ABSTRACT
Abstract Background Recent data suggest the regime of fluid therapy intraoperatively in patients undergoing major surgeries may interfere in patient outcomes. The development of postoperative Acute Kidney Injury (AKI) has been associated with both Restrictive Fluid Balance (RFB) and Liberal Fluid Balance (LFB) during non-cardiac surgery. In patients undergoing cardiac surgery, this influence remains unclear. The study objective was to evaluate the relationship between intraoperative RFB vs. LFB and the incidence of Cardiac-Surgery-Associated AKI (CSA-AKI) and major postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing on-pump Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting (CABG). Methods This prospective, multicenter, observational cohort study was set at two high-complexity university hospitals in Brazil. Adult patients who required postoperative intensive care after undergoing elective on-pump CABG were allocated to two groups according to their intraoperative fluid strategy (RFB or LFB) with no intervention. Results The primary endpoint was CSA-AKI. The secondary outcomes were in-hospital mortality, cardiovascular complications, ICU Length of Stay (ICU-LOS), and Hospital LOS (H-LOS). After propensity score matching, 180 patients remained in each group. There was no difference in risk of CSA-AKI between the two groups (RR = 1.15; 95% CI, 0.85-1.56, p= 0.36). The in-hospital mortality, H-LOS and cardiovascular complications were higher in the LFB group. ICU-LOS was not significantly different between the two groups. ROCcurve analysis determined a fluid balance above 2500 mL to accurately predict in-hospital mortality. Conclusion Patients undergoing on-pump CABG with LFB when compared with patients with RFB present similar CSA-AKI rates and ICU-LOS, but higher in-hospital mortality, cardiovascular complications, and H-LOS.
Subject(s)
Humans , Adult , Cardiopulmonary Bypass/adverse effects , Acute Kidney Injury/etiology , Acute Kidney Injury/epidemiology , Postoperative Complications/etiology , Postoperative Complications/epidemiology , Water-Electrolyte Balance , Prospective Studies , Retrospective Studies , Risk FactorsABSTRACT
RESUMO Objetivo: Avaliar se, em comparação ao início tardio, o início precoce da terapia de substituição renal se associa com menor mortalidade em pacientes com lesão renal aguda. Métodos: Conduzimos uma revisão sistemática e metanálise de ensaios clínicos randomizados e controlados, que compararam terapia de substituição renal com início precoce àquela com início tardio em pacientes com lesão renal aguda, sem sintomas relacionados à insuficiência renal aguda que oferecessem risco à vida, como sobrecarga hídrica ou distúrbios metabólicos. Dois investigadores extraíram os dados a partir de estudos selecionados. Utilizaram-se a ferramenta Cochrane Risk of Bias, para avaliar a qualidade dos estudos, e a abordagem Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE), para testar a qualidade geral da evidência. Resultados: Incluíram-se seis estudos clínicos randomizados e controlados (1.292 pacientes). Não houve diferença estatisticamente significante entre o início precoce e tardio da terapia de substituição renal, no que se referiu ao desfecho primário (OR 0,82; IC95% 0,48 - 1,42; p = 0,488). Foi maior o risco de infecção da corrente sanguínea relacionada ao cateter quando a terapia de substituição renal foi iniciada precocemente (OR 1,77; IC95% 1,01 - 3,11; p = 0,047). A qualidade da evidência gerada por nossa metanálise para o desfecho primário foi considerada baixa, em razão do risco de viés dos estudos incluídos e da heterogeneidade entre eles. Conclusão: O início precoce da terapia de substituição renal não se associou com melhora da sobrevivência. Entretanto, a qualidade da evidência atual é baixa, e os critérios utilizados para início precoce e tardio da terapia de substituição renal foram demasiadamente heterogêneos entre os estudos.
ABSTRACT Objective: To evaluate whether early initiation of renal replacement therapy is associated with lower mortality in patients with acute kidney injury compared to delayed initiation. Methods: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing early versus delayed initiation of renal replacement therapy in patients with acute kidney injury without the life-threatening acute kidney injury-related symptoms of fluid overload or metabolic disorders. Two investigators extracted the data from the selected studies. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool was used to assess the quality of the studies, and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to test the overall quality of the evidence. Results: Six randomized controlled trials (1,292 patients) were included. There was no statistically significant difference between early and delayed initiation of renal replacement therapy regarding the primary outcome (OR 0.82; 95%CI, 0.48 - 1.42; p = 0.488), but there was an increased risk of catheter-related bloodstream infection when renal replacement therapy was initiated early (OR 1.77; 95%CI, 1.01 - 3.11; p = 0.047). The quality of evidence generated by our meta-analysis for the primary outcome was considered low due to the risk of bias of the included studies and the heterogeneity among them. Conclusion: Early initiation of renal replacement therapy is not associated with improved survival. However, the quality of the current evidence is low, and the criteria used for -early- and -delayed- initiation of renal replacement therapy are too heterogeneous among studies.
Subject(s)
Renal Replacement Therapy/methods , Catheter-Related Infections/epidemiology , Acute Kidney Injury/therapy , Time Factors , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Regression Analysis , Treatment Outcome , Renal Replacement Therapy/mortalityABSTRACT
Objective To compare outcomes between elderly (≥65 years old) and non-elderly (<65 years old) resuscitated severe sepsis and septic shock patients and determine predictors of death among elderly patients.Methods Retrospective cohort study including 848 severe sepsis and septic shock patients admitted to the intensive care unit between January 2006 and March 2012.Results Elderly patients accounted for 62.6% (531/848) and non-elderly patients for 37.4% (317/848). Elderly patients had a higher APACHE II score [22 (18-28)versus 19 (15-24); p<0.001], compared to non-elderly patients, although the number of organ dysfunctions did not differ between the groups. No significant differences were found in 28-day and in-hospital mortality rates between elderly and non-elderly patients. The length of hospital stay was higher in elderly compared to non-elderly patients admitted with severe sepsis and septic shock [18 (10-41)versus 14 (8-29) days, respectively; p=0.0001]. Predictors of death among elderly patients included age, site of diagnosis, APACHE II score, need for mechanical ventilation and vasopressors.Conclusion In this study population early resuscitation of elderly patients was not associated with increased in-hospital mortality. Prospective studies addressing the long-term impact on functional status and quality of life are necessary.
Objetivo Comparar os resultados obtidos com a ressuscitação de idosos (≥65 anos) e não idosos (<65 anos) com sepse grave ou choque séptico e determinar os preditores de óbito em pacientes idosos.Métodos Estudo de coorte retrospectivo com 848 pacientes com sepse grave ou choque séptico admitidos na unidade de terapia intensiva entre janeiro de 2006 e março de 2012.Resultados Pacientes idosos representaram 62,6% (531/848) e não idosos 37,4% (317/848) dos pacientes. Pacientes idosos apresentaram maior escore APACHE II [22 (18-28) versus 19 (15-24); p<0,001] em comparação com pacientes não idosos, embora o número de disfunções orgânicas não tenha sido diferente entre os grupos. Não se observaram diferenças significativas na mortalidade hospitalar e em 28 dias entre pacientes idosos e não idosos, embora o tempo de internação hospitalar tenha sido superior nos pacientes idosos, em comparação com não idosos [18 (10-41) versus 14 (8-29) dias, respectivamente; p=0,0001]. Foram preditores de óbito entre pacientes idosos a idade, o local do diagnóstico, o escore APACHE II e a necessidade de ventilação mecânica e vasopressores.Conclusão A ressuscitação de pacientes idosos com sepse grave ou choque séptico não associou-se ao aumento de mortalidade hospitalar. Estudos prospectivos são necessários para avaliação do impacto a longo prazo no estado funcional e qualidade de vida dos pacientes idosos ressuscitados.