岸原 悠貴

Early and accurate identification of high-risk patients with peripheral intravascular catheter (PIVC)-related phlebitis is vital to prevent medical device-related complications. This study aimed to develop and validate a machine learning-based model for predicting the incidence of PIVC-related phlebitis in critically ill patients. 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. 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. 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.

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. 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. 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). 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.

<h4>Introduction</h4>Hybrid emergency room systems (HERSs) have shown promise for the management of severe trauma by reducing mortality. However, the effectiveness of HERSs in the treatment of acute ischemic stroke (AIS) remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of HERSs on treatment duration and neurological outcomes in patients with AIS undergoing endovascular therapy.<h4>Materials and methods</h4>This single-center retrospective study included 83 patients with AIS who were directly transported to our emergency department and underwent endovascular treatment between June 2017 and December 2023. Patients were divided into the HERS and conventional groups based on the utilization of HERSs. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients achieving a favorable neurological outcome (modified Rankin Scale score 0-2) at 30 days. The secondary outcomes included door-to-puncture and door-to-recanalization times. Univariate analysis was performed using the Mann-Whitney U test for continuous variables and the chi-squared test or Fisher's exact test for categorical variables, as appropriate.<h4>Results</h4>Of the 83 eligible patients, 50 (60.2%) were assigned to the HERS group and 33 (39.8%) to the conventional group. The median door-to-puncture time was significantly shorter in the HERS group than in the conventional group (99.5 vs. 131 min; p = 0.001). Similarly, the median door-to-recanalization time was significantly shorter in the HERS group (162.5 vs. 201.5 min, p = 0.018). Favorable neurological outcomes were achieved in 16/50 (32.0%) patients in the HERS group and 6/33 (18.2%) in the conventional group. The HERS and conventional groups showed no significant difference in the proportion of patients achieving favorable neurological outcomes (p = 0.21).<h4>Conclusion</h4>Implementation of the HERS significantly reduced the door-to-puncture and door-to-recanalization times in patients with AIS undergoing endovascular therapy. Despite these reductions in treatment duration, no significant improvement in neurological outcomes was observed. Further research is required to optimize patient selection and treatment strategies to maximize the benefits of the HERS in AIS management.

Status epilepticus (SE) is potentially life-threatening, however, it is unclear which antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) should be used as second-line AEDs. 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. 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. 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. 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.

<h4>Objective</h4>The objective was to investigate whether early advanced airway management during the entire resuscitation period is associated with favorable neurological outcomes and survival in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA).<h4>Methods</h4>We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients with OHCA aged ≥18 years enrolled in OHCA registry in Japan who received advanced airway management during cardiac arrest between June 2014 and December 2020. To address resuscitation time bias, we performed risk set matching analyses in which patients who did and did not receive advanced airway management were matched at the same time point (min) using the time-dependent propensity score; further, we compared early (≤10 min) and late (>10 min) advanced airway management. The primary and secondary outcome measures were favorable neurological outcomes using Cerebral Performance Category scores and survival at 1 month after cardiac arrest.<h4>Results</h4>Of the 41,101 eligible patients, 21,446 patients received early advanced airway management. Thus, risk set matching was performed with a total of 42,866 patients. In the main analysis, early advanced airway management was significantly associated with favorable neurological outcomes (risk ratio [RR] 0.997, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.995-0.999) and survival (RR 0.990, 95% CI 0.986-0.994) at 1 month after cardiac arrest. In the sensitivity analysis with early advanced airway management defined as ≤5 min and ≤20 min, the results were comparable.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Although early advanced airway management was statistically significant for improved neurological outcomes and survival at 1 month after cardiac arrest, the RR was very close to 1, indicating that the timing of advanced airway management has minimal impact on clinical outcomes, and decisions should be made based on the individual needs of the patient.