Overhydration in acute kidney injury: Is it always a menace to critically ill patients? A survival study using bioimpedance spectroscopy.

INTRODUCTION: The hydration status is a predictor of survival in critically ill patients. However, it is unclear whether this association depends on the patient clinical condition. This study was designed to analyze the impact of hydration status on survival of critically ill patients with acute kidney injury (AKI) with or without sepsis. METHODS: A prospective cohort study following critically ill patients with AKI consecutively admitted over a one-year period to a teaching hospital intensive care unit (ICU). All patients with AKI stage three or higher of the KDIGO score were included. The hydration status was evaluated through the overhydration (OH) parameter of spectroscopy bioimpedance and sepsis was defined according Sepse-3 criteria. The survival analysis used adjusted competing-risks regression. RESULTS: Forty-eight patients were included, 27 (56%) with a sepsis diagnosis. The main negative predictors of survival among sepsis patients, adjusted by SAPS3 score, were higher OH (SHR 1.1, 95% CI 1.0-1.2, p = 0.02), mechanical ventilation (SHR 6.9, 95% CI 1.0-47.8, p = 0.04) and older age (SHR 1.1, 95% CI 1.0-1.1, p = 0.005). The predictors in non-sepsis patients were lower OH (SHR 0.82, 95% CI 0.71-0.95, p = 0.008) and mechanical ventilation (SHR 12, 95% CI 2.4-6.6, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This finding suggests that extracellular overhydration is an independent predictor of survival in critically ill patients with sepsis, but it seems to have opposite effect in non-sepsis patients.

Is It Safe for Hemodialysis Patients to Seek Gains with Less Pain? Acute Hemodynamic Response to Intradialytic Blood Flow Restriction Training.

Considering that the hemodynamic safety is a major concern about intradialytic exercise with blood flow restriction, this analysis was performed to compare the blood pressure (BP) behavior during the first two hours of hemodialysis (HD) between sessions with no exercise (control group, CG), low/moderate intensity aerobic exercise with blood flow restriction (BFRE) and conventional aerobic exercise (AE). Adult patients with chronic kidney disease on HD at a university hospital were randomly assigned and submitted to a 12-week intradialytic training with BFRE or AE compared with the CG group. The main outcomes of this report were the change in systolic (SBP) and diastolic (DBP) BP during HD and the frequency of low BP (LBP) and high BP (HBP) episodes. A total of 6,074 BP measurements of 58 patients were analyzed. There was a larger decrease in BP in the exercise sessions compared with the control sessions, but with a similar magnitude in the BFRE and AE groups (effect size 0.49). There was a higher number of LBP in the BFRE group. The frequency of HBP was similar between the BFRE and the CG groups and lower in the AE group. Despite a greater number of mild LBP in BFRE patients, the BP change during the first two hours of HD was similar to that of patients in AE. Intradialytic aerobic exercise with blood flow restriction does not seem to be associated with a higher hemodynamic burden than conventional aerobic exercise.