No abstract

Background The Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) is frequently used to measure frailty in critically ill adults. There is wide variation in the approach to analysing the relationship between the CFS score and mortality after admission to the ICU. This study aimed to evaluate the influence of modelling approach on the association between the CFS score and short-term mortality and quantify the prognostic value of frailty in this context. Methods We analysed data from two multicentre prospective cohort studies which enrolled intensive care unit patients ≥ 80 years old in 26 countries. The primary outcome was mortality within 30-days from admission to the ICU. Logistic regression models for both ICU and 30-day mortality included the CFS score as either a categorical, continuous or dichotomous variable and were adjusted for patient’s age, sex, reason for admission to the ICU, and admission Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score. Results The median age in the sample of 7487 consecutive patients was 84 years (IQR 81–87). The highest fraction of new prognostic information from frailty in the context of 30-day mortality was observed when the CFS score was treated as either a categorical variable using all original levels of frailty or a nonlinear continuous variable and was equal to 9% using these modelling approaches (p < 0.001). The relationship between the CFS score and mortality was nonlinear (p < 0.01). Conclusion Knowledge about a patient’s frailty status adds a substantial amount of new prognostic information at the moment of admission to the ICU. Arbitrary simplification of the CFS score into fewer groups than originally intended leads to a loss of information and should be avoided. Trial registration NCT03134807 (VIP1), NCT03370692 (VIP2)

Background: The increasing population of very old intensive care patients (VIPs) is a major challenge currently faced by clinicians and policymakers. Reliable indicators of VIPs' prognosis and appropriateness of their admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) are urgently needed. Methods: This is a report from the Polish sample of the VIP1 multicentre cohort study (NCT03134807). Patients ≥ 80 years of age admitted to the ICU were included in the study. Information on the type and reason for admission, demographics, utilisation of ICU procedures, ICU length of stay, organ dysfunction and the decision to apply end-of-life care was collected. The primary objective was to investigate the impact of frailty syndrome on ICU and 30-day survival of VIPs. Frailty was assessed with the Clinical Frailty Scale (≥ 5 points on a scale of 1-9). Results: We enrolled 272 participants with a median age of 84 (81-87) years. Frailty was diagnosed in 170 (62.5%) patients. The ICU and 30-day survival rates were equal to 54.6% and 47.3% respectively. Three variables were found to significantly increase the odds of death in the ICU in a multiple logistic regression model, namely:

Ghrelin was shown to exhibit protective and therapeutic effect in the gut. Aim of the study was to investigate the role of sensory nerves (SN) in the protective effect of ghrelin in acute pancreatitis (AP). Studies were performed on male Wistar rats or isolated pancreatic acinar cells. After capsaicin deactivation of sensory nerves (CDSN) or treatment with saline, rats were pretreated intraperitoneally with ghrelin or saline. In those rats, AP was induced by cerulein or pancreases were used for isolation of pancreatic acinar cells. Pancreatic acinar cells were incubated in cerulein-free or cerulein containing solution. In rats with intact SN, pretreatment with ghrelin led to a reversal of the cerulein-induced increase in pancreatic weight, plasma activity of lipase and plasma concentration of tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α). These effects were associated with an increase in plasma interleukin-4 concentration and reduction in histological signs of pancreatic damage. CDSN tended to increase the severity of AP and abolished the protective effect of ghrelin. Exposure of pancreatic acinar cells to cerulein led to increase in cellular expression of mRNA for TNF-α and cellular synthesis of this cytokine. Pretreatment with ghrelin reduced this alteration, but this effect was only observed in acinar cells obtained from rats with intact SN. Moreover, CDSN inhibited the cerulein- and ghrelin-induced increase in gene expression and synthesis of heat shock protein 70 (HSP70) in those cells. Ghrelin exhibits the protective effect in cerulein-induced AP on the organ and pancreatic acinar cell level. Sensory nerves ablation abolishes this effect.

Ghrelin (GHRL) is an endogenous ligand for the growth hormone secretagogue receptor (GHS-R). Experimental studies showed that GHRL protects the stomach and pancreas against acute damage, but the effect of GHRL on pancreatic acinar cells was still undetermined. Aim: To investigate the effect of GHRL and caerulein on the functional ghrelin system in pancreatic acinar cells taking into account the role of sensory nerves (SN). Methods: Experiments were carried out on isolated pancreatic acinar cells and AR42J cells. Before acinar cells isolation, GHRL was administered intraperitoneally at a dose of 50 µg/kg to rats with intact SN or with capsaicin deactivation of SN (CDSN). After isolation, pancreatic acinar cells were incubated in caerulein-free or caerulein containing solution. AR42J cells were incubated under basal conditions and stimulated with caerulein, GHRL or a combination of the above. Results: Incubation of isolated acinar cells with caerulein inhibited GHS-R and GHRL expression at the level of mRNA and protein in those cells. Either in rats with intact SN or with CDSN, administration of GHRL before isolation of acinar cells increased expression of GHRL and GHS-R in those cells and reversed the caerulein-induced reduction in expression of those parameters. Similar upregulation of GHS-R and GHRL was observed after administration of GHRL in AR42J cells. Conclusions: GHRL stimulates its own expression and expression of its receptor in isolated pancreatic acinar cells and AR42J cells on the positive feedback pathway. This mechanism seems to participate in the pancreatoprotective effect of GHRL in the course of acute pancreatitis.