Kidney outcomes after methanol and ethylene glycol poisoning: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Ingestions with methanol, ethylene glycol, diethylene glycol, propylene glycol, and isopropanol are rare yet exceedingly dangerous conditions that may require emergent management with kidney replacement therapy. Little is known regarding short- and long-term kidney outcomes post-ingestion. OBJECTIVES: To comprehensively synthesize existing evidence regarding short- and long-term kidney and other outcomes of adult patients following these poisonings. METHODS: We developed a search strategy in MEDLINE via OVID and then translated it into other databases including EMBASE (via OVID), PubMed, CENTRAL (via OVID). The databases were searched from their dates of inception to 29 July 2021. A grey literature search was conducted in the International Traditional Medicine Clinical Trial Registry and ClinicalTrials.gov. All interventional and observational studies and case series with ≥ five participants that reported on the outcomes of toxic alcohol (methanol, ethylene glycol, diethylene glycol, propylene glycol and isopropanol) poisonings in adult patients ≥18 years old were included. Studies that reported mortality, kidney outcomes and/or complications attributed to toxic alcohol poisoning were eligible. RESULTS: The search strategy identified 1,221 citations. Sixty-seven studies (13 retrospective observational studies, one prospective observational study, 53 case series) met inclusion criteria (total N = 2,327 participants). No randomized controlled trials were identified per our prespecified criteria. Generally, included studies had small sample sizes (median of 27 participants) and were of low quality. Methanol and/or ethylene glycol poisoning made up 94.1% of included studies, whereas one study reported on isopropanol and none reported on propylene glycol. Results of the 13 observational studies of methanol and/or ethylene glycol poisoning were pooled for meta-analyses. The pooled in-hospital mortality estimates amongst patients with methanol and ethylene glycol poisoning were 24 and 11%, respectively. A more recent year of publication, female sex and mean age were associated with lower in-hospital mortality amongst individuals with ethylene glycol poisoning. Although hemodialysis was the most frequently employed kidney replacement therapy, the indications for initiation of this therapy were not reported in the majority of studies. At hospital discharge, kidney recovery occurred in 64.7-96.3% of patients with ethylene glycol poisoning. In studies of methanol and/or ethylene glycol poisoning, 2-3.7% of individuals required ongoing dialysis. Only one study reported post-discharge mortality. Furthermore, long-term toxic alcohol-mediated sequelae, such as visual and neurologic outcomes, were scarcely reported. DISCUSSION: Ingestions of methanol and ethylene glycol were associated with a significant short-term risk of mortality. Although a wealth of literature in the form of case reports and case series exists, high-quality evidence regarding kidney outcomes after these poisonings is lacking. We identified a paucity of standardized reporting in clinical presentations, therapeutics and outcomes amongst adults with toxic alcohol poisoning. Amongst the included studies, there was substantial heterogeneity encompassing study type, outcomes, duration of follow-up and treatment modalities. These sources of heterogeneity restricted our ability to perform comprehensive meta-analyses of all outcomes of interest. An additional limitation is the lack of studies pertaining to propylene glycol and the paucity of data on isopropanol. CONCLUSIONS: The indications for hemodialysis, long-term kidney recovery and long-term mortality risk vary widely in these poisonings and are inconsistently reported in the literature. This highlights the need for further research with standardized reporting of baseline kidney function, indications for initiation of kidney replacement therapy and short-term and long-term kidney outcomes. REGISTRATION: This systematic review protocol is registered at PROSPERO, CRD42018101955.

Meta-analytic Techniques to Assess the Association Between N-acetylcysteine and Acute Kidney Injury After Contrast Administration: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Importance: The most suitable analytic method to systematically analyze numerous trials with contradictory results is unclear. Multiple trials assessing the use of N-acetylcysteine (NAC) for prevention of contrast-induced acute kidney injury (CI-AKI) have had contradictory results with recent trials confirming a lack of benefit. Objective: To systematically review the literature on NAC for the prevention of CI-AKI, and to explore the heterogeneity, publication bias, and small-study effect to determine the most suitable analytic method in a setting where the literature is contradictory. Data Sources: Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were used to find randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing NAC with any other prophylactic agent or placebo in adults. Study Selection: The search included studies published in English from database inception to January 2020. Two independent reviewers screened the studies, extracted data, and performed the risk of bias assessment. Data Extraction and Synthesis: A meta-analysis was conducted about the effect of NAC on CI-AKI, the need for dialysis, and mortality. Fixed and random effects analyses were also performed. Funnel plots and the trim and fill method were used for assessment of publication bias. Metaregression was performed to explore the heterogeneity and subgroup analysis to examine the association between NAC and CI-AKI when studies were categorized according to sample size and number of events. Results: A total of 101 trials were included in this meta-analysis. The median sample size was 112 (range, 20 to 4993). Twenty-nine trials had a sample size of 200 or more, and only 3 trials had a sample size of 500 or more. Forty-five trials reported the need for kidney replacement therapy, and 41 trials reported mortality as an outcome. NAC seemed to show a benefit, with a pooled OR of 0.72 (95% CI, 0.63-0.82) using random effects model and a pooled OR of 0.82 (95% CI 0.76-0.90) using a fixed effects model. However, there was significant heterogeneity (I2 = 37.6; P < .001) and significant publication bias, which was reduced only when restricting to large RCTs (N ≥ 500). The clinical outcomes (ie, the need for kidney replacement therapy and mortality) revealed little heterogeneity and no publication bias, and each provided a robust neutral summary result. Conclusions and Relevance: In this meta-analysis, NAC was associated with a benefit in the prevention of CI-AKI. However, because of substantial publication bias and other biases, standard meta-analytic techniques resulted in significant heterogeneity and a spurious, or factitious, association, even when using a random effects model. When the analysis was restricted to RCTs with a large sample size to account for publication bias or restricted to trials with clinical outcomes, this issue was reduced and resulted in more robust and neutral effect sizes.

Intravenous albumin for the prevention of hemodynamic instability during sustained low-efficiency dialysis: a randomized controlled feasibility trial (The SAFER-SLED Study).

BACKGROUND: Hemodynamic instability is a frequent complication of sustained low-efficiency dialysis (SLED) treatments in the ICU. Intravenous hyperoncotic albumin may prevent hypotension and facilitate ultrafiltration. In this feasibility trial, we sought to determine if a future trial, powered to evaluate clinically relevant outcomes, is feasible. METHODS: This single-center, blinded, placebo-controlled, randomized feasibility trial included patients with acute kidney injury who started SLED in the ICU. Patients were randomized to receive 25% albumin versus 0.9% saline (control) as 100 mL boluses at the start and midway through SLED, for up to 10 sessions. The recruitment rate and other feasibility outcomes were determined. Secondary exploratory outcomes included ultrafiltration volumes and metrics of hemodynamic instability. RESULTS: Sixty patients (271 SLED sessions) were recruited over 10 months. Age and severity of illness were similar between study groups. Most had septic shock and required vasopressor support at baseline. Protocol adherence occurred for 244 sessions (90%); no patients were lost to follow-up; no study-related adverse events were observed; open label albumin use was 9% and 15% in the albumin and saline arms, respectively. Ultrafiltration volumes were not significantly different. Compared to the saline group, the albumin group experienced less hemodynamic instability across all definitions assessed including a smaller absolute decrease in systolic blood pressure (mean difference 10.0 mmHg, 95% confidence interval 5.2-14.8); however, there were significant baseline differences in the groups with respect to vasopressor use prior to SLED sessions (80% vs 61% for albumin and saline groups, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy of using hyperoncotic albumin to prevent hemodynamic instability in critically ill patients receiving SLED remains unclear. A larger trial to evaluate its impact in this setting, including evaluating clinically relevant outcomes, is feasible. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03665311); First Posted: Sept 11th, 2018. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03665311?term=NCT03665311&draw=2&rank=1.