Gut flora and organic acids were significantly altered in patients with severe SIRS complicated by gastrointestinal dysmotility, which was associated with higher septic mortality in SIRS patients.
BackgroundThe gut is an important target organ of injury during critically ill conditions. Although Gram staining is a common and quick method for identifying bacteria, its clinical application has not been fully evaluated in critically ill conditions.AimsThis study’s aims were to identify patterns of Gram-stained fecal flora and compare them to cultured bacterial counts and to investigate the association between the patterns and septic complications in patients with severe systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS).MethodsFifty-two patients with SIRS were included whose Gram-stained fecal flora was classified into three patterns. In a diverse pattern, large numbers of multiple kinds of bacteria completely covered the field. In a single pattern, one specific kind of bacteria or fungi predominantly covered the field. In a depleted pattern, most bacteria were diminished in the field.ResultsIn the analysis of fecal flora, the numbers of total obligate anaerobes in the depleted pattern was significantly lower than those in the diverse pattern and single pattern (p < 0.05). The concentrations of total organic acids, acetic acid, and propionic acid in the depleted pattern were significantly lower than those in diverse pattern and single pattern (p < 0.05). Mortality due to multiple organ dysfunction syndrome for the single pattern (52%) and the depleted pattern (64%) was significantly higher than that for the diverse pattern (6%) (p < 0.05).ConclusionsGram-stained fecal flora can be classified into three patterns and are associated with both cultured bacterial counts and clinical information. Gram-stained fecal bacteria can be used as a quick bedside diagnostic marker for severe SIRS patients.
BackgroundAlthough the effects of the trauma center(TC) were researched in several studies, there have been few studies on changes in the regional mortality due to the implementation of a TC. An emergency medical center (EMC) and TC were implemented at Nagasaki University Hospital (NUH) for the first time in the Nagasaki medical region of Japan in April 2010 and October 2011, respectively, and they have cooperated with each other in treating trauma patients. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects on the early mortality at population level of a TC working in cooperation with an EMC.MethodsThis is a retrospective study using standardized regional data (ambulance service record) in Nagasaki medical region from April 2007 through March 2017. We included 19,045 trauma patients directly transported from the scene. The outcome measures were prognosis for one week. To examine the association between the implementation of the EMC and TC and mortality at a region, we fit adjusted logistic regression models.ResultsThe number of patients of each fiscal year increased from 1492 in 2007 to 2101 in 2016. The number of all patients transported to NUH decreased until 2009 to 70, but increased after implementation of the EMC and TC. Overall mortality of all patients in the region improved from 2.3% in 2007 to 1.0% in 2016.In multivariate logistic regression model, odds ratio of death was significantly smaller at 2013 and thereafter if the data from 2007 to 2011 was taken as reference.ConclusionsImplementation of the EMC and TC was associated with early mortality in trauma patients directly transported from the scene by ambulance. Our analysis suggested that the implementation of EMC and TC contributed to the improvement of the early mortality at a regional city with 500000 populations.Level of evidenceLevel III.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.