Deresuscitation of Patients With Iatrogenic Fluid Overload Is Associated With Reduced Mortality in Critical Illness.

OBJECTIVES: To characterize current practice in fluid administration and deresuscitation (removal of fluid using diuretics or renal replacement therapy), the relationship between fluid balance, deresuscitative measures, and outcomes and to identify risk factors for positive fluid balance in critical illness. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Ten ICUs in the United Kingdom and Canada. PATIENTS: Adults receiving invasive mechanical ventilation for a minimum of 24 hours. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Four-hundred patients were included. Positive cumulative fluid balance (fluid input greater than output) occurred in 87.3%: the largest contributions to fluid input were from medications and maintenance fluids rather than resuscitative IV fluids. In a multivariate logistic regression model, fluid balance on day 3 was an independent risk factor for 30-day mortality (odds ratio 1.26/L [95% CI, 1.07-1.46]), whereas negative fluid balance achieved in the context of deresuscitative measures was associated with lower mortality. Independent predictors of greater fluid balance included treatment in a Canadian site. CONCLUSIONS: Fluid balance is a practice-dependent and potentially modifiable risk factor for adverse outcomes in critical illness. Negative fluid balance achieved with deresuscitation on day 3 of ICU stay is associated with improved patient outcomes. Minimization of day 3 fluid balance by limiting maintenance fluid intake and drug diluents, and using deresuscitative measures, represents a potentially beneficial therapeutic strategy which merits investigation in randomized trials.

Effect of Early Vasopressin vs Norepinephrine on Kidney Failure in Patients With Septic Shock: The VANISH Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Norepinephrine is currently recommended as the first-line vasopressor in septic shock; however, early vasopressin use has been proposed as an alternative. OBJECTIVE: To compare the effect of early vasopressin vs norepinephrine on kidney failure in patients with septic shock. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A factorial (2×2), double-blind, randomized clinical trial conducted in 18 general adult intensive care units in the United Kingdom between February 2013 and May 2015, enrolling adult patients who had septic shock requiring vasopressors despite fluid resuscitation within a maximum of 6 hours after the onset of shock. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly allocated to vasopressin (titrated up to 0.06 U/min) and hydrocortisone (n = 101), vasopressin and placebo (n = 104), norepinephrine and hydrocortisone (n = 101), or norepinephrine and placebo (n = 103). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was kidney failure-free days during the 28-day period after randomization, measured as (1) the proportion of patients who never developed kidney failure and (2) median number of days alive and free of kidney failure for patients who did not survive, who experienced kidney failure, or both. Rates of renal replacement therapy, mortality, and serious adverse events were secondary outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 409 patients (median age, 66 years; men, 58.2%) were included in the study, with a median time to study drug administration of 3.5 hours after diagnosis of shock. The number of survivors who never developed kidney failure was 94 of 165 patients (57.0%) in the vasopressin group and 93 of 157 patients (59.2%) in the norepinephrine group (difference, -2.3% [95% CI, -13.0% to 8.5%]). The median number of kidney failure-free days for patients who did not survive, who experienced kidney failure, or both was 9 days (interquartile range [IQR], 1 to -24) in the vasopressin group and 13 days (IQR, 1 to -25) in the norepinephrine group (difference, -4 days [95% CI, -11 to 5]). There was less use of renal replacement therapy in the vasopressin group than in the norepinephrine group (25.4% for vasopressin vs 35.3% for norepinephrine; difference, -9.9% [95% CI, -19.3% to -0.6%]). There was no significant difference in mortality rates between groups. In total, 22 of 205 patients (10.7%) had a serious adverse event in the vasopressin group vs 17 of 204 patients (8.3%) in the norepinephrine group (difference, 2.5% [95% CI, -3.3% to 8.2%]). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among adults with septic shock, the early use of vasopressin compared with norepinephrine did not improve the number of kidney failure-free days. Although these findings do not support the use of vasopressin to replace norepinephrine as initial treatment in this situation, the confidence interval included a potential clinically important benefit for vasopressin, and larger trials may be warranted to assess this further. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: ISRCTN 20769191.

Effects of epinephrine on cerebral oxygenation during cardiopulmonary resuscitation: A prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Epinephrine has been presumed to improve cerebral oxygen delivery during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), but animal and registry studies suggest that epinephrine-induced capillary vasoconstriction may decrease cerebral capillary blood flow and worsen neurological outcome. The effect of epinephrine on cerebral oxygenation (rSO2) during CPR has not been documented in the clinical setting. METHODS: rSO2 was measured continuously using cerebral oximetry in patients with in-hospital cardiac arrest. During CPR, time event markers recorded the administration of 1mg epinephrine. rSO2 values were analysed for a period beginning 5min before and ending 5min after the first epinephrine administration. RESULTS: A total of 56 epinephrine doses were analysed in 36 patients during CPR. The average rSO2 value in the 5-min following epinephrine administration was 1.40% higher (95% CI=0.41-2.40%; P=0.0059) than in the 5-min period before epinephrine administration. However, there was no difference in the overall rate of change of rSO2 when comparing the 5-min period before, with the 5-min period immediately after a single bolus dose of epinephrine (0.88%/min vs 1.07%/min respectively; P=0.583), There was also no difference in the changes in rSO2 at individual 1, 2, 3, or 4-min time windows before and after a bolus dose of epinephrine (P=0.5827, 0.2371, 0.2082, and 0.6707 respectively). CONCLUSIONS: A bolus of 1mg epinephrine IV during CPR produced a small but clinically insignificant increase in rSO2 in the five minutes after administration. This is the first clinical data to demonstrate the effects of epinephrine on cerebral rSO2 during CPR.