Search

Rationale & objectiveThe usefulness of measures of neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL) in urine or plasma obtained on clinical laboratory platforms for predicting acute kidney injury (AKI) and AKI requiring dialysis (AKI-D) has not been fully evaluated. We sought to quantitatively summarize published data to evaluate the value of urinary and plasma NGAL for kidney risk prediction.Study designLiterature-based meta-analysis and individual-study-data meta-analysis of diagnostic studies following PRISMA-IPD guidelines.Setting & study populationsStudies of adults investigating AKI, severe AKI, and AKI-D in the setting of cardiac surgery, intensive care, or emergency department care using either urinary or plasma NGAL measured on clinical laboratory platforms.Selection criteria for studiesPubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and congress abstracts ever published through February 2020 reporting diagnostic test studies of NGAL measured on clinical laboratory platforms to predict AKI.Data extractionIndividual-study-data meta-analysis was accomplished by giving authors data specifications tailored to their studies and requesting standardized patient-level data analysis.Analytical approachIndividual-study-data meta-analysis used a bivariate time-to-event model for interval-censored data from which discriminative ability (AUC) was characterized. NGAL cutoff concentrations at 95% sensitivity, 95% specificity, and optimal sensitivity and specificity were also estimated. Models incorporated as confounders the clinical setting and use versus nonuse of urine output as a criterion for AKI. A literature-based meta-analysis was also performed for all published studies including those for which the authors were unable to provide individual-study data analyses.ResultsWe included 52 observational studies involving 13,040 patients. We analyzed 30 data sets for the individual-study-data meta-analysis. For AKI, severe AKI, and AKI-D, numbers of events were 837, 304, and 103 for analyses of urinary NGAL, respectively; these values were 705, 271, and 178 for analyses of plasma NGAL. Discriminative performance was similar in both meta-analyses. Individual-study-data meta-analysis AUCs for urinary NGAL were 0.75 (95% CI, 0.73-0.76) and 0.80 (95% CI, 0.79-0.81) for severe AKI and AKI-D, respectively; for plasma NGAL, the corresponding AUCs were 0.80 (95% CI, 0.79-0.81) and 0.86 (95% CI, 0.84-0.86). Cutoff concentrations at 95% specificity for urinary NGAL were>580ng/mL with 27% sensitivity for severe AKI and>589ng/mL with 24% sensitivity for AKI-D. Corresponding cutoffs for plasma NGAL were>364ng/mL with 44% sensitivity and>546ng/mL with 26% sensitivity, respectively.LimitationsPractice variability in initiation of dialysis. Imperfect harmonization of data across studies.ConclusionsUrinary and plasma NGAL concentrations may identify patients at high risk for AKI in clinical research and practice. The cutoff concentrations reported in this study require prospective evaluation.

Purpose The aim of the INSTINCT trial was to assess the effect of intravenous polyspecific immunoglobulin G (IVIG) compared with placebo on self-reported physical function in intensive care unit (ICU) patients with necrotising soft tissue infection (NSTI). Methods We randomised 100 patients with NSTI 1:1 to masked infusion of 25 g of IVIG (Privigen, CSL Behring) or an equal volume of 0.9% saline once daily for the first 3 days of ICU admission. The primary outcome was the physical component summary (PCS) score of the 36-item short form health survey (SF-36) 6 months after randomisation; patients who had died were given the lowest possible score (zero). Results Of the 100 patients randomised, 87 were included in the intention-to-treat analysis of the PCS score, 42 patients (84%) in the IVIG group and 45 patients (90%) in the placebo group. The two intervention groups had similar baseline characteristics with the exception of IVIG use before randomisation (1 dose was allowed) and rates of acute kidney injury. Median PCS scores were 36 (interquartile range 0-43) in the group assigned to IVIG and 31 (0-47) in the group assigned to placebo (mean adjusted difference 1 (95% confidence interval -7 to 10), p = 0.81). The result was supported by analyses adjusted for baseline prognostics, those in the per protocol populations, in the subgroups (site of NSTI) and those done post hoc adjusted for IVIG use before randomisation. Conclusions In ICU patients with NSTI, we observed no apparent effects of adjuvant IVIG on self-reported physical functioning at 6 months. Trial registration: NCT02111161., Author(s): Martin B. Madsen [sup.1], Peter B. Hjortrup [sup.1], Marco B. Hansen [sup.2], Theis Lange [sup.3] [sup.4], Anna Norrby-Teglund [sup.5], Ole Hyldegaard [sup.2], Anders Perner [sup.1] Author Affiliations: (1) grid.475435.4, [...]

Acute kidney injury (AKI) and fluids are closely linked through oliguria, which is a marker of the former and a trigger for administration of the latter. Recent progress in this field has challenged the physiological and clinical rational of using oliguria as a trigger for the administration of fluid and brought attention to the delicate balance between benefits and harms of different aspects of fluid management in critically ill patients, in particular those with AKI. This narrative review addresses various aspects of fluid management in AKI outlining physiological aspects, the effects of crystalloids and colloids on kidney function and the effect of various resuscitation and de-resuscitation strategies on the course and outcome of AKI., Author(s): Anders Perner [sup.1], John Prowle [sup.2], Michael Joannidis [sup.3], Paul Young [sup.4], Peter B. Hjortrup [sup.1], Ville Pettilä [sup.5] Author Affiliations: (1) 0000 0001 0674 042X, grid.5254.6, Department of [...]

Author(s): Anders Perner [sup.1], Peter B. Hjortrup [sup.2], Ville Pettilä [sup.3] Author Affiliations: (1) grid.475435.4, Department of Intensive Care, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, , Copenhagen, Denmark (2) grid.476266.7, Department of [...]

Purpose We assessed the effects of a protocol restricting resuscitation fluid vs. a standard care protocol after initial resuscitation in intensive care unit (ICU) patients with septic shock. Methods We randomised 151 adult patients with septic shock who had received initial fluid resuscitation in nine Scandinavian ICUs. In the fluid restriction group fluid boluses were permitted only if signs of severe hypoperfusion occurred, while in the standard care group fluid boluses were permitted as long as circulation continued to improve. Results The co-primary outcome measures, resuscitation fluid volumes at day 5 and during ICU stay, were lower in the fluid restriction group than in the standard care group [mean differences -1.2 L (95 % confidence interval -2.0 to -0.4); p < 0.001 and -1.4 L (-2.4 to -0.4) respectively; p < 0.001]. Neither total fluid inputs and balances nor serious adverse reactions differed statistically significantly between the groups. Major protocol violations occurred in 27/75 patients in the fluid restriction group. Ischaemic events occurred in 3/75 in the fluid restriction group vs. 9/76 in the standard care group (odds ratio 0.32; 0.08-1.27; p = 0.11), worsening of acute kidney injury in 27/73 vs. 39/72 (0.46; 0.23-0.92; p = 0.03), and death by 90 days in 25/75 vs. 31/76 (0.71; 0.36-1.40; p = 0.32). Conclusions A protocol restricting resuscitation fluid successfully reduced volumes of resuscitation fluid compared with a standard care protocol in adult ICU patients with septic shock. The patient-centred outcomes all pointed towards benefit with fluid restriction, but our trial was not powered to show differences in these exploratory outcomes. Trial registration NCT02079402., Author(s): Peter B. Hjortrup [sup.1], Nicolai Haase [sup.1], Helle Bundgaard [sup.2], Simon L. Thomsen [sup.3], Robert Winding [sup.4], Ville Pettilä [sup.5], Anne Aaen [sup.6], David Lodahl [sup.7], Rasmus E. Berthelsen [...]

Background: In patients with septic shock, mortality is high, and survivors experience long-term physical, mental and social impairments. The ongoing Conservative vs Liberal Approach to fluid therapy of Septic Shock in Intensive Care (CLASSIC) trial assesses the benefits and harms of a restrictive vs standard-care intravenous (IV) fluid therapy. The hypothesis is that IV fluid restriction improves patient-important long-term outcomes.Aim: To assess the predefined patient-important long-term outcomes in patients randomised into the CLASSIC trial.Methods: In this pre-planned follow-up study of the CLASSIC trial, we will assess all-cause mortality, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and cognitive function 1 year after randomisation in the two intervention groups. The 1-year mortality will be collected from electronic patient records or central national registries in most participating countries. We will contact survivors and assess EuroQol 5-Dimension, -5-Level (EQ-5D-5L) and EuroQol-Visual Analogue Scale and Montreal Cognitive Assessment 5-minute protocol score. We will analyse mortality by logistic regression and use general linear models to assess HRQoL and cognitive function.Discussion: With this pre-planned follow-up study of the CLASSIC trial, we will provide patient-important data on long-term survival, HRQoL and cognitive function of restrictive vs standard-care IV fluid therapy in patients with septic shock. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In 2007, the Saline versus Albumin Fluid Evaluation—Translation of Research Into Practice Study (SAFE-TRIPS) reported that 0.9% sodium chloride (saline) and hydroxyethyl starch (HES) were the most commonly used resuscitation fluids in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. Evidence has emerged since 2007 that these fluids are associated with adverse patient-centred outcomes. Based on the published evidence since 2007, we sought to determine the current type of fluid resuscitation used in clinical practice and the predictors of fluid choice and determine whether these have changed between 2007 and 2014. Methods: In 2014, an international, cross-sectional study was conducted (Fluid-TRIPS) to document current patterns of intravenous resuscitation fluid use and determine factors associated with fluid choice. We examined univariate and multivariate associations between patients and prescriber characteristics, geographical region and fluid type. Additionally, we report secular trends of resuscitation fluid use in a cohort of ICUs that participated in both the 2007 and 2014 studies. Regression analysis were conducted to determine changes in the administration of crystalloid or colloid between 2007 and 2014. Findings: In 2014, a total of 426 ICUs in 27 countries participated. Over the 24 hour study day, 1456/6707 (21.7%) patients received resuscitation fluid during 2716 resuscitation episodes. Crystalloids were administered to 1227/1456 (84.3%) patients during 2208/2716 (81.3%) episodes and colloids to 394/1456 (27.1%) patients during 581/2716 (21.4%) episodes. In multivariate analyses, practice significantly varied between geographical regions. Additionally, patients with a traumatic brain injury were less likely to receive colloid when compared to patients with no trauma (adjusted OR 0.24; 95% CI 0.1 to 0.62; p = 0.003). Patients in the ICU for one or more days where more likely to receive colloid compared to patients in the ICU on their admission date (adjusted OR 1.75; 95% CI 1.27 to 2.41; p = <0.001). For secular trends in fluid resuscitation, 84 ICUs in 17 countries contributed data. In 2007, 527/1663 (31.7%) patients received fluid resuscitation during 1167 episodes compared to 491/1763 (27.9%) patients during 960 episodes in 2014. The use of crystalloids increased from 498/1167 (42.7%) in 2007 to 694/960 (72.3%) in 2014 (odds ratio (OR) 3.75, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.95 to 4.77; p = <0.001), primarily due to a significant increase in the use of buffered salt solutions. The use of colloids decreased from 724/1167 (62.0%) in 2007 to 297/960 (30.9%) in 2014 (OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.43; p = <0.001), primarily due to a decrease in the use of HES, but an overall increase in the use of albumin. Conclusions: Clinical practices of intravenous fluid resuscitation have changed between 2007 and 2014. Geographical location remains a strong predictor of the type of fluid administered for fluid resuscitation. Overall, there is a preferential use of crystalloids, specifically buffered salt solutions, over colloids. There is now an imperative to conduct a trial determining the safety and efficacy of these fluids on patient-centred outcomes. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov: Fluid-Translation of research into practice study (Fluid-TRIPS) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Prophylaxis for gastrointestinal stress ulceration is frequently given to patients in the intensive care unit (ICU), but its risks and benefits are unclear., Methods: In this European, multicenter, parallel-group, blinded trial, we randomly assigned adults who had been admitted to the ICU for an acute condition (i.e., an unplanned admission) and who were at risk for gastrointestinal bleeding to receive 40 mg of intravenous pantoprazole (a proton-pump inhibitor) or placebo daily during the ICU stay. The primary outcome was death by 90 days after randomization., Results: A total of 3298 patients were enrolled; 1645 were randomly assigned to the pantoprazole group and 1653 to the placebo group. Data on the primary outcome were available for 3282 patients (99.5%). At 90 days, 510 patients (31.1%) in the pantoprazole group and 499 (30.4%) in the placebo group had died (relative risk, 1.02; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.91 to 1.13; P=0.76). During the ICU stay, at least one clinically important event (a composite of clinically important gastrointestinal bleeding, pneumonia, Clostridium difficile infection, or myocardial ischemia) had occurred in 21.9% of patients assigned to pantoprazole and 22.6% of those assigned to placebo (relative risk, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.11). In the pantoprazole group, 2.5% of patients had clinically important gastrointestinal bleeding, as compared with 4.2% in the placebo group. The number of patients with infections or serious adverse reactions and the percentage of days alive without life support within 90 days were similar in the two groups., Conclusions: Among adult patients in the ICU who were at risk for gastrointestinal bleeding, mortality at 90 days and the number of clinically important events were similar in those assigned to pantoprazole and those assigned to placebo. (Funded by Innovation Fund Denmark and others; SUP-ICU ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02467621 .).