Monares‑Zepeda E, Chavarría‑Martínez U, Sánchez‑Díaz JS

Language: Spanish
References: 20
Page: 140-144
PDF size: 260.99 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Everything in medicine must be based and balanced on three pillars, the first is: a strong physiological principle; an explanation of what causes the pathological phenomenon that we are facing with which we find how this pathology can be reversed, the second pillar is an adequate statistical corroboration; a physiological principle may be true, but this does not imply that the outcome we seek (decrease in mortality) is the result of our interventions. The third pillar is a clinical protocol, which implies the most important part of all, working together. It is useless to believe that you know the truth, if that is the case, if you do not have the same goals in every shift, we run the risk of falling into the fallacy that «what I do is right and others are wrong», if we are not united in each shift of patient care we will never know what is best for the patient, we will only have a good pretext to affirm that the fault is never ours. During emerging crises you can work without statistics while it is being built, but never without physiology and unity (protocols), the physiological explanation given here is as accurate as possible, the protocol is an induction derived from said physiology, waiting to have Soon a statistic will tell us if what we do is useful or not. In conclusion, what the reader has in his hands are conjectures in search of refutations. At the time of writing this article the only correct answer is «We don’t know yet».

REFERENCES

1. Ruan Q, Yang K, Wang W, Jiang L, Song J. Clinical predictors of mortality due to COVID-19 based on an analysis of data of 150 patients from Wuhan, China [published online ahead of print, 2020 Mar 3]. Intensive Care Med. 2020; 1-3. doi: 10.1007/s00134-020-05991-x.

2. Ospina-Tascón GA, Bautista DF, Madriñán HJ, et al. Microcirculatory dysfunction and dead-space ventilation in early ARDS: a hypothesis-generating observational study. Ann Intensive Care. 2020; 10 (1): 35. Published 2020 Mar 24. doi: 10.1186/s13613-020-00651-1.

3. Claure-Del Granado R, Mehta RL. Fluid overload in the ICU: evaluation and management. BMC Nephrol. 2016; 17: 109. Published 2016 Aug 2. doi: 10.1186/s12882-016-0323-6.

4. Mehta P, McAuley DF, Brown M, et al. COVID-19: consider cytokine storm syndromes and immunosuppression. Lancet. 2020; 395: 1033-1034. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30628-0.

5. Zeng J, Huang J, Pan L. How to balance acute myocardial infarction and COVID-19: the protocols from Sichuan Provincial People’s Hospital [published online ahead of print, 2020 Mar 11]. Intensive Care Med. 2020; 1-3. doi: 10.1007/s00134-020-05993-9.

6. Shi S, Qin M, Shen B, et al. Association of cardiac injury with mortality in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 in Wuhan, China [published online ahead of print, 2020 Mar 25]. JAMA Cardiol. 2020; e200950. doi: 10.1001/jamacardio.2020.0950.

7. Schunkert H, Erbel R. Evidenzbasierte Primärprävention: Wo stehen wir im Jahr 2020? [Evidence-based primary prevention: where do we stand in 2020?]. Herz. 2020; 45: 1-2. doi: 10.1007/s00059-019-04889-9.

8. Sondergaard S. Pavane for a pulse pressure variation defunct. Crit Care. 2013; 17: 327. Published 2013 Nov 14. doi: 10.1186/cc13109.

9. Vieillard-Baron A, Chergui K, Augarde R, et al. Cyclic changes in arterial pulse during respiratory support revisited by Doppler echocardiography. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2003; 168: 671-676. doi: 10.1164/rccm.200301-135OC.

10. Grissom CK, Hirshberg EL, Dickerson JB, et al. Fluid management with a simplified conservative protocol for the acute respiratory distress syndrome*. Crit Care Med. 2015; 43: 288-295. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000000715.

11. Wilson JG, Calfee CS. ARDS subphenotypes: understanding a heterogeneous syndrome. Crit Care. 2020; 24: 102. Published 2020 Mar 24. doi: 10.1186/s13054-020-2778-x.

12. Famous KR, Delucchi K, Ware LB, et al. Acute respiratory distress syndrome subphenotypes respond differently to randomized fluid management strategy. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2017; 195: 331-338. doi: 10.1164/rccm.201603-0645OC.

13. Tourneux P, Rakza T, Bouissou A, Krim G, Storme L. Pulmonary circulatory effects of norepinephrine in newborn infants with persistent pulmonary hypertension. J Pediatr. 2008; 153: 345-349. doi: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2008.03.007.

14. Mizota T, Fujiwara K, Hamada M, Matsukawa S, Segawa H. Effect of arginine vasopressin on systemic and pulmonary arterial pressure in a patient with pulmonary hypertension secondary to pulmonary emphysema: a case report. JA Clin Rep. 2017;3: 1. doi: 10.1186/s40981-016-0072-3.

15. Mekontso Dessap A, Boissier F, Charron C, et al. Acute cor pulmonale during protective ventilation for acute respiratory distress syndrome: prevalence, predictors, and clinical impact. Intensive Care Med. 2016; 42: 862-870. doi: 10.1007/s00134-015-4141-2.

16. Repessé X, Vieillard-Baron A. Right heart function during acute respiratory distress syndrome. Ann Transl Med. 2017; 5: 295. doi: 10.21037/atm.2017.06.66.

17. Ferraris A, Bouisse C, Mottard N, et al. Mottling score and skin temperature in septic shock: Relation and impact on prognosis in ICU. PLoS One. 2018; 13: e0202329. Published 2018 Aug 16. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0202329.

18. Pickard A, Karlen W, Ansermino JM. Capillary refill time: is it still a useful clinical sign? Anesth Analg. 2011; 113: 120-123. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0b013e31821569f9.

19. Berridge JC. Influence of cardiac output on the correlation between mixed venous and central venous oxygen saturation. Br J Anaesth. 1992; 69: 409-410. doi: 10.1093/bja/69.4.409.

20. Mallat J, Lemyze M, Tronchon L, Vallet B, Thevenin D. Use of venous-to-arterial carbon dioxide tension difference to guide resuscitation therapy in septic shock. World J Crit Care Med. 2016; 5: 47-56. Published 2016 Feb 4. doi: 10.5492/wjccm.v5.i1.47.