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.

Pharmacokinetics of Imipenem/Cilastatin Burn Intensive Care Unit Patients Undergoing High-Dose Continuous Venovenous Hemofiltration.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: High-dose continuous venovenous hemofiltration (CVVH) is a continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) used frequently in patients with burns. However, antibiotic dosing is based on inference from studies assessing substantially different methods of CRRT. To address this knowledge gap for imipenem/cilastatin (I/C), we evaluated the systemic and extracorporeal clearances (CLs) of I/C in patients with burns undergoing high-dose CVVH. DESIGN: Prospective clinical pharmacokinetic study. PATIENTS: Ten adult patients with burns receiving I/C for a documented infection and requiring high-dose CVVH were studied. METHODS: Blood and effluent samples for analysis of I/C concentrations were collected for up to 6 hours after the I/C infusion for calculation of I/C total CL (CLTotal ), CL by CVVH (CLHF ), half-life during CVVH, volume of distribution at steady state (Vdss ), and the percentage of drug eliminated by CVVH. RESULTS: In this patient sample, the mean age was 50 ± 17 years, total body surface area burns was 23 ± 27%, and 80% were male. Nine patients were treated with high-dose CVVH for acute kidney injury and one patient for sepsis. The mean delivered CVVH dose was 52 ± 14 ml/kg/hour (range 32-74 ml/kg/hr). The imipenem CLHF was 3.27 ± 0.48 L/hour, which accounted for 23 ± 4% of the CLTotal (14.74 ± 4.75 L/hr). Cilastatin CLHF was 1.98 ± 0.56 L/hour, which accounted for 45 ± 19% of the CLTotal (5.16 + 2.44 L/hr). The imipenem and cilastatin half-lives were 1.77 ± 0.38 hours and 4.21 ± 2.31 hours, respectively. Imipenem and cilastatin Vdss were 35.1 ± 10.3 and 32.8 ± 13.8 L, respectively. CONCLUSION: Efficient removal of I/C by high-dose CVVH, a high overall clearance, and a high volume of distribution in burn intensive care unit patients undergoing this CRRT method warrant aggressive dosing to treat serious infections effectively depending on the infection site and/or pathogen.