Serum Creatinine Levels and Nephrocheck® Values With and Without Correction for Urine Dilution-A Multicenter Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: The Nephrocheck® test is a single-use cartridge designed to measure the concentrations of two novel cell-cycle arrest biomarkers of acute kidney injury, namely tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase 2 (TIMP-2) and insulin-like growth factor binding protein 7 (IGFBP7). Correlations of serum creatine values and TIMP-2 and IGFBP7 with and without correction for urine dilution have not been previously undertaken in patients undergoing major abdominal surgery. We hypothesized that the Nephrocheck® values would be significantly different with and without correction for urine dilution in patients with elevated creatinine values post major abdominal surgery. METHODS: We performed a post hoc analysis of serum and urine specimens sampled preoperatively and postoperatively in 72 patients undergoing major abdominal surgery. Thirty samples were measured from patients with the greatest decrease and the greatest increase in postoperative serum creatinine values. Urine was analyzed with the Nephrocheck to predict the risk of acute kidney injury (AKIRisk™). We then examined the relationship between serum creatinine and the urinary excretion of TIMP-2 and IGFBP7 as measured by the Nephrocheck test. The AKIRisk between the groups with and without correction for urine dilution was assessed. RESULTS: The median perioperative change in serum creatinine in the two groups was -19% and +57%, respectively. The uncorrected median baseline AKIRisk decreased from 0.70 (25th-75th percentiles, 0.09-1.98) to 0.35 (0.19-0.57) (mg/L)2 in the first group and rose from 0.57 (0.22-1.53) to 0.85 (0.67-2.20) (mg/L)2 in the second group. However, when corrected for the squared urine dilution, the AKIRisk™ in patients with postoperative increases in serum creatinine was not indicative of kidney injury; the corrected AKIRisk was 8.0 (3.2-11.7) µg2/mmol2 before surgery vs.6.9 (5.3-11.0) µg2/mmol2 after the surgery (P = 0.69). CONCLUSION: In the setting of major abdominal surgery, after correction of TIMP-2 and IGFBP7 for urine dilution, the Nephrocheck AKIRisk scores were significantly different from the uncorrected values. These finding imply that the AKIRisk index is a function of urine flow in addition to an increased release of the biomarkers.

A Randomized, Multicenter, Open-Label, Blinded End Point, Phase 2, Feasibility, Efficacy, and Safety Trial of Preoperative Microvascular Protection in Patients Undergoing Major Abdominal Surgery.

BACKGROUND: The endothelial glycocalyx, a carbohydrate-rich layer coating all endothelial surfaces, plays a fundamental role in the function of microcirculation. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of using dexamethasone and albumin to protect the endothelial glycocalyx in patients undergoing abdominal surgery. Secondary and exploratory outcomes included efficacy and safety. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, open-label, blinded end point, phase 2, randomized trial. Patients undergoing colorectal, pancreas, or liver surgery were recruited and randomized to receive either intravenous dexamethasone (16 mg) and 20% albumin (100 mL) at induction of anesthesia, then 200 mL of 20% albumin with each subsequent 1000 mL of crystalloid administered (dexamethasone and albumin [Dex-Alb] group), or crystalloid fluid only with no dexamethasone (control group). Feasibility end points included patient recruitment and retention, consent rate, and successful study drug administration. The primary efficacy end point was the measurement of plasma syndecan-1 level on postoperative day (POD) 1, and secondary end points were heparan sulfate levels and inflammatory markers measured at 4 perioperative timepoints. Safety end points included errors in administration of the intervention, hyperglycemia, occurrence of postoperative complications, and patient retention. RESULTS: Seventy-two patients were randomized. All feasibility end points were achievable. There were no statistically significant differences observed in median (interquartile range) syndecan-1 levels on POD 1 (39 ng·mL-1 [20-97] in the Dex-Alb group versus 41 ng·mL-1 [19-84] in the control group; difference in medians -2.1, 95% confidence interval [CI], -13 to 8.6; P = .69). The Dex-Alb group had lower POD 1 heparan sulfate levels (319 ng·mL-1 [161-717] in the Dex-Alb group versus 1422 [670-2430] ng·mL-1 in the control group; difference in medians -1085, 95% CI, -1779 to -391) and C-reactive protein (CRP) levels on POD 1 (48 [29-77] mg·L-1 in the Dex-Alb group versus 85 mg·L-1 [49-133] in the control group; difference in medians -48, 95% CI, -75 to -21). Fewer patients had one or more postoperative complication in the Dex-Alb group than in the control group (6 [17%] vs 18 patients [50%]; odds ratio = 0.2, 95% CI, 0.06-0.6). CONCLUSIONS: Intravenous dexamethasone and albumin administration was feasible but did not reduce syndecan-1 on POD 1 in patients undergoing abdominal surgery. Given the clinically important CIs observed between the groups for heparan sulfate, CRP, and postoperative complications, a larger trial assessing the associations between dexamethasone and albumin administration and these outcomes is warranted.

Audit of emergency department assessment and management of patients presenting with community-acquired needle stick injuries.

OBJECTIVES: To describe characteristics and management of people with community acquired needle stick injuries (CANSI) attending urban emergency departments; and suggest a guideline to improve assessment, management, and documentation. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of cases with CANSI attending emergency departments in two tertiary hospitals between 2001 and 2005 using medical record review with follow up phone and written survey. RESULTS: Thirty-nine cases met the criteria for CANSI. Persons younger than 30 years sustained 48.72% of all injuries. Source serology was available for only five cases (12.82%). Thirty-one of thirty-nine patients (79.49%) were classed as not immune to hepatitis B but only four of these (12.90%) received both hepatitis B vaccination and hepatitis B immunoglobulin. Six patients (15.38%) received HIV prophylaxis; of which two (33.33%) did not receive baseline HIV testing. Of ten patients referred to immunology clinic for follow up only two (20.00%) attended at 6 months. CONCLUSION: We have identified groups that are at high risk of CANSI, including young males, security workers and cleaners. In the majority of cases protection against hepatitis B was inadequately provided, and a substantial proportion had inadequate baseline assessment and documentation. A guideline is suggested that may be used to improve these deficits.