mean (SD) temperatures achieved 24 hours after randomization were 33.3°C (0.9°C) and 37.0°C (0.9°C) in the hypothermia and control group, respectively. At 3 months, 86% in the hypothermia group compared with 74% of controls had an unfavorable outcome (RR, 2.17; 95% CI, 0.78-6.01; P = .13). After adjustment for age, score on GCS at inclusion, and the presence of septic shock at inclusion, mortality remained higher, although not significantly, in the hypothermia group (hazard ratio, 1.76; 95% CI, 0.89-3.45; P = .10). Subgroup analysis on patients with pneumococcal meningitis showed similar results. Post hoc analysis showed a low probability to reach statistically significant difference in favor of hypothermia at the end of the 3 planned sequential analyses (probability to conclude in favor of futility, 0.977). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Moderate hypothermia did not improve outcome in patients with severe bacterial meningitis and may even be harmful. Careful evaluation of safety issues in future trials on hypothermia are needed and may have important implications in patients presenting with septic shock or stroke. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00774631.

Endovascular Versus External Targeted Temperature Management for Patients With Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest A Randomized, Controlled Study

Background— Targeted temperature management is recommended after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Whether advanced internal cooling is superior to basic external cooling remains unknown. The aim of this multicenter, controlled trial was to evaluate the benefit of endovascular versus basic surface cooling. Methods and Results— Inclusion criteria were the following: age of 18 to 79 years, out-of-hospital cardiac arrest related to a presumed cardiac cause, time to return of spontaneous circulation <60 minutes, delay between return of spontaneous circulation and inclusion <240 minutes, and unconscious patient after return of spontaneous circulation and before the start of cooling. Exclusion criteria were terminal disease, pregnancy, known coagulopathy, uncontrolled bleeding, temperature on admission <30°C, in-hospital cardiac arrest, immediate need for extracorporeal life support or hemodialysis. Patients were randomized between 2 cooling strategies: endovascular femoral devices (Icy catheter, Coolgard, Zoll, formerly Alsius; n=203) or basic external cooling using fans, a homemade tent, and ice packs (n=197). The primary end point, that is, favorable outcome evaluated by survival without major neurological damage (Cerebral Performance Categories 1–2) at day 28, was not significantly different between groups (odds ratio, 1.41; 95% confidence interval, 0.93–2.16; P=0.107). Improvement in favorable outcome at day 90 in favor of the endovascular group did not reach significance (odds ratio, 1.51; 95% confidence interval, 0.96–2.35; P=0.07). Time to target temperature (33°C) was significantly shorter and target hypothermia was more strictly maintained in the endovascular than in the surface group (P<0.001). Minor side effects directly related to the cooling method were observed more frequently in the endovascular group (P=0.009). Conclusion— Despite better hypothermia induction and maintenance, endovascular cooling was not significantly superior to basic external cooling in terms of favorable outcome. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00392639.

Endovascular versus External Targeted Temperature Management for Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Patients: A Randomized Controlled Study

Background— Targeted temperature management is recommended after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Whether advanced internal cooling is superior to basic external cooling remains unknown. The aim of this multicenter, controlled trial was to evaluate the benefit of endovascular versus basic surface cooling. Methods and Results— Inclusion criteria were the following: age of 18 to 79 years, out-of-hospital cardiac arrest related to a presumed cardiac cause, time to return of spontaneous circulation <60 minutes, delay between return of spontaneous circulation and inclusion <240 minutes, and unconscious patient after return of spontaneous circulation and before the start of cooling. Exclusion criteria were terminal disease, pregnancy, known coagulopathy, uncontrolled bleeding, temperature on admission <30°C, in-hospital cardiac arrest, immediate need for extracorporeal life support or hemodialysis. Patients were randomized between 2 cooling strategies: endovascular femoral devices (Icy catheter, Coolgard, Zoll, formerly Alsius; n=203) or basic external cooling using fans, a homemade tent, and ice packs (n=197). The primary end point, that is, favorable outcome evaluated by survival without major neurological damage (Cerebral Performance Categories 1–2) at day 28, was not significantly different between groups (odds ratio, 1.41; 95% confidence interval, 0.93–2.16; P=0.107). Improvement in favorable outcome at day 90 in favor of the endovascular group did not reach significance (odds ratio, 1.51; 95% confidence interval, 0.96–2.35; P=0.07). Time to target temperature (33°C) was significantly shorter and target hypothermia was more strictly maintained in the endovascular than in the surface group (P<0.001). Minor side effects directly related to the cooling method were observed more frequently in the endovascular group (P=0.009). Conclusion— Despite better hypothermia induction and maintenance, endovascular cooling was not significantly superior to basic external cooling in terms of favorable outcome. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00392639.

Response to Letter Regarding Article, "Endovascular Versus External Targeted Temperature Management for Patients With Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: A Randomized, Controlled Study".

We thank Dr Yan Kang and colleagues for their comments assuming that endovascular cooling may theoretically present more advantages than surface cooling. We agree with this assertion as we consider that automated devices control like endovascular cooling allow significant shortening in time-to-target temperature, better controlled maintenance and rewarming phases, and improvement in intensive care unit nurses’ workload as described in our trial.1 However, as reported in several studies, it is not clear whether reaching the targeted temperature more quickly may result in a better prognosis in post–cardiac arrest patients. Although demonstrated by most of animal studies,2 several clinical studies failed to prove any relationship between time-to-target temperature and final outcome.3 In contrast, studies even observed that the lower the time-to-target temperature, the worse the prognosis could be, suggesting that the more the brain is damaged, the more the thermoregulation is impaired leading to lower core temperature on admission.4 This …

Emphysematous gastritis: a rare cause of septic shock

A 84-year-old man was admitted to our ward for septic shock. An abdominal computed tomography (CT) scan revealed unexpected emphysematous gastritis with air in the portal venous system without any signs of pneumoperitoneum or peritoneal effusion. The upper endoscopy revealed only gastritis in the fundus. A medical treatment was decided upon in which the surgeon used fluid loading, norepinephrine and probabilistic antibiotic. A control CT scan on day 4 did not show any air except in a small portion of the portal system. No microbiologic documentation could be confirmed. Complete cure was fast, enabling the patient to be quickly transferred out of the intensive care unit and discharged from the hospital (Fig. 1).