Thoracic epidural analgesia in intensive care unit patients with acute pancreatitis: the EPIPAN multicenter randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Findings from preclinical studies and one pilot clinical trial suggest potential benefits of epidural analgesia in acute pancreatitis. We aimed to assess the efficacy of thoracic epidural analgesia, in addition to usual care, in improving clinical outcomes of intensive care unit patients with acute pancreatitis. METHODS: A multicenter, open-label, randomized, controlled trial including adult patients with a clinical diagnosis of acute pancreatitis upon admission to the intensive care unit. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to a strategy combining thoracic epidural analgesia and usual care (intervention group) or a strategy of usual care alone (control group). The primary outcome was the number of ventilator-free days from randomization until day 30. RESULTS: Between June 2014 and January 2019, 148 patients were enrolled, and 135 patients were included in the intention-to-treat analysis, with 65 patients randomly assigned to the intervention group and 70 to the control group. The number of ventilator-free days did not differ significantly between the intervention and control groups (median [interquartile range], 30 days [15-30] and 30 days [18-30], respectively; median absolute difference of - 0.0 days, 95% CI - 3.3 to 3.3; p = 0.59). Epidural analgesia was significantly associated with longer duration of invasive ventilation (median [interquartile range], 14 days [5-28] versus 6 days [2-13], p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: In a population of intensive care unit adults with acute pancreatitis and low requirement for intubation, this first multicenter randomized trial did not show the hypothesized benefit of epidural analgesia in addition to usual care. Safety of epidural analgesia in this setting requires further investigation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov registration number NCT02126332 , April 30, 2014.

Renal Replacement Therapy Modality in the ICU and Renal Recovery at Hospital Discharge.

OBJECTIVES: Acute kidney injury requiring renal replacement therapy is a major concern in ICUs. Initial renal replacement therapy modality, continuous renal replacement therapy or intermittent hemodialysis, may impact renal recovery. The aim of this study was to assess the influence of initial renal replacement therapy modality on renal recovery at hospital discharge. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study of all ICU stays from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2013, with a "renal replacement therapy for acute kidney injury" code using the French hospital discharge database. SETTING: Two hundred ninety-one ICUs in France. PATIENTS: A total of 1,031,120 stays: 58,635 with renal replacement therapy for acute kidney injury and 25,750 included in the main analysis. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS MAIN RESULTS: PPatients alive at hospital discharge were grouped according to initial modality (continuous renal replacement therapy or intermittent hemodialysis) and included in the main analysis to identify predictors of renal recovery. Renal recovery was defined as greater than 3 days without renal replacement therapy before hospital discharge. The main analysis was a hierarchical logistic regression analysis including patient demographics, comorbidities, and severity variables, as well as center characteristics. Three sensitivity analyses were performed. Overall mortality was 56.1%, and overall renal recovery was 86.2%. Intermittent hemodialysis was associated with a lower likelihood of recovery at hospital discharge; odds ratio, 0.910 (95% CI, 0.834-0.992) p value equals to 0.0327. Results were consistent across all sensitivity analyses with odds/hazards ratios ranging from 0.883 to 0.958. CONCLUSIONS: In this large retrospective study, intermittent hemodialysis as an initial modality was associated with lower renal recovery at hospital discharge among patients with acute kidney injury, although the difference seems somewhat clinically limited.