安田 英人

OBJECTIVES: We aim to assess the early use of contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) of patients with severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) using the computed tomography severity index (CTSI) in prognosis prediction. The CTSI combines quantification of pancreatic and extrapancreatic inflammation with the extent of pancreatic necrosis. METHODS: Post-hoc retrospective analysis of a large, multicentric database (44 institutions) of SAP patients in Japan. The area under the curve (AUC) of the CTSI for predicting mortality and the odds ratio (OR) of the extent of pancreatic inflammation and necrosis were calculated using multivariable analysis. RESULTS: In total, 1097 patients were included. The AUC of the CTSI for mortality was 0.65 (95 % confidence interval [CI:] [0.59-0.70]; p < 0.001). In multivariable analysis, necrosis 30-50 % and >50 % in low-enhanced pancreatic parenchyma (LEPP) was independently associated with a significant increase in mortality, with OR 2.04 and 95 % CI 1.01-4.12 (P < 0.05) and OR 3.88 and 95 % CI 2.04-7.40 (P < 0.001), respectively. However, the extent of pancreatic inflammation was not associated with mortality, regardless of severity. CONCLUSIONS: The degree of necrosis in LEPP assessed using early CECT of SAP was a better predictor of mortality than the extent of pancreatic inflammation.

AIM OF THE STUDY: Peripheral intravascular catheter (PIVC) insertion is frequently performed in the emergency room (ER) and many failures of initial PIVC insertion occur. To reduce the failures, new needles were developed. This study aimed to investigate whether the use of the newly developed needle reduced the failure of initial PIVC insertion in the ER compared with the use of the existing needle. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This single-centre, prospective observational study was conducted in Japan between April 1, 2022, and February 2, 2023. We included consecutive patients who visited our hospital by ambulance as a secondary emergency on a weekday during the day shift (from 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM). The practitioners for PIVC insertion and assessors were independent. The primary and secondary outcomes were the failure of initial PIVC insertion and number of procedures, respectively. We defined the difficulty of titrating, leakage, and hematoma within 30 s after insertion as failures. To evaluate the association between the outcomes and the use of newly developed needles, we performed multivariate logistic regression and multiple regression analyses by adjusting for covariates. RESULTS: In total, 522 patients without missing data were analysed, and 81 (15.5%) patients showed failure of initial PIVC insertion. The median number of procedures (interquartile range) was 1 (1-1). Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed no significant association between the use of newly developed PIVCs and the failure of initial PIVC insertion (odds ratio, 0.79; 95% confidence interval, [0.48-1.31]; p = 0.36). Moreover, multiple regression analysis revealed no significant association between the use of newly developed PIVCs and the number of procedures (regression coefficient, -0.0042; 95% confidence interval, [-0.065-0.056]; p = 0.89). CONCLUSIONS: Our study did not show a difference between the two types of needles with respect to the failure of initial PIVC insertion and the number of procedures.

INTRODUCTION: Early and accurate identification of high-risk patients with peripheral intravascular catheter (PIVC)-related phlebitis is vital to prevent medical device-related complications. AIM OF THE STUDY: This study aimed to develop and validate a machine learning-based model for predicting the incidence of PIVC-related phlebitis in critically ill patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four machine learning models were created using data from patients ≥ 18 years with a newly inserted PIVC during intensive care unit admission. Models were developed and validated using a 7:3 split. Random survival forest (RSF) was used to create predictive models for time-to-event outcomes. Logistic regression with least absolute reduction and selection operator (LASSO), random forest (RF), and gradient boosting decision tree were used to develop predictive models that treat outcome as a binary variable. Cox proportional hazards (COX) and logistic regression (LR) were used as comparators for time-to-event and binary outcomes, respectively. RESULTS: The final cohort had 3429 PIVCs, which were divided into the development cohort (2400 PIVCs) and validation cohort (1029 PIVCs). The c-statistic (95% confidence interval) of the models in the validation cohort for discrimination were as follows: RSF, 0.689 (0.627-0.750); LASSO, 0.664 (0.610-0.717); RF, 0.699 (0.645-0.753); gradient boosting tree, 0.699 (0.647-0.750); COX, 0.516 (0.454-0.578); and LR, 0.633 (0.575-0.691). No significant difference was observed among the c-statistic of the four models for binary outcome. However, RSF had a higher c-statistic than COX. The important predictive factors in RSF included inserted site, catheter material, age, and nicardipine, whereas those in RF included catheter dwell duration, nicardipine, and age. CONCLUSIONS: The RSF model for the survival time analysis of phlebitis occurrence showed relatively high prediction performance compared with the COX model. No significant differences in prediction performance were observed among the models with phlebitis occurrence as the binary outcome.

BACKGROUND: Status epilepticus (SE) is potentially life-threatening, however, it is unclear which antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) should be used as second-line AEDs. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing multiple second-line AEDs for SE to investigate the efficacy of AEDs. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, CENTRAL, ClinicalTrials.gov, and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Platform Search Portal and included RCTs for patients aged ≥15 years with SE on December 31, 2023. We compared multiple second-line AEDs for SE including fosphenytoin (fPHT), lacosamide (LCM), levetiracetam (LEV), phenytoin (PHT), phenobarbital (PHB), and valproate (VPA). The primary and secondly outcomes were termination of seizures integrating the absence of seizure recurrence at 30 min and 60 min, and adverse events associated with AEDs, respectively, with expressing as relative risk (RR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI). We conducted a NMA using frequentist-based approach with multivariate random effects, and assessed the certainty based on the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations framework. RESULTS: Seven RCTs (n = 780) were included, and statistically significant difference was detected between VPA vs. PHB (RR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.53-0.85; very low certainty), fPHT vs. PHB (RR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.48-0.90; very low certainty), LCM vs. PHB (RR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.41-0.93; very low certainty), and LEV vs. PHB (RR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.51-0.94; very low certainty). Moreover, PHB was the highest in the ranking for termination of seizures. For adverse events, no significant reduction was observed owing to the selection of AEDs, although the ranking of PHB was the lowest. CONCLUSIONS: PHB may have been the most effective for seizure termination as second-line AEDs in adult patients with SE. However, the certainty of almost all comparisons was "very low", and careful interpretation is essential.