Добавил:
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз: Предмет: Файл:
Ординатура / Хирургия / Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана / Книга_5224_Библиотеки_им_академика_М_И_Перельмана.pdf
Скачиваний:
0
Добавлен:
02.09.2026
Размер:
21 Мб
Скачать
30 Ultrasound in Acute Kidney Injury 357
The microbubbles used for contrast-enhanced ultrasound are sensitive to insonation and consequently can easily be depleted by overscanning. The rst­generation ultrasound contrast agents contained microbubbles of air and were characterized by a very short life [ half-life and the ability to cross the pulmonary circulation have led to the develop­ment of second-generation contrast agents. They include microbubbles of peruo­rocarbon, nitrogen gas, or sulfur hexauoride stabilized in a phospholipid membrane. The bubbles oscillate when exposed to the ultrasound beam [30].
To evaluate the perfusion, the ultrasound contrast is infused continuously at low velocity, while intermittent imaging with destructive frames at increasing imaging frame rates is recorded. This allows to build a curve representing replenishment kinetics from a series of clips at different frame rates. Fitting of this curve enables derivation of two relative parameters representing perfusion in the tissue: the regional blood volume (plateau value) and blood velocity (initial slope of the replenishment curve). The local blood ow, F, is thus the product of microbubble velocity by regional blood volumeF = A × βwhere A corresponds to the plateau signal intensity and β is the initial slope of the replenishment curve [31]. Other approaches for estimating the blood ow, derived by the extension of the previous application, are developed; this has led to the development and availability of different analysis software. During the acquisition of a destruction relling sequence, several images are collected. Each panel of acquisition is divided in two: one side shows contrast-specic image, while the other side is standard B-mode image. In a healthy and well-perfused kidney after the destruction ash, no signal is detectable in the contrast-specic image. After 5 s, partial replenishment of the main arteries with contrast can be n oticed. At 10 s, the kidney is fully replenished with contrast. During the acquisition of these different images in the contrast-specic box, there are any signicant changes observ able in B-mode images [32, 33].
Although the capability of CEUS to assess microvascular perfusion and renal blood ow is well dened [32] and has been proposed for predicting renal outcomes in patients with acute kidney injury [34], its usefulness at bedside in the intensive care unit is still unclear, it is affected by a variability of measure up, and it is not correlated with pati ents characteristics [28, 35]. More studies should be performed in critical patients to determine whether CEUS parameters predict or facilitate the early diagnosis of acute kidney injury and whether they can help assess the impact of therapeutic interventions in real time [33].
29]. The need for microbubbles with a longer

Conclusions

Ultimately, the interpretation of RRI may be highly dependent on the clinical context, and patient selection for studies investigating the signicance of the RRI should be considered carefully. Doppler-based RRI and IRVF may enable to indi­vidualize diagnostic tools in AKI and moni tor its evolution, but an integrated
358 G. Romero-González et al.
approach with other echographic techniques and biomarkers should be preferred. Furthermore, more studies are needed to conrm preliminary reports.
Nowadays, CEUS failed to demonstrate its usefulness [36] although additional studies are needed, even if assessing performance of the technique (e.g., machine setting, homogenization of infusion modalities
of contrast media, use of 3D
probes) [36].

References

1. Moses AA, Fernandez HE. Ultrasonography in acute kidney injury. POCUS J. 2022;7:35–44.
2. Romero-González G, Manrique J, Slon-Roblero MF, Husain-Syed F, De la Espriella R, Ferrari F, et al. PoCUS in nephrology: a new tool to improve our diagnostic skills. Clin J. 2023;16(2):218–29.
3. Firth JDRALJ. Lancet. 1981;1:1033–5.
4. Mullens W, Abrahams Z, Francis GS, Sokos G, Taylor DO, Starling RC, et al. Importance of venous congestion for worsening of renal function in advanced decompensated heart failure. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;53:589–96.
5. Beaubien-Souligny W, Denault A, Robillard P, Desjardins G. The role of point-of-care ultra­sound monitoring in cardiac surgical patients with acute kidney injury. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2019;33(10):2781–96.
6. Argaiz ER. VExUS nexus: bedside assessment of venous congestion. Adv Chronic Kidney Dis. 2021;28(3):252–61.
7. Husain-Syed F, Gröne H, Assmus B, Bauer P, Gall H, Seeger W, et al. Congestive nephropathy: a neglected entity? Proposal for diagnostic criteria and future perspectives. ESC Heart Fail. 2021;8(1):183–203.
8. Boorsma EM, ter Maaten JM, Voors AA, van Veldhuisen DJ. Renal compression in heart failure. JACC Heart Fail. 2022;10(3):175–83.
9. Hanberg JS, Sury K, Wilson FP, Brisco MA, Ahmad T, ter Maaten JM, et al. Reduced cardiac index is not the dominant driver of renal dysfunction in heart failure. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016;67(19):2199–208.
10. Beaubien-Souligny W, Rola P, Haycock K, Bouchard J, Lamarche Y, Spiegel R, et al. Quan­tifying systemic congestion with point-of-care ultrasound: development of the venous excess ultrasound grading system. Ultrasound J. 2020;12(1):16.
11. Husain-Syed F, Birk H, Ronco C, Schörmann T, Tello K, Richter MJ, et al. Doppler-derived renal venous stasis index in the prognosis of right heart failure. J Am Heart Assoc. 2019;8(21): e013584.
12. Meola M, Nalesso F, Petrucci I, Samoni S, Ronco C. Ultrasound in acute kidney disease. Contrib Nephrol. 2016;188:11–20.
13. Rozemeijer S, Haitsma Mulier JLG, Röttgering JG, Elbers PWG, Spoelstra-de Man AME, Tuinman PR, et al. Renal resistive index: response to shock and its determinants in critically ill patients. Shock. 2019;52(1):43–51.
14. Meola M, Samoni S, Petrucci I, Ronco C. Clinical scenarios in acute kidney injury-parenchymal acute kidney injury – vascular diseases. Contrib Nephrol. 2016;188:48–63.
15. Bossard G, Bourgoin P, Corbeau JJ, Huntzinger J, Beydon L. Early detection of postoperative acute kidney injury by Doppler renal resistive index in cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass. Br J Anaesth. 2011;107(6):891–8.
16. Schnell D, better predicts the occurrence of acute kidney injury than cystatin C. Shock. 2012;38(6):592–7.
Raised venous pressure: a direct cause of renal sodium retention in oedema?
Deruddre S, Harrois A, Pottecher J, Cosson C, Adoui N, et al. Renal resistive index
Kidney
30 Ultrasound in Acute Kidney Injury 359
17. Guinot PG, Bernard E, Abou Arab O, Badoux L, Diouf M, Zogheib E, et al. Doppler-based renal resistive index can assess progression of acute kidney injury in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2013;27(5):890–6.
18. Platt JF, Rubin JM, Ellis JH. Acute renal failure: possible role of duplex Doppler US distinction between acute prerenal failure and acute tubular necrosis. Radiology. 1991;179(2): 419–23.
19. Bianchi Bosisio NSM, Romero-González G, De Silvestri A, Husain-Syad F, Ferrari F. Doppler­based evaluation of intrarenal venous ow as a new tool to predict acute kidney injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Nefrologia. 2023;43:57.
20. Langlois SLP. Focused ultrasound training for clinicians. Crit Care Med. 2007;35(Suppl): S138–43.
21. Herrler T, Tischer A, Meyer A, Feiler S, Guba M, Nowak S, et al. The intrinsic renal compartment syndrome: new perspectives in kidney transplantation. Transplantation. 2010;89 (1):40–6.
22. Deruddre S, Cheisson G, Mazoit JX, Vicaut E, Benhamou D, Duranteau J. Renal arterial resistance in septic shock: effects of increasing mean arterial pressure with norepinephrine on the renal resistive index assessed with Doppler ultrasonography. Intensive Care Med. 2007;33 (9):1557–62.
23. Beaubien-Souligny W, Huard G, Bouchard J, Lamarche Y, Denault A, Albert M. Doppler renal resistance index for the prediction of response to passive leg-raising following cardiac surgery. J Clin Ultrasound. 2018;46(7):455–60.
24. Olson MC, Abel EJ, Mankowski Gettle L. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound in renal imaging and intervention. Curr Urol Rep. 2019;20(11):73.
25. Kazmierski B, Deurdulian C, Tchelepi H, Grant EG. Applications of contrast-enhanced ultra­sound in the kidney. Abdom Radiol. 2018;43(4):880–98.
26. Bertolotto M, Bucci S, Valentino M, Currò F, Sachs C, Cova MA. Contrast-enhanced ultra­sound for characterizing renal masses. Eur J Radiol. 2018;105:41–8.
27. Kazmierski BJ, Sharbidre KG, Robbin ML, Grant EG. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound for the evaluation of renal transplants. J Ultrasound Med. 2020;39(12):2457–68.
28. Darmon M, Schnell D, Schneider A. Monitoring of renal perfusion. Intensive Care Med. 2022;48:1505–7.
29. Esposito F, Di Serano M, Sgambati P, Mercogliano F, Tarantino L, Vallone G, et al. Ultrasound contrast media in paediatric patients: is it an off-label use? Regulatory requirements and radiologists liability. Radiol Med. 2012;117(1):148–59.
30. Wilson SR, Greenbaum LD, Goldberg BB. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound: what is the evidence and what are the obstacles? Am J Roentgenol. 2009;193(1):55–60.
31. Wei K, Le E, Bin JP, Coggins M, Thorpe J, Kaul S. Quantication of renal blood ow with contrast-enhanced ultrasound. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001;37(4):1135–40.
32. Schneider AG, Hofmann L, Wuerzner G, Glatz N, Maillard M, Meuwly JY, et al. Renal perfusion evaluation with contrast-enhanced ultrasonography. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2012;27(2):674–81.
33. Schneider A, Johnson L, Goodwin M, Schelleman A, Bellomo R. Bench-to-bedside review: contrast enhanced ultrasonography – a promising technique to assess renal perfusion in the ICU. Crit Care. 2011;15(3):1–8.
34. Yoon HE, Kim DW, Kim D, Kim Y, Shin SJ, Shin YR. A pilot trial to evaluate the clinical usefulness of contrast-enhanced ultrasound in predicting renal outcomes in patients with acute kidney injury. PLoS One. 2020;15(6):e0235130.
35. Schneider AG, enhanced ultrasonography to evaluate changes in renal cortical microcirculation induced by noradrenaline: a pilot study. Crit Care. 2014;18(6):1–9.
36.
Darmon M, 2022;48(10):1505–7.
Goodwin
Schnell D, Schneider A. Monitoring of renal perfusion. Intensive Care Med.
MD, Schelleman A, Bailey M, Johnson L, Bellomo R. Contrast-
in
Chapter 31
Management of AKI: Fluids
Gianluca Castellani, Marta Calatroni, and Antonio Messina

Introduction

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a signicant disorder that worsens the outcome of critically ill patients, leading to increased morbidity, mortality, and healthcare costs [1, 2]. The incidence of hospital-acquired AKI in intensive care unit (ICU) has increased over the past decades, affecting more than 50% of patients, primarily among older individuals in the context of multiorgan failure [1, 2]. Risk factors for AKI include conditions like volume depletion, sepsis, preexisting chronic kidney disease (CKD), heart, liver, and gastrointestinal diseases, anemia, major surgery, and use of nephrotoxic drugs [3]. In up to 75% of cases, AKI results from reduced renal perfusion associated with hypovolemia or impaired cardiac output (pre-renal AKI) [4]. Ensuring sufcient renal perfusion by preventing uid decit has conventionally been one of the cornerstones of prevention and treatment of AKI [5]. Nevertheless,
Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-66541-7_31.
G. Castellani Department Milan, Italy e-mail: gianluca.castellani@humanitas.it
M. Calatroni Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Milan, Italy
Nephrology and Dialysis Division, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Milan, Italy e-mail: marta.calatroni@hunimed.eu
A. Messina ( Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Milan, Italy
Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Milan, Italy
© T A. Cotoia et al. (eds.), Nutrition, Metabolism and Kidney Support,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-66541-7_31
of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital,
✉)
he Author(s), u
nder exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024
361
362 G. Castellani et al.
some types of AKI are volume unresponsive, and the clinical benet of this approach is being challenged by increasing evidence that AKI patients are especially suscep­tible to developing volume overload compared to non-AKI patients with worsening organ dysfunction [69]. In addition, uid overload raises venous pressure, leading to renal venous congestion and renal interstitial edema which may decelerate AKI recovery [10].
these
Given remains one of the most disputed aspects of treating AKI patients. It depends on the underlying cause of AKI, the patients volume status, the type of uid employed, and the timing, infusion rates, and volumes used [11].
In this chapter, we provide an overview of uid management in critically ill patients with AKI. This approach should strike a balance between the need for adequate uid resuscitation and the avoidance of volume overload with organ edema.
considerat
ions,
the risk–benet assessment of uid administration
Renal Perfusion and Goals of Fluids in AKI
AKI can result from reduced kidney perfusion. Renal blood ow (RBF) is deter­mined by the pressure gradient between inow and outow pressures in the kidneys (ΔP), as well as vascular resistance (R), RBF = [ΔP/R]. The inow pressure depends on mean arterial pressure (MAP), while the outow pressure is inuenced by the renal venous pressure. Hypotension decreases RBF by reducing inow pressure. Conversely, an increase in outow pressure, often seen in systemic venous congestion due conditions like right heart failure, cirrhosis, or compartment syn­drome, can lead to interstitial edema and increased resistance to RBF. Resistance is chiey determined by the afferent and efferent arterioles. Vasoconstriction of both arterioles reduces RBF, while efferent arteriolar vasoconstriction increases the glomerular capillary pressure and ltration fraction [ ible, persistent renal ischemia leads to an acute tubular necrosis (ATN) with tubular epithelial injury, cell death, and delayed renal recovery, necessitating tissue regen­eration [13, 14]. Furthermore, multiple inammatory mechanisms contribute to AKIs pathogenesis, involving direct cellular injury, inammation-induced damage, and microcirculatory system alterations [ 15].Given the interplay of local and systemic inammation, changes in intrarenal blood ow, and microcirculatory dysfunction, improving calculated renal oxygen delivery through systemic circula­tion alone may not easily reverse these processes. In this setting, the main physio­logical rationale for administration of uids in critically ill patients with AKI is to increase stroke volume (SV) and, consequently, cardiac output (CO) to optimize systemic blood ow and tissue perfusion, to reverse renal ischemia, and to avert the onset of ATN [ diuresis, dilute tubular toxins, and attenuate tubular obstruction in the renal tubules and correct electrolyte alterations and acid-base disorders. In clinical practice, no single clinical or laboratory marker can be used to quantify renal perfusion.
16, 17]
(Fig. 31.1). Other goals for uid prescription are to promote
Although initially revers-
12].
31 Management of AKI: Fluids 363
Fluid therapy
Restore systemic blood pressure, CO and renal perfusion
Reduction of the neuroendocrine reflexes responsible for
increasing renal vascular resistance
Total RBF
Pressure gradient between the glomerular capillary and Bowman’s
space
GFR
of AKI
Fig. 31.1 Main goals of fluid administration in AKI patients. CO cardiac output, RBF renal bloodow, GFR glomerular ltration rate, AKI acute kidney injury
Therefore, a multimodal assessment is recommended [18]. In patients with AKI, the reduction of glomerular ltration rate (GFR) due to reduced CO, systemic hypoten­sion, and triggered neuroendocrine reexes causes an activation of the renin­angiotensin system (RAS) with consequences increased in salt and water retention, reduction of urine output with oliguria, and risk of volume overload.
364 G. Castellani et
al.
Signs of hypoperfusion
Hemodynamic Instability
Clinical trigger
Bedside Hemodynamic
Evaluation
CCE
CRT
Lactate
Skin mottling
ΔPCO
2
ScVO
2
Is the patient
fluid responsive?
Bedside hemodynamic evaluation
Heart dysfunction
No heart dysfunction
FC infusion
Reassessment
• CCE
• Signs of hypoperfusion
Can an increase CO to
improve hypoperfusion?
Clinical quesion
Consider Advanced
Hemodynamic Monitoring
No Improvement
Improvement but no resolution
Improvement and resolution
STOP FLUIDS
Fig. 31.2 Decision-making process at the bedside to guide and titrate uid administration during an episode of acute circulatory failure in critically ill patients. CCE critical care echocardiography, CO cardiac output, CRT capillary rell time, FC fluid challenge, ΔPCO
venous-to-arterial CO
2
tension difference, ScVO2central venous oxygen saturation

Clinical Evaluation of a Patient with AKI in ICU

AKI has many underlying causes, including intrinsic and obstructive (the classical intrarenal and post-renal AKI), yet the most frequent causes of AKI are conse­quences of hemodynamically mediated reductions in the glomerular ltration rate (the classicalprerenal AKI). Restoring kidney perfusion rapidly reverses the latter condition as the integrity of the kidneys remains intact. Severe or prolonged hypoperfusion may ultimately result in tubular epithelial cell necrosis, which might be irreversible. Treatment strategy in AKI has usually implied the adminis­tration of intravenous uids to correct hypovolemia and/or restore kidney perfusion. However, it should be recognized that many patients with hemodynamic AKI do not respond to volume administration. In patients with cardiogenic or obstructive shock, administration of uids does not necessarily result in an increased cardiac output (CO) with improved kidney perfusion. Moreover, even in distributive shock types, this is often not the case as the CO reserve has already been exploited and alterations to intra-glomerular hemodynamics play a dominant role. Finally, in patients with established tubular injury, GFR will not improve with uid administration, even if the initial precipitating cause of AKI was true hypovolemia. Therefore, the approach to the critical patient AKI should start with taking a comprehensive history to assess for obvious causes of uid loss (i.e., gastrointestinal), careful chart review, and evaluation of uid in- and outputs. The second step is the assessment of the hemodynamic status; a possible evaluation is described in Fig.
31.2 [16].
step should include renal ultrasound or CT to rule out obstructive disease and urine examination to evaluate the presence of proteinuria or dysmorphic hematuria to
The third
2
31 Management of AKI: Fluids 365
exclude glomerular causes of AKI [19]. Then, the fractional sodium excretion (FENa +) is helpful to differentiate prerenal AKI (FENa+ <1%) from ATN, although low FENa+ is not a reliable predictor of uid responsiveness as hemodynamic AKI due to vasodilatation or congestion is associated with a low urine sodium concentration [20].

Studies Which Investigated the Association of Fluid Therapy and AKI

The aim of uid administration in critically ill patients is to restore euvolemia and guarantee perfusion of tissues, without causing uid overload and harm to the organs. Fluid therapy has been used for more than 200 years in sick patients. Until recent years, the choice of uid for resuscitation was related to different practice in different geographical areas rather than evidence [21]. During the last decades, the relationship between volume overload, AKI, and adverse outcomes has increased. In several observational studies, a positive uid balance seems to be associated with increased risk of AKI, non-recovery of renal function, and an increase of mortality [2224].Also, uid overload during renal replacement therapy (RRT) in ICU is associated with increased risk of death and impaired recovery of renal function [25]. In a retrospective analysis of a multice nter randomized clinical trial (RCT), a negative uid balance achieved during RRT has been signicantly associated with increased RRT-free days [26]. In another study, the Fluid and Catheter Treatment Trial (FACTT), a positive uid balance was strongly associated with mortality and diuretic treatment associated with improved survival in patients who developed AKI during the study [27]. According to this evidence, a careful identication of patients that benet from uid administration is crucial. In recent years, different studies investigated the relation between the type and volume of uid administered and the incidence of AKI. Br oadly speaking, the matter can be approached considering the studies on volume of uids and type (colloids or crystalloids).

Volume of Fluid

Fluid loading is indicated in cases of shock due to intravascular hypovolemia to prevent organ failure, including AKI. However, an association between uid overload and AKI has been described in different studies [8, 23, 28, 29]. The mechanisms may include intrarenal compartment syndrome and venous congestion as a result of the kidneys being encapsulated organs [10]. Fluid administration may also impair the renal oxygen supply-demand relationship as a result of an increase in glomerular ltration rate and sodium reabsorption [30]. An association between elevated central venous pressure, renal venous congestion, and development of
366 G. Castellani et al.
AKI, mainly reported in congestive heart failure, has also been found in other ICU patient cohorts [31, 32 ]. A randomized controlled trial on uid management in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) patients showed that restrictive uid man­agement does not cause more harm to the kidneys compared to a liberal one [33]. A study in 2008 described the relationship between positive uid balance and worse outcomes in acute renal failure [23]. Myles et al. found a relationship between a
34]
restrictive uid balance and a higher rate of acute kidney injury [
.

Type of Fluid

Crystalloids
All commercially available crystalloid solutions are articial, with a composition that differs from human plasma. Historically, intravenous 0.9% sodium chloride solution has been the standard resuscitation uid. There are concerns regarding possible nephrotoxicity of normal saline, related to its high concentration of sodium and chloride and acidity. A study in 1983 demonstrated the association between chloride infusion and progressive renal vasoconstriction and a fall in GFR that is independent of the renal nerves, is potentiated by prior salt depletion, and is related to tubular Cl reabsorption [35]. Chloride-induced vasoconstriction appears specic for the renal vessels. Another study in 2012 demonstra ted that intravenous infusion of 0.9% saline results in reductions in renal blood ow velocity and renal cortical tissue perfusion [36].
Therefore, trials were planned to assess the association between different crys-
talloid solutions and AKI (Table 31.1).
A trial in 2016 reported a higher risk of hyperkalemia in post-kidney transplant patients who received 2 L of 0.9% saline versus Ringers lactate. This nding may be since chloride-rich crystalloids contribute to the development of non-anion gap metabolic acidosis and potential efux of intracellular potassium [37].
The Split trial random ized patients to Plasma-Lyte 148 versus normal saline, and there was no difference in patients with moderate to severe AKI; this analysis was a feasibility trial that included patients with lower comorbid conditions, and the average amount of uids given was <2L[38].
The SALT noncritically ill patients cared outside the ICU; while there was no difference in hospital-free days between treatment with balanc ed crystalloids and treatment with saline, a relation between major kidney events and normal saline therapy was found [39].
In the SMART trial among critically ill adults, the use of balanced crystalloids for intravenous uid administration resulted in a lower rate of the composite outcom e of death from any cause, new renal replacement therapy (RRT), or persistent renal dysfunction than the use of saline [39].
-ED trial compared balanced crystalloids versus normal saline in
31 Management of AKI: Fluids 367
s. 12.9%)
RT
Australia and
New Zealand
Double random-
75 ICUs in Brazil 53 ICUs in
Single center USA,
Monocentric,
5 ICUs
USA
Double blind, fac-
Pragmatic, cluster ran-
Pragmatic, mul-
ized controlled
trial
torial, randomized
clinical trial
domized, multiple
crossover
tiple crossover
Critically ill adults
(50% elective
Critically ill adults Critically ill adults
Noncritically ill
adults
surgery)
Balanced crystalloids Plasma-Lyte Plasma-Lyte 148
90-day mortality
90-day mortality
MAKE within 30 days
crystalloids
Hospital-free
0.90)
(21.8% vs. 22%, p
vs. 27.2%,
(26.4%
p 0.47)
(14.3% vs. 15.4% p
0.04)
(25 vs.
25, p 0.41)
days
New R
AKI with RRT
Hospital mortality at
MAKE at
Maximum
(12.7% v
(0.88% vs. 0.93%)
30 days
(10.3% vs. 11.1%,
30 days
(4.7% vs. 5.6%,
increase of creati-
nine during ICU
p0.06); new RRT
(2.5% vs. 2.9%, p 0.08)
p 0,01)
stay
(0.41 vs. 0.41 mg/
dl)
OMalley et al.
Table 31.1 Main trials on administration of crystalloids in ICU patients
[37] SPLIT [38] SALT-ED [39] SMART [39] BaSICS [40] PLUS [41]
Study
Setting Monocentric 4 ICUs in
New Zealand
Double blind,
cluster random-
ized, double
crossover
double blind
Design Randomized,
Number of patients 51 2278 13,347 15,802 11,052 5037
patients, mainly
Critically ill
plant patients
Population Kidney trans-
surgical
Intervention Ringers lactate Plasma-Lyte Balanced
Control Normal saline Normal saline Normal saline Normal saline Normal saline Normal saline
p 0.77)
AKI
(9.6% vs. 9.2%,
Creatinine on
pod
3 (no difference)
Primary outcome
(Intervention vs. control)
In hospital mor-
tality
(25.2 vs. 29,4%)
Number of
patients with
peak K+ > 6
Secondary outcome
(Intervention vs. control)
RRT
(0 vs. 5)
(2.5% vs. 2.9%)
unit, AKI acute kidney injury, RRT renal replacement therapy
ICU intensive care