The technological advancements that allow support for organ dysfunction have led to an increase in survival rates for the most critically ill patients. Some of these patients survive the initial acute critical condition but continue to suffer from organ dysfunction and remain in an inflammatory state for long periods of time. This group of critically ill patients has been described since the 1980s and has had different diagnostic criteria over the years. These patients are known to have lengthy hospital stays, undergo significant alterations in muscle and bone metabolism, show immunodeficiency, consume substantial health resources, have reduced functional and cognitive capacity after discharge, create a sizable workload for caregivers, and present high long-term mortality rates. The aim of this review is to report on the most current evidence in terms of the definition, pathophysiology, clinical manifestations, treatment, and prognosis of persistent critical illness.

Our data suggest that the NRS-2002 high-risk cut-off is associated with worse clinical outcomes and is a predictor for ICU mortality.

Objective To contribute to updating the recommendations for brain-dead potential organ donor management. Method A group of 27 experts, including intensivists, transplant coordinators, transplant surgeons, and epidemiologists, joined a task force formed by the General Coordination Office of the National Transplant System/Brazilian Ministry of Health (CGSNT-MS), the Brazilian Association of Intensive Care Medicine (AMIB), the Brazilian Association of Organ Transplantation (ABTO), and the Brazilian Research in Intensive Care Network (BRICNet). The questions were developed within the scope of the 2011 Brazilian Guidelines for Management of Adult Potential Multiple-Organ Deceased Donors. The topics were divided into mechanical ventilation, hemodynamic support, endocrine-metabolic management, infection, body temperature, blood transfusion, and use of checklists. The outcomes considered for decision-making were cardiac arrest, number of organs recovered or transplanted per donor, and graft function/survival. Rapid systematic reviews were conducted, and the quality of evidence of the recommendations was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Two expert panels were held in November 2016 and February 2017 to classify the recommendations. A systematic review update was performed in June 2020, and the recommendations were reviewed through a Delphi process with the panelists between June and July 2020. Results A total of 19 recommendations were drawn from the expert panel. Of these, 7 were classified as strong (lung-protective ventilation strategy, vasopressors and combining arginine vasopressin to control blood pressure, antidiuretic hormones to control polyuria, serum potassium and magnesium control, and antibiotic use), 11 as weak (alveolar recruitment maneuvers, low-dose dopamine, low-dose corticosteroids, thyroid hormones, glycemic and serum sodium control, nutritional support, body temperature control or hypothermia, red blood cell transfusion, and goal-directed protocols), and 1 was considered a good clinical practice (volemic expansion). Conclusion Despite the agreement among panel members on most recommendations, the grade of recommendation was mostly weak. The observed lack of robust evidence on the topic highlights the importance of the present guideline to improve the management of brain-dead potential organ donors.

Franzosi OS, Von Frankenberg AD, Loss SH, Nunes DSL, Vieira SR. Underfeeding versus full enteral feeding in critically ill patients with acute respiratory failure: a systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Resumen Introducción: a pesar de las directrices que hacen hincapié en que la cantidad de la Nutrición Enteral (NE) administrada debe estar próxima a las necesidades del paciente, los estudios prospectivos cuestionan esta estrategia.Objetivo: comparar el efecto de dos estrategias de NE (subalimentación vs. alimentación completa) sobre la mortalidad en la UCI y general (mortalidad hospitalaria o la mortalidad en 60 días), el tiempo de internación en la UCI y en el hospital, duración de la ventilación mecánica (VM), complicaciones infecciosas y la tolerancia gastrointestinal en pacientes críticos.Métodos: metaanálisis de efectos aleatorios de ensayos clínicos aleatorizados (ECA). Nuestra búsqueda se basa en MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS y CENTRAL hasta mayo de 2015. La subalimentación fue asignada a dos grupos diferentes de acuerdo con el nivel de consumo de energía (alimentación moderada 46-72% y la alimentación trófi ca 16-25%) para el análisis de subgrupos.Resultados: se incluyeron cinco ECA entre los 904 estudios que se encontraron en la búsqueda (n = 2.432 pacientes). No se encontraron diferencias en la mortalidad general cuando se combinaron los cinco estudios. En el análisis de subgrupos, la alimentación moderada (tres estudios) mostró una mortalidad más baja en comparación con la alimentación completa (RR 0,82; IC 95% 0,68-0,98; I 2 0% p = 0,59 para la heterogeneidad). No se encontraron diferencias de mortalidad en la UCI ni en el tiempo de internación hospitalaria, la duración de la VM y las complicaciones infecciosas. La subalimentación mostró menor aparición de signos y síntomas gastrointestinales, excepto para aspiración y distensión abdominal (no se encontró ninguna diferencia).Conclusiones: este metaanálisis no encontró diferencias signifi cativas de mortalidad, duración de la estancia, duración de VM ni complicaciones infecciosas en la UCI o hospitalización total entre los grupos de subalimentación y alimentación completa. El análisis de subgrupos mostró menor mortalidad global entre los pacientes que recibieron la subalimentación moderada. Este resultado debe interpretarse con cautela debido a las limitaciones del pequeño número de estudios analizados y su metodología. Key words:Enteral nutrition. Critical care. Mortality. Artifi cial respiration. Digestive signs and symptoms. AbstractIntroduction: Although guidelines emphasize that the provision of enteral nutrition (EN) should be as close as the patient's needs, prospective studies question this strategy.