Feasibility and efficacy of modified fixed citrate concentration protocol using only commercial preparations in critically ill patients: a prospective cohort study with a historical control group.

BACKGROUND: The cumbersome program and the shortage of commercial solution hindered the regular application of regional citrate anticoagulation (RCA). It is urgent to simplify the protocol using only commercial preparations. The aim of this study was to explore the feasibility and efficacy of the modified protocol for continuous veno-venous hemofiltration (CVVH) in unselected critically ill patients. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was conducted in 66 patients who received a new protocol combining fixed citrate concentration with modified algorithm for supplements (i.e., fixed protocol), and compared the efficacy, safety and convenience for this group to a historical control group with a traditional protocol (n = 64), where citrate was titrated according to the circuit ionized calcium concentration (i.e., titrated protocol). The convenience was defined as the demand for monitoring test and dose adjustment of any supplement. RESULTS: The filter lifespan was 63.2 ± 16.1 h in the fixed group and 51.9 ± 17.7 h in the titrated group, respectively. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis demonstrated longer circuit lifetime for fixed group (log-rank, p = 0.026). The incidence of circuit clotting was lower in the fixed protocol (15.2% vs. 29.7% in the titrated protocol, p = 0.047). Moreover, compared with the titrated group, patients with fixed protocol had less demand for monitoring test and dose adjustment of any supplement (the number of times per person per day) (3.3 [IQR 2.3-4.5] vs. 5.7 [IQR 3.3-6.9], p = 0.001 and 1.9 [IQR 0.5-2.7] vs. 6.3 [IQR 4.2-7.9], p < 0.001; respectively). No new onset bleeding complications occurred in all patients. The overall incidence of suspected citrate accumulation was 4.6% and there was no difference between the two groups (p = 0.969), yet a lower rate of metabolic alkalosis was found in the fixed group (3.0% vs. 14.1%, p = 0.024). CONCLUSIONS: Our modified fixed citrate concentration protocol is feasible, safe and effective to enhance the circuit lifespan and the convenience of implementation while maintaining a similar safety when compared to the traditional protocol. Using only commercial preparations may be helpful for widespread application of RCA. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov. NCT02663960 . Registered 26 January 2016.

Stress ulcer prophylaxis in intensive care unit patients receiving enteral nutrition: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Pharmacologic stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP) is recommended in critically ill patients with high risk of stress-related gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding. However, as to patients receiving enteral feeding, the preventive effect of SUP is not well-known. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the effect of pharmacologic SUP in enterally fed patients on stress-related GI bleeding and other clinical outcomes. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane database from inception through 30 Sep 2017. Eligible trials were RCTs comparing pharmacologic SUP to either placebo or no prophylaxis in enterally fed patients in the ICU. Results were expressed as risk ratio (RR) and mean difference (MD) with accompanying 95% confidence interval (CI). Heterogeneity, subgroup analysis, sensitivity analysis and publication bias were explored. RESULTS: Seven studies (n = 889 patients) were included. There was no statistically significant difference in GI bleeding (RR 0.80; 95% CI, 0.49 to 1.31, p = 0.37) between groups. This finding was confirmed by further subgroup analyses and sensitivity analysis. In addition, SUP had no effect on overall mortality (RR 1.21; 95% CI, 0.94 to 1.56, p = 0.14), Clostridium difficile infection (RR 0.89; 95% CI, 0.25 to 3.19, p = 0.86), length of stay in the ICU (MD 0.04 days; 95% CI, -0.79 to 0.87, p = 0.92), duration of mechanical ventilation (MD -0.38 days; 95% CI, -1.48 to 0.72, p = 0.50), but was associated with an increased risk of hospital-acquired pneumonia (RR 1.53; 95% CI, 1.04 to 2.27; p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggested that in patients receiving enteral feeding, pharmacologic SUP is not beneficial and combined interventions may even increase the risk of nosocomial pneumonia.