Renal Replacement Therapy in Severe Burns: A Multicenter Observational Study.

Acute kidney injury (AKI) after severe burns is historically associated with a high mortality. Over the past two decades, various modes of renal replacement therapy (RRT) have been used in this population. The purpose of this multicenter study was to evaluate demographic, treatment, and outcomes data among severe burn patients treated with RRT collectively at various burn centers around the United States. After institutional review board approval, a multicenter observational study was conducted. All adult patients aged 18 or older, admitted with severe burns who were placed on RRT for acute indications but not randomized into a concurrently enrolling interventional trial, were included. Across eight participating burn centers, 171 subjects were enrolled during a 4-year period. Complete data were available in 170 subjects with a mean age of 51 ± 17, percent total body surface area burn of 38 ± 26% and injury severity score of 27 ± 21. Eighty percent of subjects were male and 34% were diagnosed with smoke inhalation injury. The preferred mode of therapy was continuous venovenous hemofiltration at a mean delivered dose of 37 ± 19 (ml/kg/hour) and a treatment duration of 13 ± 24 days. Overall, in hospital, mortality was 50%. Among survivors, 21% required RRT on discharge from the hospital while 9% continued to require RRT 6 months after discharge. This is the first multicenter cohort of burn patients who underwent RRT reported to date. Overall mortality is comparable to other critically ill populations who undergo RRT. Most patients who survive to discharge eventually recover renal function.

High-volume hemofiltration in adult burn patients with septic shock and acute kidney injury: a multicenter randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Sepsis and septic shock occur commonly in severe burns. Acute kidney injury (AKI) is also common and often results as a consequence of sepsis. Mortality is unacceptably high in burn patients who develop AKI requiring renal replacement therapy and is presumed to be even higher when combined with septic shock. We hypothesized that high-volume hemofiltration (HVHF) as a blood purification technique would be beneficial in this population. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled clinical trial to evaluate the impact of HVHF on the hemodynamic profile of burn patients with septic shock and AKI involving seven burn centers in the United States. Subjects randomized to the HVHF were prescribed a dose of 70 ml/kg/hour for 48 hours while control subjects were managed in standard fashion in accordance with local practices. RESULTS: During a 4-year period, a total of nine subjects were enrolled for the intervention during the ramp-in phase and 28 subjects were randomized, 14 each into the control and HVHF arms respectively. The study was terminated due to slow enrollment. Ramp-in subjects were included along with those randomized in the final analysis. Our primary endpoint, the vasopressor dependency index, decreased significantly at 48 hours compared to baseline in the HVHF group (p = 0.007) while it remained no different in the control arm. At 14 days, the multiple organ dysfunction syndrome score decreased significantly in the HVHF group when compared to the day of treatment initiation (p = 0.02). No changes in inflammatory markers were detected during the 48-hour intervention period. No significant difference in survival was detected. No differences in adverse events were noted between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: HVHF was effective in reversing shock and improving organ function in burn patients with septic shock and AKI, and appears safe. Whether reversal of shock in these patients can improve survival is yet to be determined. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01213914 . Registered 30 September 2010.

Nutrition in Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis: A Multicenter Review.

BACKGROUND: Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS) and toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN) are severe exfoliative diseases treated in burn centers due to large skin losses. Literature on SJS/TEN refers to parenteral nutrition (PN) as the preferred route of nutrition support. This study describes nutrition support interventions in SJS/TEN patients admitted to burn centers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seven burn centers participated in this Institutional Review Board-exempted retrospective chart review of adults with SJS/TEN admitted from 2000-2012. RESULTS: This analysis included 171 patients with SJS/TEN. Median total body surface area involvement was 35% (n = 145; interquartile range [IQR], 16%-62%). The majority required mechanical ventilation (n = 105). Based on indirect calorimetry, measured energy needs were 24.2 kcal/kg of admit weight (n = 58; IQR, 19.4-29.9). Thirty-one patients did not require enteral nutrition (EN) and started oral intake on hospital day 1 (IQR, 1-2), and 81% required EN support due to inadequate oral intake and remained on EN until day 16 (median hospital day, 16; IQR, 9-25). High-protein enteral formulas predominated. PN was rarely used (n = 12, 7%). Most patients were discharged home (57%), with 14% still requiring EN. CONCLUSIONS: Nutrition support should be considered in patients with SJS/TEN due to increased metabolic needs and an inability to meet these needs orally. Most SJS/TEN patients continued on EN and did not require escalation to PN.

Results of a prospective randomized controlled trial of early ambulation for patients with lower extremity autografts.

It is common practice to keep those patients with lower extremity autografts immobile until post-operative day (POD) 5. There is however inherent risks associated with even short periods of immobility. As of now there are no randomized controlled trials looking at early ambulation of patients with lower extremity autografts in the burn community.The objective of this study was to show that patients who begin ambulation within 24 hours of lower extremity autografting will have no increased risk of graft failure than those patients who remain immobile until POD 5. Thirty-one subjects who received autografts to the lower extremity were randomized after surgery into either the early ambulation group (EAG;17 subjects) or the standard treatment group (STG;14 subjects). Those subjects randomized to the EAG began ambulating with physical therapy on POD 1. Subjects in the STG maintained bed rest until POD 5. There was no difference in the number of patients with graft loss in either the EAG or STG on POD 5, and during any of the follow-up visits. No subjects required regrafting. There was a significant difference in the mean minutes of ambulation, with the EAG ambulating longer than the STG (EAG 23.4 minutes [SD 12.03], STG 14.1 [SD 9.00], P=.0235) on POD 5. Burn patients with lower extremity autografts can safely ambulate on POD 1 without fear of graft failure compared with those patients that remain on bed rest for 5 days.