2
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      Call for Papers in Kidney and Blood Pressure ResearchKidney Function and Omics Science

      Submission Deadline: December 20, 2023

      Submit now

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Hyperoncotic Albumin Solution in Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy Patients

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Aim

          The aim of this study was to investigate the association of hyperoncotic (20%) human albumin solution (HAS) with outcomes among critically ill patients receiving continuous renal replacement therapy (RRT).

          Methods

          Analysis of the Randomized Evaluation of Normal versus Augmented Level (RENAL) RRT trial data.

          Results

          Of 1,508 patients, 771 (51%) received albumin. Of these, 345 (45%) received 4% HAS only, 155 (20%) received 20% HAS only, and 271 (35%) received both. Patients who received combined 4% and 20% HAS were more severely ill, received more days of RENAL trial therapy and required mechanical ventilation for longer. Mean daily fluid balance was −288 mL (−904 to 261) with 20% HAS only versus 245 mL (−248 to 1,050) with 4% HAS only ( p < 0.001). On Cox proportional hazards regression, 20% HAS exposure was not associated with greater 90-day mortality (odds ratio 1.12, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.77–1.62; p = 0.55) or longer recovery to RRT independence (sub-hazard ratio 1.04, 95% CI: 0.84–1.30; p = 0.70) compared to those who received 4% HAS only.

          Conclusions

          RENAL trial patients commonly received albumin in varying concentrations. The administration of 20% HAS was associated with a more negative fluid balance but was not independently associated with increased mortality or RRT dependence when compared to 4% HAS only.

          Related collections

          Most cited references36

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Moving towards best practice when using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) using the propensity score to estimate causal treatment effects in observational studies

          The propensity score is defined as a subject's probability of treatment selection, conditional on observed baseline covariates. Weighting subjects by the inverse probability of treatment received creates a synthetic sample in which treatment assignment is independent of measured baseline covariates. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) using the propensity score allows one to obtain unbiased estimates of average treatment effects. However, these estimates are only valid if there are no residual systematic differences in observed baseline characteristics between treated and control subjects in the sample weighted by the estimated inverse probability of treatment. We report on a systematic literature review, in which we found that the use of IPTW has increased rapidly in recent years, but that in the most recent year, a majority of studies did not formally examine whether weighting balanced measured covariates between treatment groups. We then proceed to describe a suite of quantitative and qualitative methods that allow one to assess whether measured baseline covariates are balanced between treatment groups in the weighted sample. The quantitative methods use the weighted standardized difference to compare means, prevalences, higher‐order moments, and interactions. The qualitative methods employ graphical methods to compare the distribution of continuous baseline covariates between treated and control subjects in the weighted sample. Finally, we illustrate the application of these methods in an empirical case study. We propose a formal set of balance diagnostics that contribute towards an evolving concept of ‘best practice’ when using IPTW to estimate causal treatment effects using observational data. © 2015 The Authors. Statistics in Medicine Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Association between a chloride-liberal vs chloride-restrictive intravenous fluid administration strategy and kidney injury in critically ill adults.

            Administration of traditional chloride-liberal intravenous fluids may precipitate acute kidney injury (AKI). To assess the association of a chloride-restrictive (vs chloride-liberal) intravenous fluid strategy with AKI in critically ill patients. Prospective, open-label, sequential period pilot study of 760 patients admitted consecutively to the intensive care unit (ICU) during the control period (February 18 to August 17, 2008) compared with 773 patients admitted consecutively during the intervention period (February 18 to August 17, 2009) at a university-affiliated hospital in Melbourne, Australia. During the control period, patients received standard intravenous fluids. After a 6-month phase-out period (August 18, 2008, to February 17, 2009), any use of chloride-rich intravenous fluids (0.9% saline, 4% succinylated gelatin solution, or 4% albumin solution) was restricted to attending specialist approval only during the intervention period; patients instead received a lactated solution (Hartmann solution), a balanced solution (Plasma-Lyte 148), and chloride-poor 20% albumin. The primary outcomes included increase from baseline to peak creatinine level in the ICU and incidence of AKI according to the risk, injury, failure, loss, end-stage (RIFLE) classification. Secondary post hoc analysis outcomes included the need for renal replacement therapy (RRT), length of stay in ICU and hospital, and survival. RESULTS Chloride administration decreased by 144 504 mmol (from 694 to 496 mmol/patient) from the control period to the intervention period. Comparing the control period with the intervention period, the mean serum creatinine level increase while in the ICU was 22.6 μmol/L (95% CI, 17.5-27.7 μmol/L) vs 14.8 μmol/L (95% CI, 9.8-19.9 μmol/L) (P = .03), the incidence of injury and failure class of RIFLE-defined AKI was 14% (95% CI, 11%-16%; n = 105) vs 8.4% (95% CI, 6.4%-10%; n = 65) (P <.001), and the use of RRT was 10% (95% CI, 8.1%-12%; n = 78) vs 6.3% (95% CI, 4.6%-8.1%; n = 49) (P = .005). After adjustment for covariates, this association remained for incidence of injury and failure class of RIFLE-defined AKI (odds ratio, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.37-0.75]; P <.001) and use of RRT (odds ratio, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.33-0.81]; P = .004). There were no differences in hospital mortality, hospital or ICU length of stay, or need for RRT after hospital discharge. CONCLUSION The implementation of a chloride-restrictive strategy in a tertiary ICU was associated with a significant decrease in the incidence of AKI and use of RRT. Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00885404.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              A positive fluid balance is associated with a worse outcome in patients with acute renal failure

              Introduction Despite significant improvements in intensive care medicine, the prognosis of acute renal failure (ARF) remains poor, with mortality ranging from 40% to 65%. The aim of the present observational study was to analyze the influence of patient characteristics and fluid balance on the outcome of ARF in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. Methods The data were extracted from the Sepsis Occurrence in Acutely Ill Patients (SOAP) study, a multicenter observational cohort study to which 198 ICUs from 24 European countries contributed. All adult patients admitted to a participating ICU between 1 and 15 May 2002, except those admitted for uncomplicated postoperative surveillance, were eligible for the study. For the purposes of this substudy, patients were divided into two groups according to whether they had ARF. The groups were compared with respect to patient characteristics, fluid balance, and outcome. Results Of the 3,147 patients included in the SOAP study, 1,120 (36%) had ARF at some point during their ICU stay. Sixty-day mortality rates were 36% in patients with ARF and 16% in patients without ARF (P < 0.01). Oliguric patients and patients treated with renal replacement therapy (RRT) had higher 60-day mortality rates than patients without oliguria or the need for RRT (41% versus 33% and 52% versus 32%, respectively; P < 0.01). Independent risk factors for 60-day mortality in the patients with ARF were age, Simplified Acute Physiology Score II (SAPS II), heart failure, liver cirrhosis, medical admission, mean fluid balance, and need for mechanical ventilation. Among patients treated with RRT, length of stay and mortality were lower when RRT was started early in the course of the ICU stay. Conclusion In this large European multicenter study, a positive fluid balance was an important factor associated with increased 60-day mortality. Outcome among patients treated with RRT was better when RRT was started early in the course of the ICU stay.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Blood Purif
                Blood Purif
                BPU
                Blood Purification
                S. Karger AG (Allschwilerstrasse 10, P.O. Box · Postfach · Case postale, CH–4009, Basel, Switzerland · Schweiz · Suisse, Phone: +41 61 306 11 11, Fax: +41 61 306 12 34, karger@karger.com )
                0253-5068
                1421-9735
                July 2022
                12 August 2021
                12 August 2021
                : 51
                : 7
                : 590-599
                Affiliations
                [1] aDepartment of Intensive Care, Austin Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
                [2] bDepartment of Anaesthesia, Austin Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
                [3] cAustralian and New Zealand Intensive Care Research Centre, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
                [4] dDepartment of Intensive Care, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
                [5] eDepartment of Critical Care, School of Medicine, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
                [6] fThe George Institute for Global Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
                [7] gData Analytics Research and Evaluation (DARE) Centre, The University of Melbourne and Austin Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
                Author notes
                Article
                bpu-0051-0590
                10.1159/000517957
                9393816
                34515056
                d8ee69e5-f7ef-49bf-9f18-169a448135d1
                Copyright © 2021 by The Author(s). Published by S. Karger AG, Basel

                This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC). Usage and distribution for commercial purposes requires written permission. Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug. Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.

                History
                : 14 January 2021
                : 4 June 2021
                : 2022
                Page count
                Figures: 1, Tables: 4, References: 32, Pages: 10
                Categories
                Critical Care Nephrology − Research Article

                hyperoncotic albumin,renal replacement therapy,acute kidney injury

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content249

                Cited by4

                Most referenced authors877