Physiologic Determinants of Near-Infrared Spectroscopy-Derived Cerebral and Tissue Oxygen Saturation Measurements in Critically Ill Patients.

OBJECTIVES: Near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) is a potentially valuable modality to monitor the adequacy of oxygen delivery to the brain and other tissues in critically ill patients, but little is known about the physiologic determinants of NIRS-derived tissue oxygen saturations. The purpose of this study was to assess the contribution of routinely measured physiologic parameters to tissue oxygen saturation measured by NIRS. DESIGN: An observational sub-study of patients enrolled in the Role of Active Deresuscitation After Resuscitation-2 (RADAR-2) randomized feasibility trial. SETTING: Two ICUs in the United Kingdom. PATIENTS: Patients were recruited for the RADAR-2 study, which compared a conservative approach to fluid therapy and deresuscitation with usual care. Those included in this sub-study underwent continuous NIRS monitoring of cerebral oxygen saturations (SctO2) and quadriceps muscle tissue saturations (SmtO2). INTERVENTION: Synchronized and continuous mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR), and pulse oximetry (oxygen saturation, Spo2) measurements were recorded alongside NIRS data. Arterial Paco2, Pao2, and hemoglobin concentration were recorded 12 hourly. Linear mixed effect models were used to investigate the association between these physiologic variables and cerebral and muscle tissue oxygen saturations. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Sixty-six patients were included in the analysis. Linear mixed models demonstrated that Paco2, Spo2, MAP, and HR were weakly associated with SctO2 but only explained 7.1% of the total variation. Spo2 and MAP were associated with SmtO2, but together only explained 0.8% of its total variation. The remaining variability was predominantly accounted for by between-subject differences. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings demonstrated that only a small proportion of variability in NIRS-derived cerebral and tissue oximetry measurements could be explained by routinely measured physiologic variables. We conclude that for NIRS to be a useful monitoring modality in critical care, considerable further research is required to understand physiologic determinants and prognostic significance.

Vascular leak in sepsis: physiological basis and potential therapeutic advances.

Sepsis is a life-threatening condition characterised by endothelial barrier dysfunction and impairment of normal microcirculatory function, resulting in a state of hypoperfusion and tissue oedema. No specific pharmacological therapies are currently used to attenuate microvascular injury. Given the prominent role of endothelial breakdown and microcirculatory dysfunction in sepsis, there is a need for effective strategies to protect the endothelium. In this review we will discuss key mechanisms and putative therapeutic agents relevant to endothelial barrier function.

Repair of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome in COVID-19 by Stromal Cells (REALIST-COVID Trial): A Multicenter, Randomized, Controlled Clinical Trial.

Rationale: Mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) may modulate inflammation, promoting repair in coronavirus disease (COVID-19)-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Objectives: We investigated the safety and efficacy of ORBCEL-C (CD362 [cluster of differentiation 362]-enriched, umbilical cord-derived MSCs) in COVID-19-related ARDS. Methods: In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind, allocation-concealed, placebo-controlled trial (NCT03042143), patients with moderate to severe COVID-19-related ARDS were randomized to receive ORBCEL-C (400 million cells) or placebo (Plasma-Lyte 148). The primary safety and efficacy outcomes were the incidence of serious adverse events and oxygenation index at Day 7, respectively. Secondary outcomes included respiratory compliance, driving pressure, PaO2:FiO2 ratio, and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score. Clinical outcomes relating to duration of ventilation, lengths of ICU and hospital stays, and mortality were collected. Long-term follow-up included diagnosis of interstitial lung disease at 1 year and significant medical events and mortality at 2 years. Transcriptomic analysis was performed on whole blood at Days 0, 4, and 7. Measurements and Main Results: Sixty participants were recruited (final analysis: n = 30 received ORBCEL-C, n = 29 received placebo; 1 participant in the placebo group withdrew consent). Six serious adverse events occurred in the ORBCEL-C group and three in the placebo group (risk ratio, 2.9 [95% confidence interval, 0.6-13.2]; P = 0.25). Day 7 mean (SD) oxygenation index did not differ (ORBCEL-C, 98.3 [57.2] cm H2O/kPa; placebo, 96.6 [67.3] cm H2O/kPa). There were no differences in secondary surrogate outcomes or in mortality at Day 28, Day 90, 1 year, or 2 years. There was no difference in the prevalence of interstitial lung disease at 1 year or significant medical events up to 2 years. ORBCEL-C modulated the peripheral blood transcriptome. Conclusion: ORBCEL-C MSCs were safe in subjects with moderate to severe COVID-19-related ARDS but did not improve surrogates of pulmonary organ dysfunction.

Repair of acute respiratory distress syndrome by stromal cell administration (REALIST): a structured study protocol for an open-label dose-escalation phase 1 trial followed by a randomised, triple-blind, allocation concealed, placebo-controlled phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) may be of benefit in ARDS due to immunomodulatory and reparative properties. This trial investigates a novel CD362 enriched umbilical cord derived MSC product (REALIST ORBCEL-C), produced to Good Manufacturing Practice standards, in patients with moderate to severe ARDS due to COVID-19 and ARDS due to other causes. METHODS: Phase 1 is a multicentre open-label dose-escalation pilot trial. Patients will receive a single infusion of REALIST ORBCEL-C (100 × 106 cells, 200 × 106 cells or 400 × 106 cells) in a 3 + 3 design. Phase 2 is a multicentre randomised, triple blind, allocation concealed placebo-controlled trial. Two cohorts of patients, with ARDS due to COVID-19 or ARDS due to other causes, will be recruited and randomised 1:1 to receive either a single infusion of REALIST ORBCEL-C (400 × 106 cells or maximal tolerated dose in phase 1) or placebo. Planned recruitment to each cohort is 60 patients. The primary safety outcome is the incidence of serious adverse events. The primary efficacy outcome is oxygenation index at day 7. The trial will be reported according to the Consolidated Standards for Reporting Trials (CONSORT 2010) statement. DISCUSSION: The development and manufacture of an advanced therapy medicinal product to Good Manufacturing Practice standards within NHS infrastructure are discussed, including challenges encountered during the early stages of trial set up. The rationale to include a separate cohort of patients with ARDS due to COVID-19 in phase 2 of the trial is outlined. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03042143. Registered on 3 February 2017. EudraCT Number 2017-000584-33.

Feasibility of conservative fluid administration and deresuscitation compared with usual care in critical illness: the Role of Active Deresuscitation After Resuscitation-2 (RADAR-2) randomised clinical trial.

PURPOSE: Fluid overload is common in critical illness and is associated with mortality. This study investigated the feasibility of a randomised trial comparing conservative fluid administration and deresuscitation (active removal of accumulated fluid using diuretics or ultrafiltration) with usual care in critical illness. METHODS: Open-label, parallel-group, allocation-concealed randomised clinical feasibility trial. Mechanically ventilated adult patients expected to require critical care beyond the next calendar day were enrolled between 24 and 48 h following admission to the intensive care unit (ICU). Patients were randomised to either a 2-stage fluid strategy comprising conservative fluid administration and, if fluid overload was present, active deresuscitation, or usual care. The primary endpoint was fluid balance in the 24 h up to the start of study day 3. Secondary endpoints included cumulative fluid balance, mortality, and duration of mechanical ventilation. RESULTS: One hundred and eighty patients were randomised. After withdrawal of 1 patient, 89 patients assigned to the intervention were compared with 90 patients assigned to the usual care group. The mean plus standard deviation (SD) 24-h fluid balance up to study day 3 was lower in the intervention group (- 840 ± 1746 mL) than the usual care group (+ 130 ± 1401 mL; P < 0.01). Cumulative fluid balance was lower in the intervention group at days 3 and 5. Overall, clinical outcomes did not differ significantly between the two groups, although the point estimate for 30-day mortality favoured the usual care group [intervention arm: 19 of 90 (21.6%) versus usual care: 14 of 89 (15.6%), P = 0.32]. Baseline imbalances between groups and lack of statistical power limit interpretation of clinical outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: A strategy of conservative fluid administration and active deresuscitation is feasible, reduces fluid balance compared with usual care, and may cause benefit or harm. In view of wide variations in contemporary clinical practice, large, adequately powered trials investigating the clinical effectiveness of conservative fluid strategies in critically ill patients are warranted.

Repair of acute respiratory distress syndrome by stromal cell administration (REALIST) trial: A phase 1 trial.

BACKGROUND: Mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) may be of benefit in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) due to immunomodulatory, reparative, and antimicrobial actions. ORBCEL-C is a population of CD362 enriched umbilical cord-derived MSCs. The REALIST phase 1 trial investigated the safety and feasibility of ORBCEL-C in patients with moderate to severe ARDS. METHODS: REALIST phase 1 was an open label, dose escalation trial in which cohorts of mechanically ventilated patients with moderate to severe ARDS received increasing doses (100, 200 or 400 × 106 cells) of a single intravenous infusion of ORBCEL-C in a 3 + 3 design. The primary safety outcome was the incidence of serious adverse events. Dose limiting toxicity was defined as a serious adverse reaction within seven days. Trial registration clinicaltrials.gov NCT03042143. FINDINGS: Nine patients were recruited between the 7th January 2019 and 14th January 2020. Study drug administration was well tolerated and no dose limiting toxicity was reported in any of the three cohorts. Eight adverse events were reported for four patients. Pyrexia within 24 h of study drug administration was reported in two patients as pre-specified adverse events. A further two adverse events (non-sustained ventricular tachycardia and deranged liver enzymes), were reported as adverse reactions. Four serious adverse events were reported (colonic perforation, gastric perforation, bradycardia and myocarditis) but none were deemed related to administration of ORBCEL-C. At day 28 no patients had died in cohort one (100 × 106), three patients had died in cohort two (200 × 106) and one patient had died in cohort three (400 × 106). Overall day 28 mortality was 44% (n = 4/9). INTERPRETATION: A single intravenous infusion of ORBCEL-C was well tolerated in patients with moderate to severe ARDS. No dose limiting toxicity was reported up to 400 × 106 cells.

Fluid management and deresuscitation practices: A survey of critical care physicians.

Accumulation of a positive fluid balance is common in critically ill patients, and is associated with adverse outcomes, including mortality. However, there are few randomised clinical trials to guide clinicians as to the most appropriate fluid strategy following initial resuscitation and on the use of deresuscitation (removal of accumulated fluid using diuretics and/or renal replacement therapy). To inform the design of randomised trials, we surveyed critical care physicians with regard to perceptions of fluid overload in critical care, self-reported practice, acceptability of a variety of approaches to deresuscitation, appropriate safety parameters, and overall acceptability of a randomised trial of deresuscitation. Of 524 critical care specialists completing the survey, the majority practiced in mixed medical/surgical intensive care units in the United Kingdom. Most (309 of 363 respondents, 85%) believed fluid overload to be a modifiable source of morbidity; there was strong support (395 of 457, 86%) for a randomised trial of deresuscitation in critical illness. Marked practice variability was evident among respondents. In a given clinical scenario, self-reported practice ranged from the administration of fluid (N = 59, 14%) to the administration of a diuretic (N = 285, 67%). The majority (95%) considered it appropriate to administer diuretics for fluid overload in the setting of noradrenaline infusion and to continue to administer diuretics despite mild dysnatraemias, hypotension, metabolic alkalosis, and hypokalaemia. The majority of critical care physicians view fluid overload as a common and modifiable source of morbidity; deresuscitation is widely practiced, and there is widespread support for randomised trials of deresuscitation in critical illness.

Repair of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome by Stromal Cell Administration in COVID-19 (REALIST-COVID-19): A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised, controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: The primary objective of the study is to assess the safety of a single intravenous infusion of Mesenchymal Stromal Cells (MSCs) in patients with Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) due to COVID-19. Secondary objectives are to determine the effects of MSCs on important clinical outcomes, as described below. TRIAL DESIGN: REALIST COVID 19 is a randomised, placebo-controlled, triple blinded trial. PARTICIPANTS: The study will be conducted in Intensive Care Units in hospitals across the United Kingdom. Patients with moderate to severe ARDS as defined by the Berlin definition, receiving invasive mechanical ventilation and with a diagnosis of COVID-19 based on clinical diagnosis or PCR test will be eligible. Patients will be excluded for the following reasons: more than 72 hours from the onset of ARDS; age < 16 years; patient known to be pregnant; major trauma in previous 5 days; presence of any active malignancy (other than non-melanoma skin cancer); WHO Class III or IV pulmonary hypertension; venous thromboembolism currently receiving anti-coagulation or within the past 3 months; patient receiving extracorporeal life support; severe chronic liver disease (Child-Pugh > 12); Do Not Attempt Resuscitation order in place; treatment withdrawal imminent within 24 hours; prisoners; declined consent; non-English speaking patients or those who do not adequately understand verbal or written information unless an interpreter is available; previously enrolled in the REALIST trial. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Intervention: Allogeneic donor CD362 enriched human umbilical cord derived mesenchymal stromal cells (REALIST ORBCEL-C) supplied as sterile, single-use cryopreserved cell suspension of a fixed dose of 400 x106 cells in 40ml volume, to be diluted in Plasma-Lyte 148 to a total volume of 200mls for administration. Comparator (placebo): Plasma-Lyte 148 Solution for Infusion (200mls). The cellular product (REALIST ORBCEL-C) was developed and patented by Orbsen Therapeutics. MAIN OUTCOMES: The primary safety outcome is the incidence of serious adverse events. The primary efficacy outcome is Oxygenation Index (OI) at day 7. Secondary outcomes include: OI at days 4 and 14; respiratory compliance, driving pressure and PaO2/FiO2 ratio (PF ratio) at days 4, 7 and 14; Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score at days 4, 7 and 14; extubation and reintubation; ventilation free days at day 28; duration of mechanical ventilation; length of ICU and hospital stay; 28-day and 90-day mortality. RANDOMISATION: After obtaining informed consent, patients will be randomised via a centralised automated 24-hour telephone or web-based randomisation system (CHaRT, Centre for Healthcare Randomised Trials, University of Aberdeen). Randomisation will be stratified by recruitment centre and by vasopressor use and patients will be allocated to REALIST ORBCEL-C or placebo control in a 1:1 ratio. BLINDING (MASKING): The investigator, treating physician, other members of the site research team and participants will be blinded. The cell therapy facility and clinical trials pharmacist will be unblinded to facilitate intervention and placebo preparation. The unblinded individuals will keep the treatment information confidential. The infusion bag will be masked at the time of preparation and will be administered via a masked infusion set. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): A sample size of 60 patients with 30 patients randomised to the intervention and 30 to the control group. If possible, recruitment will continue beyond 60 patients to provide more accurate and definitive trial results. The total number of patients recruited will depend on the pandemic and be guided by the data monitoring and ethics committee (DMEC). TRIAL STATUS: REALIST Phase 1 completed in January 2020 prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. This was an open label dose escalation study of REALIST ORBCEL-C in patients with ARDS. The COVID-19 pandemic emerged as REALIST Phase 2 was planned to commence and the investigator team decided to repurpose the Phase 2 trial as a COVID-19 specific trial. This decision was discussed and approved by the Trial Steering Committee (TSC) and DMEC. Submissions were made to the Research Ethics Committee (REC) and MHRA to amend the protocol to a COVID-19 specific patient population and the protocol amendment was accepted by the REC on 27th March 2020 and MHRA on 30th March 2020 respectively. Other protocol changes in this amendment included an increase in the time of onset of ARDS from 48 to 72 hours, inclusion of clinical outcomes as secondary outcomes, the provision of an option for telephone consent, an indicative sample size and provision to continue recruitment beyond this indicative sample size. The current protocol in use is version 4.0 23.03.2020 (Additional file 1). Urgent Public Health status was awarded by the NIHR on 2 April 2020 and the trial opened to recruitment and recruited the first participant the same day. At the time of publication the trial was open to recruitment at 5 sites across the UK (Belfast Health and Social Care Trust, King's College London, Guys and St Thomas' Hospital London, Birmingham Heartlands Hospital and the Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham) and 12 patients have been recruited across these sites. Additional sites are planned to open and appropriate approvals for these are being obtained. It is estimated recruitment will continue for 6 months. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03042143 (Registered 3 Feb 2017). EudraCT 2017-000585-33 (Registered 28 Nov 2017). FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol (version 4.0 23.03.2020) is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest of expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol. The study protocol has been reported in accordance with the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Clinical Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) guidelines (Additional file 2).

Guidelines on the management of acute respiratory distress syndrome.

The Faculty of Intensive Care Medicine and Intensive Care Society Guideline Development Group have used GRADE methodology to make the following recommendations for the management of adult patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The British Thoracic Society supports the recommendations in this guideline. Where mechanical ventilation is required, the use of low tidal volumes (<6 ml/kg ideal body weight) and airway pressures (plateau pressure <30 cmH2O) was recommended. For patients with moderate/severe ARDS (PF ratio<20 kPa), prone positioning was recommended for at least 12 hours per day. By contrast, high frequency oscillation was not recommended and it was suggested that inhaled nitric oxide is not used. The use of a conservative fluid management strategy was suggested for all patients, whereas mechanical ventilation with high positive end-expiratory pressure and the use of the neuromuscular blocking agent cisatracurium for 48 hours was suggested for patients with ARDS with ratio of arterial oxygen partial pressure to fractional inspired oxygen (PF) ratios less than or equal to 27 and 20 kPa, respectively. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation was suggested as an adjunct to protective mechanical ventilation for patients with very severe ARDS. In the absence of adequate evidence, research recommendations were made for the use of corticosteroids and extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal.

Deresuscitation of Patients With Iatrogenic Fluid Overload Is Associated With Reduced Mortality in Critical Illness.

OBJECTIVES: To characterize current practice in fluid administration and deresuscitation (removal of fluid using diuretics or renal replacement therapy), the relationship between fluid balance, deresuscitative measures, and outcomes and to identify risk factors for positive fluid balance in critical illness. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Ten ICUs in the United Kingdom and Canada. PATIENTS: Adults receiving invasive mechanical ventilation for a minimum of 24 hours. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Four-hundred patients were included. Positive cumulative fluid balance (fluid input greater than output) occurred in 87.3%: the largest contributions to fluid input were from medications and maintenance fluids rather than resuscitative IV fluids. In a multivariate logistic regression model, fluid balance on day 3 was an independent risk factor for 30-day mortality (odds ratio 1.26/L [95% CI, 1.07-1.46]), whereas negative fluid balance achieved in the context of deresuscitative measures was associated with lower mortality. Independent predictors of greater fluid balance included treatment in a Canadian site. CONCLUSIONS: Fluid balance is a practice-dependent and potentially modifiable risk factor for adverse outcomes in critical illness. Negative fluid balance achieved with deresuscitation on day 3 of ICU stay is associated with improved patient outcomes. Minimization of day 3 fluid balance by limiting maintenance fluid intake and drug diluents, and using deresuscitative measures, represents a potentially beneficial therapeutic strategy which merits investigation in randomized trials.

Conservative fluid management or deresuscitation for patients with sepsis or acute respiratory distress syndrome following the resuscitation phase of critical illness: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: It is unknown whether a conservative approach to fluid administration or deresuscitation (active removal of fluid using diuretics or renal replacement therapy) is beneficial following haemodynamic stabilisation of critically ill patients. PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of conservative or deresuscitative fluid strategies in adults and children with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), sepsis or systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) in the post-resuscitation phase of critical illness. METHODS: We searched Medline, EMBASE and the Cochrane central register of controlled trials from 1980 to June 2016, and manually reviewed relevant conference proceedings from 2009 to the present. Two reviewers independently assessed search results for inclusion and undertook data extraction and quality appraisal. We included randomised trials comparing fluid regimens with differing fluid balances between groups, and observational studies investigating the relationship between fluid balance and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: Forty-nine studies met the inclusion criteria. Marked clinical heterogeneity was evident. In a meta-analysis of 11 randomised trials (2051 patients) using a random-effects model, we found no significant difference in mortality with conservative or deresuscitative strategies compared with a liberal strategy or usual care [pooled risk ratio (RR) 0.92, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.82-1.02, I 2 = 0 %]. A conservative or deresuscitative strategy resulted in increased ventilator-free days (mean difference 1.82 days, 95 % CI 0.53-3.10, I 2 = 9 %) and reduced length of ICU stay (mean difference -1.88 days, 95 % CI -0.12 to -3.64, I 2 = 75 %) compared with a liberal strategy or standard care. CONCLUSIONS: In adults and children with ARDS, sepsis or SIRS, a conservative or deresuscitative fluid strategy results in an increased number of ventilator-free days and a decreased length of ICU stay compared with a liberal strategy or standard care. The effect on mortality remains uncertain. Large randomised trials are needed to determine optimal fluid strategies in critical illness.

Fluid strategies and outcomes in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome, systemic inflammatory response syndrome and sepsis: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Fluid administration to critically ill patients remains the subject of considerable controversy. While intravenous fluid given for resuscitation may be life-saving, a positive fluid balance over time is associated with worse outcomes in critical illness. The aim of this systematic review is to summarise the existing evidence regarding the relationship between fluid administration or balance and clinically important patient outcomes in critical illness. METHODS: We will search Medline, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from 1980 to the present and key conference proceedings from 2009 to the present. We will include studies of critically ill adults and children with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), sepsis and systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS). We will include randomised controlled trials comparing two or more fluid regimens of different volumes of fluid and observational studies reporting the relationship between volume of fluid administered or fluid balance and outcomes including mortality, lengths of intensive care unit and hospital stay and organ dysfunction. Two independent reviewers will assess articles for eligibility, data extraction and quality appraisal. We will conduct a narrative and/or meta-analysis as appropriate. DISCUSSION: While fluid management has been extensively studied and discussed in the critical care literature, no systematic review has attempted to summarise the evidence for post-resuscitation fluid strategies in critical illness. Results of the proposed systematic review will inform practice and the design of future clinical trials. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42013005608. ( http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/ ).

Fluid balance, intradialytic hypotension, and outcomes in critically ill patients undergoing renal replacement therapy: a cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: In this cohort study, we explored the relationship between fluid balance, intradialytic hypotension and outcomes in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury (AKI) who received renal replacement therapy (RRT). METHODS: We analysed prospectively collected registry data on patients older than 16 years who received RRT for at least two days in an intensive care unit at two university-affiliated hospitals. We used multivariable logistic regression to determine the relationship between mean daily fluid balance and intradialytic hypotension, both over seven days following RRT initiation, and the outcomes of hospital mortality and RRT dependence in survivors. RESULTS: In total, 492 patients were included (299 male (60.8%), mean (standard deviation (SD)) age 62.9 (16.3) years); 251 (51.0%) died in hospital. Independent risk factors for mortality were mean daily fluid balance (odds ratio (OR) 1.36 per 1000 mL positive (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.18 to 1.57), intradialytic hypotension (OR 1.14 per 10% increase in days with intradialytic hypotension (95% CI 1.06 to 1.23)), age (OR 1.15 per five-year increase (95% CI 1.07 to 1.25)), maximum sequential organ failure assessment score on days 1 to 7 (OR 1.21 (95% CI 1.13 to 1.29)), and Charlson comorbidity index (OR 1.28 (95% CI 1.14 to 1.44)); higher baseline creatinine (OR 0.98 per 10 µmol/L (95% CI 0.97 to 0.996)) was associated with lower risk of death. Of 241 hospital survivors, 61 (25.3%) were RRT dependent at discharge. The only independent risk factor for RRT dependence was pre-existing heart failure (OR 3.13 (95% CI 1.46 to 6.74)). Neither mean daily fluid balance nor intradialytic hypotension was associated with RRT dependence in survivors. Associations between these exposures and mortality were similar in sensitivity analyses accounting for immortal time bias and dichotomising mean daily fluid balance as positive or negative. In the subgroup of patients with data on pre-RRT fluid balance, fluid overload at RRT initiation did not modify the association of mean daily fluid balance with mortality. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of patients with AKI requiring RRT, a more positive mean daily fluid balance and intradialytic hypotension were associated with hospital mortality but not with RRT dependence at hospital discharge in survivors.

Clinical review: Acute respiratory distress syndrome - clinical ventilator management and adjunct therapy.

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a potentially devastating form of acute inflammatory lung injury with a high short-term mortality rate and significant long-term consequences among survivors. Supportive care, principally with mechanical ventilation, remains the cornerstone of therapy - although the goals of this support have changed in recent years - from maintaining normal physiological parameters to avoiding ventilator-induced lung injury while providing adequate gas exchange. In this article we discuss the current evidence base for ventilatory support and adjunctive therapies in patients with ARDS. Key components of such a strategy include avoiding lung overdistension by limiting tidal volumes and airway pressures, and the use of positive end-expiratory pressure with or without lung recruitment manoeuvres in patients with severe ARDS. Adjunctive therapies discussed include pharmacologic techniques (for example, vasodilators, diuretics, neuromuscular blockade) and nonpharmacologic techniques (for example, prone position, alternative modes of ventilation).