The Mini Nutritional Assessment-Short Form is more effective in predicting clinical outcomes among hospitalised patients with overweight than the Nutritional Risk Screening-2002.

Understanding of the association between nutritional risk and clinical outcomes in hospitalised patients with overweight is still at an early stage. Given the lack of specific tools for the patient with overweight, the objective of this study was to compare two of the main general screening instruments for assessing nutritional risk in predicting clinical outcomes in a population of hospitalised patients with overweight. A retrospective study was carried out in a medium-sized hospital in Brazil, with patients ≥20 years old admitted between July 2017 and December 2019. Patients who were overweight and had records of Nutritional Risk Screening-2002 (NRS-2002) and Mini-Nutritional Assessment-Short Form (MNA-SF) in their medical files were included in the study. Clinical outcomes data (longer length of stay, readmission during the study period and mortality before the end of study or during hospitalisation) were obtained. The Kappa coefficient assessed agreement between both tools, and their performance for predicting outcomes was analysed using characteristic receiver operating curves (ROC). Data were collected from 643 patients. The prevalence of nutritional risk was 17.7% and 36.1% according to the NRS-2002 and MNA-SF (k = 0.390; p < 0.001), respectively. According to both tools, all clinical outcomes were significantly more common among individuals at nutritional risk (p < 0.05). Only the MNA-SF showed a significant percentage of predictions for readmission (57.2%) and death during hospitalisation (65.7%). For mortality until the end of the study, the area under the ROC curve was similar for MNA-SF (60.5%) and NRS-2002 (60.7%; p = 0.057). The MNA-SF detected a greater proportion of nutritional risk among hospitalised patients with overweight and better predicted all clinical outcomes compared to the NRS-2002 and should be used to screen patients with overweight for nutritional risk.

High-volume peritoneal dialysis in acute kidney injury: indications and limitations.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Peritoneal dialysis is still used for AKI in developing countries despite concerns about its limitations. The objective of this study was to explore the role of high-volume peritoneal dialysis in AKI patients in relation to metabolic and fluid control, outcome, and risk factors associated with death. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: A prospective study was performed on 204 AKI patients who were assigned to high-volume peritoneal dialysis (prescribed Kt/V=0.60/session) by flexible catheter and cycler; 150 patients (80.2%) were included in the final analysis. RESULTS: Mean age was 63.8±15.8 years, 70% of patients were in the intensive care unit, and sepsis was the main etiology of AKI (54.7%). BUN and creatinine levels stabilized after four sessions at around 50 and 4 mg/dl, respectively. Fluid removal and nitrogen balance increased progressively and stabilized around 1200 ml and -1 g/d after four sessions, respectively. Weekly delivered Kt/V was 3.5±0.68. Regarding AKI outcome, 23% of patients presented renal function recovery, 6.6% of patients remained on dialysis after 30 days, and 57.3% of patients died. Age and sepsis were identified as risk factors for death. In urine output, increase of 1 g in nitrogen balance and increase of 500 ml in ultrafiltration after three sessions were identified as protective factors. CONCLUSIONS: High-volume peritoneal dialysis is effective for a selected AKI patient group, allowing adequate metabolic and fluid control. Age, sepsis, and urine output as well as nitrogen balance and ultrafiltration after three high-volume peritoneal dialysis sessions were associated significantly with death.