![]() |
|
To print: Select File and then Print from your browser's menu Title: Propofol Associated with Increased Infections in Critically Ill Patients: Presented at ASA |
|
"Propofol Associated with Increased Infections in Critically Ill Patients: Presented at ASA" By Deborah Brauser ORLANDO, Fla -- October 21, 2008 -- A continuous infusion of propofol can lead to increased infections in intensive care unit (ICU) patients, according to research presented here at the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) 2008 Annual Meeting. Lead investigator Samir Haddad, MD, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama, and Intensive Care Department, King Abdulaziz Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, reported the results on October 19. Though Dr. Haddad submitted this study while working at the University of Alabama, it was conducted in the medical surgical ICU in the Riyadh hospital. Dr. Haddad and colleagues studied 523 consecutive patients who were admitted to the ICU and received sedation for 48 hours or more. A total of 124 patients a mean age of 38 years were given propofol, while 399 patients a mean age of 57 years were treated without propofol. Dr. Haddad's team then collected data on patients' demographics, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II scores, admission categories, chronic illnesses, and sedative use. The team also documented ICU-acquired infections in the following categories: all infections, ventilator-associated pneumonia, urosepsis, tracheobronchitis, and catheter-related infections/blood stream infections, as well as incidences of sepsis (clinical sepsis, severe sepsis, and septic shock), and ICU and hospital mortality. Results show that the rate of ICU-acquired infection was higher in the propofol group than in the control group (50% vs 35.3%, respectively; [P = .003), but hospital mortality was significantly lower in the propofol group (17.7% vs 33.3%; P = .0009). On multivariate analysis, the researchers found that risk of infection was higher in the propofol-treated group compared with the control group (odds ratio [OR] = 2.08; confidence interval [CI], 1.29-3.34; P = .003). However, they found no significant difference in ICU mortality (OR = 0.94; CI, 0.47-1.85; P = .85) or hospital mortality (OR = 0.74; CI, 0.41-1.31; P = .3). |
|
Copyright © 2009 P\S\L Consulting Group Inc. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of P\S\L content is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of P\S\L. P\S\L shall not be liable for any errors, omissions or delays in this content or any other content on its sites, newsletters or other publications, nor for any decisions or actions taken in reliance on such content. Go back This site is maintained by webmaster@pslgroup.com Please contact us with any comments, problems or bugs. All contents Copyright (c) 2009 P\S\L Consulting Group Inc. All rights reserved. |