ARDS Patients Exhibiting a "Hyperinflammatory Anasarca" Phenotype Could Benefit From a Conservative Fluid Management Strategy.

Object: The fluid management strategy in ARDS is not very clear. A secondary analysis of RCT data was conducted to identify patients with ARDS benefitting from a conservative strategy of fluid management. Methods: The data of this study were downloaded from the ARDS network series of randomized controlled trials (Conservative Strategy vs. Liberal Strategy in 2006). Based on the clinical feature of patients, within the first 24 h after admission, clustering was performed using the k-means clustering algorithm to identify the phenotypes of ARDS. Survival was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier survival analysis to assess the effect of the two fluid management strategies on the 90-day cumulative mortality. Categorical/dichotomic variables were analyzed by the chi-square test. Continuous variables were expressed as the mean and standard deviation and evaluated through a one-way ANOVA. A P-value < 0.05 was defined as the statistically significant cut-off value. Results: A total of 1,000 ARDS patients were enrolled in this unsupervised clustering research study, of which 503 patients were treated with a conservative fluid-management strategy, and 497 patients were treated with a liberal fluid-management strategy. The first 7-day cumulative fluid balance in patients with the conservative strategy and liberal strategy were -136 ± 491 ml and 6,992 ± 502 ml, respectively (P < 0.001). Four phenotypes were found, and the conservative fluid-management strategy significantly improved the 90-day cumulative mortality compared with the liberal fluid-management strategy (HR = 0.532, P = 0.024) in patients classified as "hyperinflammatory anasarca" phenotype (phenotype II). The characteristics of this phenotype exhibited a higher WBC count (20487.51 ± 7223.86/mm3) with a higher incidence of anasarca (8.3%) and incidence of shock (26.6%) at baseline. The furthermore analysis found that the conservative fluid management strategy was superior to the liberal fluid management strategy in avoiding superinfection (10.10 vs. 14.40%, P = 0.037) and returned to assisted breathing (4.60 vs. 16.20%, P = 0.030) in patients classified as "hyperinflammatory anasarca" phenotype. In addition, patients with other phenotypes given the different fluid management strategies did not show significant differences in clinical outcomes. Conclusion: Patients exhibiting a "hyperinflammatory anasarca" phenotype could benefit from a conservative fluid management strategy.

Fluid Therapy and Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome.

The optimal fluid management for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) remains unknown. Liberal fluid management may improve cardiac function and end-organ perfusion, but may lead to increased pulmonary edema and inhibit gas exchange. Trials suggest that conservative fluid management leads to better clinical outcomes, although prospective randomized, controlled trials have not demonstrated mortality benefit. Recent discoveries suggest there is large heterogeneity in ARDS, and varying phenotypes of ARDS respond differently to fluid treatments. Future advances in management will require real-time assignment of ARDS phenotypes, which may facilitate inclusion into clinical trials by ARDS phenotype and guide development of targeted therapies.

The costs of fluid overload in the adult intensive care unit: is a small-volume infusion model a proactive solution?

PURPOSE: Fluid overload (FO) in critically ill patients remains a challenging clinical dilemma, and many continuous intravenous (IV) medications in the US are being delivered as a dilute solution, adding significantly to a patient's daily intake. This study describes the costs and outcomes of FO in patients receiving multiple continuous infusions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted using a hospital administrative database covering >500 US hospitals. An FO cohort included adult intensive care unit (ICU) patients with a central line receiving IV loop diuretics and 2+ continuous IV infusions on 50%+ of their ICU days; a directly matched non-FO cohort included patients without IV diuretic use. The primary outcome of the study was total hospitalization costs per visit. Additional outcomes were ICU costs, mortality, total and ICU length of stay (LOS), 30-day readmission rates, and ventilator use. Unadjusted descriptive analysis was performed using chi-squared or paired t-tests to compare outcomes between the two cohorts. RESULTS: A total of 63,974 patients were identified in each cohort. The total hospitalization cost per visit for the FO cohort was US$15,344 higher than the non-FO cohort (US$42,386 vs US$27,042), and the ICU cost for the FO cohort was US$5,243 higher than the non-FO cohort (US$10,902 vs US$5,659). FO patients had higher mortality (20% vs 16.8%), prolonged LOS (11.5 vs 8.0 days), longer ICU LOS (6.2 vs 3.6 days), higher risk of 30-day readmission (21.8% vs 21.3%), and ventilator usage (47.7% vs 28.3%) than the non-FO cohort (all P<0.05). CONCLUSION: In patients receiving multiple continuous infusions, FO is associated with increased health care resources and costs. Maximally concentrating medications and proactively providing continuous medications in small-volume infusions (SVI) could be a potential solution to prevent iatrogenic FO in critically ill patients. Further prospective research is warranted to assess the impact of the SVI dispensing model on patient outcomes and health care costs.

Treating acute lung injury by strategy of conservative fluid management combining with lung-protective ventilation / 中国基层医药

Objective To explore the role of strategy of conservative fluid management combining with lung-protective ventilation in treating acute lung injury. Methods 40 cases with final diagnosis of acute lung injury were selected and randomly divided into experimental group(22cases) and control group(18cases). Between two groups,on the basis of lung-protective ventilation,therapy policy of conservative fluid management was carried out in experimental group, and strategy with a liberal fluid management was taken in the other group. Hie duration of mechanical ventilation and intensive care together with the incidence rate of nonpulmonary complications( congestive heart failure,renal failure and liver failure) were compared between both groups. Results When compared with the control group,the experimental group had the shorter duration of mechanical ventilation and intensive care( P < 0.05 ). And the incidence rate of nonpulmonary complications were similar in both groups. Conclusion Strategy of conservative fluid management combining with lung-protective ventilation could shortened the duration of mechanical ventilation and intensive care for patients with acute lung injury without increasing the incidence rate of nonpulmonary complications, which was an effective and safe treatment and deserved consulting in clinical work.