Renal replacement therapy initiation strategies in comatose patients with severe acute kidney injury: a secondary analysis of a multicenter randomized controlled trial.

PURPOSE: The effect of renal replacement therapy (RRT) in comatose patients with acute kidney injury (AKI) remains unclear. We compared two RRT initiation strategies on the probability of awakening in comatose patients with severe AKI. METHODS: We conducted a post hoc analysis of a trial comparing two delayed RRT initiation strategies in patients with severe AKI. Patients were monitored until they had oliguria for more than 72 h and/or blood urea nitrogen higher than 112 mg/dL and then randomized to a delayed strategy (RRT initiated after randomization) or a more-delayed one (RRT initiated if complication occurred or when blood urea nitrogen exceeded 140 mg/dL). We included only comatose patients (Richmond Agitation-Sedation scale [RASS] < - 3), irrespective of sedation, at randomization. A multi-state model was built, defining five mutually exclusive states: death, coma (RASS < - 3), incomplete awakening (RASS [- 3; - 2]), awakening (RASS [- 1; + 1] two consecutive days), and agitation (RASS > + 1). Primary outcome was the transition from coma to awakening during 28 days after randomization. RESULTS: A total of 168 comatose patients (90 delayed and 78 more-delayed) underwent randomization. The transition intensity from coma to awakening was lower in the more-delayed group (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.36 [0.17-0.78]; p = 0.010). Time spent awake was 10.11 days [8.11-12.15] and 7.63 days [5.57-9.64] in the delayed and the more-delayed groups, respectively. Two sensitivity analyses were performed based on sedation status and sedation practices across centers, yielding comparable results. CONCLUSION: In comatose patients with severe AKI, a more-delayed RRT initiation strategy resulted in a lower chance of transitioning from coma to awakening.

Differential effect on mortality of the timing of initiation of renal replacement therapy according to the criteria used to diagnose acute kidney injury: an IDEAL-ICU substudy.

BACKGROUND: This substudy of the randomized IDEAL-ICU trial assessed whether the timing of renal replacement therapy (RRT) initiation has a differential effect on 90-day mortality, according to the criteria used to diagnose acute kidney injury (AKI), in patients with early-stage septic shock. METHODS: Three groups were considered according to the criterion defining AKI: creatinine elevation only (group 1), reduced urinary output only (group 2), creatinine elevation plus reduced urinary output (group 3). Primary outcome was 90-day all-cause death. Secondary endpoints were RRT-free days, RRT dependence and renal function at discharge. We assessed the interaction between RRT strategy (early vs. delayed) and group, and the association between RRT strategy and mortality in each group by logistic regression. RESULTS: Of 488 patients enrolled, 205 (42%) patients were in group 1, 174 (35%) in group 2, and 100 (20%) in group 3. The effect of RRT initiation strategy on 90-day mortality across groups showed significant heterogeneity (adjusted interaction p = 0.021). Mortality was 58% vs. 42% for early vs. late RRT initiation, respectively, in group 1 (p = 0.028); 57% vs. 67%, respectively, in group 2 (p = 0.18); and 58% vs. 55%, respectively, in group 3 (p = 0.79). There was no significant difference in secondary outcomes. CONCLUSION: The timing of RRT initiation has a differential impact on outcome according to AKI diagnostic criteria. In patients with elevated creatinine only, early RRT initiation was associated with significantly increased mortality. In patients with reduced urine output only, late RRT initiation was associated with a nonsignificant, 10% absolute increase in mortality.

Prognostic value of an automated thrombin generation assay in COVID-19 patients entering hospital: A multicentric, prospective observational study.

INTRODUCTION: The prognostic significance of the thrombin generation assay (TGA) with a thrombomodulin (TM) challenge in patients entering hospital with severe COVID-19 is uncertain. METHODS: We prospectively evaluated an automated TGA (aTGA) using the ST-ThromboScreen® assay and ST-Genesia® analyser in 179 patients with severe COVID-19 during their admission to 2 university hospitals. The primary outcome was early survival at Day 28 (D28). Secondary outcomes were late survival at Day 90 (D90), later transfer to an intensive care unit (ICU), and occurrence of any thrombotic complications during hospitalisation. RESULTS: Among the 174 patients, 50 were initially admitted to ICUs. Forty-two were transferred to ICUs before D28. Fourteen patients, all in ICUs, died before D28, and 20 before D90, all but 1 in ICUs. None of the aTGA-derived results were associated with vital status either at D28 or D90. Nine patients had a thrombotic event with no association with the aTGA results. Later transfer to the ICU was associated with higher velocity index, thrombin peak height and endogenous thrombin potential (ETP) values of the aTGA performed with TM, and mainly with a lower TM-induced decrease in ETP (odds ratio 15.5 (2.15-132), p = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS: aTGA, a global assay supposed to evidence coagulopathy, could predict neither early or late survival, nor thrombotic events, in hospitalised COVID-19 patients. Its clinical justification in that setting is thus unlikely. A relative resistance of the ETP to TM was associated with later transfer to the ICU and deserves further investigation.

Avdoralimab (Anti-C5aR1 mAb) Versus Placebo in Patients With Severe COVID-19: Results From a Randomized Controlled Trial (FOR COVID Elimination [FORCE]).

OBJECTIVES: Severe COVID-19 is associated with exaggerated complement activation. We assessed the efficacy and safety of avdoralimab (an anti-C5aR1 mAb) in severe COVID-19. DESIGN: FOR COVID Elimination (FORCE) was a double-blind, placebo-controlled study. SETTING: Twelve clinical sites in France (ICU and general hospitals). PATIENTS: Patients receiving greater than or equal to 5 L oxygen/min to maintain Sp o2 greater than 93% (World Health Organization scale ≥ 5). Patients received conventional oxygen therapy or high-flow oxygen (HFO)/noninvasive ventilation (NIV) in cohort 1; HFO, NIV, or invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) in cohort 2; and IMV in cohort 3. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, to receive avdoralimab or placebo. The primary outcome was clinical status on the World Health Organization ordinal scale at days 14 and 28 for cohorts 1 and 3, and the number of ventilator-free days at day 28 (VFD28) for cohort 2. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We randomized 207 patients: 99 in cohort 1, 49 in cohort 2, and 59 in cohort 3. During hospitalization, 95% of patients received glucocorticoids. Avdoralimab did not improve World Health Organization clinical scale score on days 14 and 28 (between-group difference on day 28 of -0.26 (95% CI, -1.2 to 0.7; p = 0.7) in cohort 1 and -0.28 (95% CI, -1.8 to 1.2; p = 0.6) in cohort 3). Avdoralimab did not improve VFD28 in cohort 2 (between-group difference of -6.3 (95% CI, -13.2 to 0.7; p = 0.96) or secondary outcomes in any cohort. No subgroup of interest was identified. CONCLUSIONS: In this randomized trial in hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia, avdoralimab did not significantly improve clinical status at days 14 and 28 (funded by Innate Pharma, ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04371367).

Influence of socioeconomic status on functional recovery after ARDS caused by SARS-CoV-2: a multicentre, observational study.

INTRODUCTION: Prognosis of patients with COVID-19 depends on the severity of the pulmonary affection. The most severe cases may progress to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), which is associated with a risk of long-term repercussions on respiratory function and neuromuscular outcomes. The functional repercussions of severe forms of COVID-19 may have a major impact on quality of life, and impair the ability to return to work or exercise. Social inequalities in healthcare may influence prognosis, with socially vulnerable individuals more likely to develop severe forms of disease. We describe here the protocol for a prospective, multicentre study that aims to investigate the influence of social vulnerability on functional recovery in patients who were hospitalised in intensive care for ARDS caused by COVID-19. This study will also include an embedded qualitative study that aims to describe facilitators and barriers to compliance with rehabilitation, describe patients' health practices and identify social representations of health, disease and care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The "Functional Recovery From Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) Due to COVID-19: Influence of Socio-Economic Status" (RECOVIDS) study is a mixed-methods, observational, multicentre cohort study performed during the routine follow-up of post-intensive care unit (ICU) functional recovery after ARDS. All patients admitted to a participating ICU for PCR-proven SARS-CoV-2 infection and who underwent chest CT scan at the initial phase AND who received respiratory support (mechanical or not) or high-flow nasal oxygen, AND had ARDS diagnosed by the Berlin criteria will be eligible. The primary outcome is the presence of lung sequelae at 6 months after ICU discharge, defined either by alterations on pulmonary function tests, oxygen desaturation during a standardised 6 min walk test or fibrosis-like pulmonary findings on chest CT. Patients will be considered to be socially disadvantaged if they have an "Evaluation de la Précarité et des Inégalités de santé dans les Centres d'Examen de Santé" (EPICES) score ≥30.17 at inclusion. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol and the informed consent form were approved by an independent ethics committee (Comité de Protection des Personnes Sud Méditerranée II) on 10 July 2020 (2020-A02014-35). All patients will provide informed consent before participation. Findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at national and international congresses. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04556513.

Continuous renal replacement therapy versus intermittent hemodialysis as first modality for renal replacement therapy in severe acute kidney injury: a secondary analysis of AKIKI and IDEAL-ICU studies.

BACKGROUND: Intermittent hemodialysis (IHD) and continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) are the two main RRT modalities in patients with severe acute kidney injury (AKI). Meta-analyses conducted more than 10 years ago did not show survival difference between these two modalities. As the quality of RRT delivery has improved since then, we aimed to reassess whether the choice of IHD or CRRT as first modality affects survival of patients with severe AKI. METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of two multicenter randomized controlled trials (AKIKI and IDEAL-ICU) that compared an early RRT initiation strategy with a delayed one. We included patients allocated to the early strategy in order to emulate a trial where patients would have been randomized to receive either IHD or CRRT within twelve hours after the documentation of severe AKI. We determined each patient's modality group as the first RRT modality they received. The primary outcome was 60-day overall survival. We used two propensity score methods to balance the differences in baseline characteristics between groups and the primary analysis relied on inverse probability of treatment weighting. RESULTS: A total of 543 patients were included. Continuous RRT was the first modality in 269 patients and IHD in 274. Patients receiving CRRT had higher cardiovascular and total-SOFA scores. Inverse probability weighting allowed to adequately balance groups on all predefined confounders. The weighted Kaplan-Meier death rate at day 60 was 54·4% in the CRRT group and 46·5% in the IHD group (weighted HR 1·26, 95% CI 1·01-1·60). In a complementary analysis of less severely ill patients (SOFA score: 3-10), receiving IHD was associated with better day 60 survival compared to CRRT (weighted HR 1.82, 95% CI 1·01-3·28; p < 0.01). We found no evidence of a survival difference between the two RRT modalities in more severe patients. CONCLUSION: Compared to IHD, CRRT as first modality seemed to convey no benefit in terms of survival or of kidney recovery and might even have been associated with less favorable outcome in patients with lesser severity of disease. A prospective randomized non-inferiority trial should be implemented to solve the persistent conundrum of the optimal RRT technique.

Personalization of renal replacement therapy initiation: a secondary analysis of the AKIKI and IDEAL-ICU trials.

BACKGROUND: Trials comparing early and delayed strategies of renal replacement therapy in patients with severe acute kidney injury may have missed differences in survival as a result of mixing together patients at heterogeneous levels of risks. Our aim was to evaluate the heterogeneity of treatment effect on 60-day mortality from an early vs a delayed strategy across levels of risk for renal replacement therapy initiation under a delayed strategy. METHODS: We used data from the AKIKI, and IDEAL-ICU randomized controlled trials to develop a multivariable logistic regression model for renal replacement therapy initiation within 48 h after allocation to a delayed strategy. We then used an interaction with spline terms in a Cox model to estimate treatment effects across the predicted risks of RRT initiation. RESULTS: We analyzed data from 1107 patients (619 and 488 in the AKIKI and IDEAL-ICU trial respectively). In the pooled sample, we found evidence for heterogeneous treatment effects (P = 0.023). Patients at an intermediate-high risk of renal replacement therapy initiation within 48 h may have benefited from an early strategy (absolute risk difference, - 14%; 95% confidence interval, - 27% to - 1%). For other patients, we found no evidence of benefit from an early strategy of renal replacement therapy initiation but a trend for harm (absolute risk difference, 8%; 95% confidence interval, - 5% to 21% in patients at intermediate-low risk). CONCLUSIONS: We have identified a clinically sound heterogeneity of treatment effect of an early vs a delayed strategy of renal replacement therapy initiation that may reflect varying degrees of kidney demand-capacity mismatch.

Renal Replacement Therapy for Acute Kidney Injury in French Intensive Care Units: A Nationwide Survey of Practices.

BACKGROUND: The frequency of acute kidney injury (AKI) can be as high as 50% in the intensive care unit (ICU). Despite the publication of national guidelines in France in 2015 for the use of RRT, there are no data describing the implementation of these recommendations in real-life. METHODS: We performed a nationwide survey of practices from November 15, 2019, to January 24, 2020, in France. An electronic questionnaire based on the items recommended in the national guidelines was sent using an online survey platform, to the chiefs of all ICUs in France. The questionnaire comprised a section for the Department Chief about local organization and facilities, and a second section destined for individual physicians about their personal practices. RESULTS: We contacted the Department Chief in 356 eligible ICUs, of whom 88 (24.7%) responded regarding their ICU organization. From these 88 ICUs, 232/285 physicians (82%) completed the questionnaire regarding individual practices. The practices reported by respondent physicians were as follows: intermittent RRT was first-line choice in >75% in a patient with single organ (kidney) failure at the acute phase, whereas continuous RRT was predominant (>75%) in patients with septic shock or multi-organ failure. Blood and dialysate flow for intermittent RRT were 200-300 mL/min and 400-600 mL/min, respectively. The dose of dialysis for continuous RRT was 25-35 mL/kg/h (65%). Insertion of the dialysis catheter was mainly performed by the resident under echographic guidance, in the right internal jugular vein. The most commonly used catheter lock was citrate (53%). The most frequently cited criterion for weaning from RRT was diuresis, followed by a drop in urinary markers (urea and creatinine). CONCLUSION: This study shows a satisfactory level of reported compliance with French guidelines and recent scientific evidence among ICU physicians regarding initiation of RRT for AKI in the ICU.

Mental health and stress among ICU healthcare professionals in France according to intensity of the COVID-19 epidemic.

BACKGROUND: We investigated the impact of the COVID-19 crisis on mental health of professionals working in the intensive care unit (ICU) according to the intensity of the epidemic in France. METHODS: This cross-sectional survey was conducted in 77 French hospitals from April 22 to May 13 2020. All ICU frontline healthcare workers were eligible. The primary endpoint was the mental health, assessed using the 12-item General Health Questionnaire. Sources of stress during the crisis were assessed using the Perceived Stressors in Intensive Care Units (PS-ICU) scale. Epidemic intensity was defined as high or low for each region based on publicly available data from Santé Publique France. Effects were assessed using linear mixed models, moderation and mediation analyses. RESULTS: In total, 2643 health professionals participated; 64.36% in high-intensity zones. Professionals in areas with greater epidemic intensity were at higher risk of mental health issues (p < 0.001), and higher levels of overall perceived stress (p < 0.001), compared to low-intensity zones. Factors associated with higher overall perceived stress were female sex (B = 0.13; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.08-0.17), having a relative at risk of COVID-19 (B = 0.14; 95%-CI = 0.09-0.18) and working in high-intensity zones (B = 0.11; 95%-CI = 0.02-0.20). Perceived stress mediated the impact of the crisis context on mental health (B = 0.23, 95%-CI = 0.05, 0.41) and the impact of stress on mental health was moderated by positive thinking, b = - 0.32, 95% CI = - 0.54, - 0.11. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 negatively impacted the mental health of ICU professionals. Professionals working in zones where the epidemic was of high intensity were significantly more affected, with higher levels of perceived stress. This study is supported by a grant from the French Ministry of Health (PHRC-COVID 2020).

Comparison of two delayed strategies for renal replacement therapy initiation for severe acute kidney injury (AKIKI 2): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Delaying renal replacement therapy (RRT) for some time in critically ill patients with severe acute kidney injury and no severe complication is safe and allows optimisation of the use of medical devices. Major uncertainty remains concerning the duration for which RRT can be postponed without risk. Our aim was to test the hypothesis that a more-delayed initiation strategy would result in more RRT-free days, compared with a delayed strategy. METHODS: This was an unmasked, multicentre, prospective, open-label, randomised, controlled trial done in 39 intensive care units in France. We monitored critically ill patients with severe acute kidney injury (defined as Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes stage 3) until they had oliguria for more than 72 h or a blood urea nitrogen concentration higher than 112 mg/dL. Patients were then randomly assigned (1:1) to either a strategy (delayed strategy) in which RRT was started just after randomisation or to a more-delayed strategy. With the more-delayed strategy, RRT initiation was postponed until mandatory indication (noticeable hyperkalaemia or metabolic acidosis or pulmonary oedema) or until blood urea nitrogen concentration reached 140 mg/dL. The primary outcome was the number of days alive and free of RRT between randomisation and day 28 and was done in the intention-to-treat population. The study is registered with ClinicalTrial.gov, NCT03396757 and is completed. FINDINGS: Between May 7, 2018, and Oct 11, 2019, of 5336 patients assessed, 278 patients underwent randomisation; 137 were assigned to the delayed strategy and 141 to the more-delayed strategy. The number of complications potentially related to acute kidney injury or to RRT were similar between groups. The median number of RRT-free days was 12 days (IQR 0-25) in the delayed strategy and 10 days (IQR 0-24) in the more-delayed strategy (p=0·93). In a multivariable analysis, the hazard ratio for death at 60 days was 1·65 (95% CI 1·09-2·50, p=0·018) with the more-delayed versus the delayed strategy. The number of complications potentially related to acute kidney injury or renal replacement therapy did not differ between groups. INTERPRETATION: In severe acute kidney injury patients with oliguria for more than 72 h or blood urea nitrogen concentration higher than 112 mg/dL and no severe complication that would mandate immediate RRT, longer postponing of RRT initiation did not confer additional benefit and was associated with potential harm. FUNDING: Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique.

Prevalence of pressure injuries among critically ill patients and factors associated with their occurrence in the intensive care unit: The PRESSURE study.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of pressure injuries (PIs) in critically ill patients has been extensively studied, but there is uncertainty regarding the risk factors. The main objective of this study was to describe the prevalence of PIs in critically ill patients. Secondary objectives were to describe PI, use of preventive measures for PI, and factors associated with occurrence of PI in the intensive care unit (ICU). MATERIAL AND METHODS: This was a 1-day point-prevalence study performed on a weekday in June 2017 in ICUs in France. On the same day, we noted the presence or absence of PI in all hospitalised patients of the participating ICUs, data on the ICUs, and the characteristics of patients and of PI. RESULTS: Eighty-six participating ICUs allowed the inclusion of 1228 patients. The prevalence of PI on the study day was 18.7% (95% confidence interval: 16.6-21.0). PIs acquired in the ICU were observed in 12.5% (95% confidence interval: 10.6-14.3) of critically ill patients on the study day. The most frequent locations of PI were the sacrum (57.4%), heel (35.2%), and face (8.7%). Severe forms of PI accounted for 40.8% of all PIs. Antiulcer mattresses were used in 91.5% of the patients, and active and/or passive mobilisation was performed for all the patients. Multiple logistic regression analysis identified longer length of stay in the ICU, a higher Simplified Acute Physiology Score, higher body weight, motor neurological disorder, high-dose steroids, and absence of oral nutrition on the study day as factors independently associated with occurrence of PI in the ICU. CONCLUSION: This large point-prevalence study shows that PIs are found in about one of five critically ill patients despite extensive use of devices for preventing PI. Acquisition of PI in the ICU is strongly related to the patient's severity of illness on admission to the ICU and length of stay in the ICU.

Adverse Events in Intensive Care and Continuing Care Units During Bed-Bath Procedures: The Prospective Observational NURSIng during critical carE (NURSIE) Study.

OBJECTIVES: Standard nursing interventions, especially bed-baths, in ICUs can lead to complications or adverse events defined as a physiologic change that can be life-threatening or that prolongs hospitalization. However, the frequency and type of these adverse events are rarely reported in the literature. The primary objective of our study was to describe the proportion of patients experiencing at least one serious adverse event during bed-bath. The secondary objectives were to determine the incidence of each type of serious adverse event and identify risk factors for these serious adverse events. DESIGN: Prospective multicenter observational study. SETTING: Twenty-four ICUs in France, Belgium, and Luxembourg. PATIENTS: The patients included in this study had been admitted to an ICU for less than 72 hours and required at least one of the following treatments: invasive ventilation, vasopressors, noninvasive ventilation, high-flow oxygen therapy. Serious adverse events were defined as cardiac arrest, accidental extubation, desaturation and/or mucus plugging/inhalation, hypotension and/or arrhythmia and/or agitation requiring therapeutic intervention, acute pain, accidental disconnection or dysfunction of equipment, and patient fall requiring additional assistance. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The study included 253 patients from May 1, 2018, to July 31, 2018 in 24 ICUs, representing 1,529 nursing procedures. The mean Simplified Acute Physiology Score II was 54 ± 19. Nursing care was administered by an average of 2 ± 1 caregivers and lasted between 11 and 20 minutes. Of the 253 patients included, 142 (56%) experienced at least one serious adverse event. Of the 1,529 nursing procedures, 295 (19%) were complicated by at least one serious adverse event. In multivariate analysis, the factors associated with serious adverse event were as follows: presence of a specific protocol (p = 0.011); tracheostomy (p = 0.032); administration of opioids (p = 0.007); presence of a physician (p = 0.0004); duration of nursing care between 6 and 10 minutes (p = 0.003), duration of nursing care between 11 and 20 minutes (p = 0.005), duration of nursing care greater than 40 minutes (p = 0.04) with a reference duration of nursing care between 20 and 40 minutes. CONCLUSIONS: Serious adverse events were observed in one-half of patients and concerned one-fifth of nurses, confirming the need for caution. Further studies are needed to test systematic serious adverse event prevention strategies.

Vancomycin Serum Concentration after 48 h of Administration: A 3-Years Survey in an Intensive Care Unit.

The present study assessed the proportion of intensive care unit (ICU) patients who had a vancomycin serum concentration between 20 and 25 mg/L after 24-48 h of intravenous vancomycin administration. From 2016 to 2018, adult ICU patients with vancomycin continuous infusion (CI) for any indication were included. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with a first-available vancomycin serum concentration between 20-25 mg/L at 24 h (D2) or 48 h (D3). Of 3894 admitted ICU patients, 179 were included. A median loading dose of 15.6 (interquartile range (IQR) = (12.5-20.8) mg/kg) was given in 151/179 patients (84%). The median daily doses of vancomycin infusion for D1 and D2 were 2000 [(IQR (1600-2000)) and 2000 (IQR (2000-2500)) mg/d], respectively. The median duration of treatment was 4 (2-7) days. At D2 or D3, the median value of first serum vancomycin concentration was 19.8 (IQR (16.0-25.1)) with serum vancomycin concentration between 20-25 mg/L reported in 43 patients (24%). Time spent in the ICU before vancomycin initiation was the only risk factor of non-therapeutic concentration at D2 or D3. Acute kidney injury occurred significantly more when vancomycin concentration was supra therapeutic at D2 or D3. At D28, 44 (26%) patients had died. These results emphasize the need of appropriate loading dose and regular monitoring to improve vancomycin efficacy and avoid renal toxicity.

Short- and Long-Term Outcome of Chronic Dialyzed Patients Admitted to the ICU and Assessment of Prognosis Factors: Results of a 6-Year Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVES: Data about end-stage kidney disease patients admitted to the ICU are scarce, dated, and mostly limited to short-term survival. The aim of this study was to assess the short- and long-term outcome and to determine the prognostic factors for end-stage kidney disease patients admitted to the ICU. DESIGN: Prospective observational study. SETTING: Medical ICUs in two university hospitals. PATIENTS: Consecutive end-stage kidney disease patients admitted in two ICUs between 2012 and 2017. INTERVENTION: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Renal replacement therapy variables, demographic, clinical, and biological data were collected. The requirement of mechanical ventilation and vasopressive drugs were also collected. In-ICU and one-year mortality were estimated and all data were analyzed in order to identify predictive factors of short and long-term mortality. A total of 140 patients were included, representing 1.7% of total admissions over the study period. Septic shock was the main reason for admission mostly of pulmonary origin. Median Simplified Acute Physiology Score II and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score were at 63 and 6.7, respectively. In-ICU, hospital, and 1-year mortality were 41.4%, 46.4%, and 63%, respectively. ICU mortality was significantly higher as compared with ICU control group non-end-stage kidney disease (25% vs 41.4%; p = 0.005). By multivariate analysis, the short-term outcome was significantly associated with nonrenal Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score, and with the requirement of mechanical ventilation or/and vasoconstrictive agents during ICU stay. One-year mortality was associated with increased dialysis duration (> 3 yr) and phosphatemia (> 2.5 mmol/L), with lower albuminemia (< 30 g/L) and nonrenal Sequential Organ Failure Assessment greater than 8. CONCLUSIONS: End-stage kidney disease patients presented frequently severe complications requiring critical care that induced significant short- and long-term mortality. ICU and hospital mortality depended mainly on the severity of the critical event reflected by Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score and the need of mechanical ventilation and/or catecholamines. One-year mortality was associated with both albuminemia and phosphatemia and with prior duration of chronic dialysis treatment, and with organ failure at ICU admission.

Delayed versus early initiation of renal replacement therapy for severe acute kidney injury: a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: The timing of renal replacement therapy (RRT) for severe acute kidney injury is highly debated when no life-threatening complications are present. We assessed whether a strategy of delayed versus early RRT initiation affects 28-day survival in critically ill adults with severe acute kidney injury. METHODS: In this systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE (via PubMed), Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for randomised trials published from April 1, 2008, to Dec 20, 2019, that compared delayed and early RRT initiation strategies in patients with severe acute kidney injury. Trials were eligible for inclusion if they included critically ill patients aged 18 years or older with acute kidney injury (defined as a Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes [KDIGO] acute kidney injury stage 2 or 3, or, where KDIGO was unavailable, a renal Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score of 3 or higher). We contacted the principal investigator of each eligible trial to request individual patient data. From the included trials, any patients without acute kidney injury or who were not randomly allocated were not included in the individual patient data meta-analysis. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at day 28 after randomisation. This study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42019125025). FINDINGS: Among the 1031 studies identified, one study that met the eligibility criteria was excluded because the recruitment period was not recent enough, and ten (including 2143 patients) were included in the analysis. Individual patient data were available for nine studies (2083 patients), from which 1879 patients had severe acute kidney injury and were randomly allocated: 946 (50%) to the delayed RRT group and 933 (50%) to the early RRT group. 390 (42%) of 929 patients allocated to the delayed RRT group and who had available data did not receive RRT. The proportion of patients who died by day 28 did not significantly differ between the delayed RRT group (366 [44%] of 837) and the early RRT group (355 [43%] of 827; risk ratio 1·01 [95% CI 0·91 to 1·13], p=0·80), corresponding to an overall risk difference of 0·01 (95% CI -0·04 to 0·06). There was no heterogeneity across studies (I2=0%; τ2=0), and most studies had a low risk of bias. INTERPRETATION: The timing of RRT initiation does not affect survival in critically ill patients with severe acute kidney injury in the absence of urgent indications for RRT. Delaying RRT initiation, with close patient monitoring, might lead to a reduced use of RRT, thereby saving health resources. FUNDING: None.

The Artificial Kidney Initiation in Kidney Injury 2 (AKIKI2): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The Artificial Kidney Initiation in Kidney Injury (AKIKI) trial showed that a delayed renal replacement therapy (RRT) strategy for severe acute kidney injury (AKI) in critically ill patients was safe and associated with major reduction in RRT initiation compared with an early strategy. The five criteria which mandated RRT initiation in the delayed arm were: severe hyperkalemia, severe acidosis, acute pulmonary edema due to fluid overload resulting in severe hypoxemia, serum urea concentration > 40 mmol/l and oliguria/anuria > 72 h. However, duration of anuria/oliguria and level of blood urea are still criteria open to debate. The objective of the study is to compare the delayed strategy used in AKIKI (now termed "standard") with another in which RRT is further delayed for a longer period (termed "delayed strategy"). METHODS/DESIGN: This is a prospective, multicenter, open-label, two-arm randomized trial. The study is composed of two stages (observational and randomization stages). At any time, the occurrence of a potentially severe condition (severe hyperkalemia, severe metabolic or mixed acidosis, acute pulmonary edema due to fluid overload resulting in severe hypoxemia) suggests immediate RRT initiation. Patients receiving (or who have received) intravenously administered catecholamines and/or invasive mechanical ventilation and presenting with AKI stage 3 of the KDIGO classification and with no potentially severe condition are included in the observational stage. Patients presenting a serum urea concentration > 40 mmol/l and/or an oliguria/anuria for more than 72 h are randomly allocated to a standard (RRT is initiated within 12 h) or a delayed RRT strategy (RRT is initiated only if an above-mentioned potentially severe condition occurs or if the serum urea concentration reaches 50 mmol/l). The primary outcome will be the number of RRT-free days at day 28. One interim analysis is planned. It is expected to include 810 patients in the observational stage and to randomize 270 subjects. DISCUSSION: The AKIKI2 study should improve the knowledge of RRT initiation criteria in critically ill patients. The potential reduction in RRT use allowed by a delayed RRT strategy might be associated with less invasive care and decreased costs. Enrollment is ongoing. Inclusions are expected to be completed by November 2019. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT03396757. Registered on 11 January 2018.