Search

Objectives: To compare the incidence of healthcare-associated infections (HAI) and their outcomes between patients admitted to the ICU with sepsis and those admitted with non-sepsis diagnoses. Materials and methods: We performed a single-center, prospective, observational study of ICU patients at a tertiary level medical-surgical unit from April 2018 to October 2018. All patients admitted to the ICU with a length of stay (LOS) > 48 hours were included. Baseline data including demographics, co-morbidities, and severity of illness scores were collected. Index occurrence of HAI in all these patients was noted and data regarding organ support and patient outcomes were recorded. The incidence, complications, ICU LOS, and 30-day mortality of HAI were compared between the patients admitted to ICU originally with sepsis and non-sepsis diagnoses. Results: A total of 271 patients were evaluated in our study (N = 106 for the sepsis group and N = 165 for the non-sepsis group). No significant difference between the groups was found in the incidence of HAI (29.2% in sepsis group vs 24.4% in non-sepsis group; p = 0.07). Complications (acute kidney injury (AKI): 71 vs 45%; p = 0.01, shock: 81 vs 55%; p = 0.05, need for mechanical ventilation (MV): 30 vs 15%; p = 0.04) were more common in sepsis group compared to the non-sepsis group. The ICU LOS (12.2 ± 5.2 days vs 8.8 ± 2.05 days; p = 0.01) was significantly longer in the sepsis group. There was no significant difference in 30-day mortality between the groups (45 vs 25%; p = 0.07). Conclusions: The incidence of HAI seems to be similar between patients admitted with sepsis and non-sepsis diagnoses. However, patients admitted with sepsis develop higher rates of organ failure secondary to HAI and have a longer ICU LOS compared to patients admitted with non-sepsis diagnoses. The mortality rate of HAI did not differ between these two groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Fluid therapy in critically ill patients, especially timing and fluid choice, is controversial. Previous randomized trials produced conflicting results. This observational study evaluated the effect of colloid use on 90-day mortality and acute kidney injury (RIFLE F) within the Rational Fluid Therapy in Asia (RaFTA) registry in intensive care units. Materials and methods: RaFTA is a prospective, observational study in Asian intensive care unit (ICU) patients focusing on fluid therapy and related outcomes. Logistic regression was performed to identify risk factors for increased 90-day mortality and acute kidney injury (AKI). Results: Twenty-four study centers joined the RaFTA registry and collected 3,187 patient data sets from November 2011 to September 2012. A follow-up was done 90 days after ICU admission. For 90-day mortality, significant risk factors in the overall population were sepsis at admission (OR 2.185 [1.799; 2.654], p < 0.001), cumulative fluid balance (OR 1.032 [1.018; 1.047], p < 0.001), and the use of vasopressors (OR 3.409 [2.694; 4.312], p < 0.001). The use of colloids was associated with a reduced risk of 90-day mortality (OR 0.655 [0.478; 0.900], p = 0.009). The initial colloid dose was not associated with an increased risk for AKI (OR 1.094 [0.754; 1.588], p = 0.635). Conclusion: RaFTA adds the important finding that colloid use was not associated with increased 90-day mortality or AKI after adjustment for baseline patient condition. Clinical significance: Early resuscitation with colloids showed potential mortality benefit in the present analysis. Elucidating these findings may be an approach for future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: In critically ill patients, acute kidney injury (AKI) and sepsis often coexist. This confounds the assessment of outcomes of both sepsis and AKI in these patients. Hence, in this study, we compare the outcomes of AKI with sepsis, AKI without sepsis, and sepsis without AKI against a control cohort comprising patients with neither AKI nor sepsis. Materials and methods: Prospective observational study conducted in our critical care unit (CCU) between January and July 2009. Data including demographic details, acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE) III score, presence of AKI, presence of sepsis, intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS), and outcomes were collected for all patients. Acute Kidney Injury Network (AKIN) criteria were used to define the presence of AKI and American College of Critical Care Medicine 2001 definition was used to define the presence of sepsis. Results: A total of 250 patients were included in the study and 8 patients were excluded from analysis as they were discharged from hospital against medical advice. The remaining 242 patients (mean age 52.8 ± 17 years; 61.6% male; APACHE III score: 48.2 ± 24.1) were analyzed, and AKI was seen in 111 patients (45.8%). Among the patients with AKI, 55.8% (62/111) had sepsis and 44.2% (49/111) had nonseptic AKI. There was a higher need for renal replacement therapy (RRT) among patients with septic AKI in comparison to those with nonseptic AKI (19.3% vs 6.1%; p = 0.04), but no mortality difference was seen between the two groups (25.8% vs 20.4%, p = 0.5). Patients with sepsis and AKI had a significantly higher mortality (25.8%) compared to the patients with sepsis alone (5.6%; p < 0.01). Conclusion: Patients with septic AKI had a higher RRT requirement compared to patients with nonseptic AKI, but no significant differences in mortality were seen between the groups. Occurrence of AKI in septic patients substantially increases their mortality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: Recent advances in dialysis therapy have made an impact on the clinical practice of renal replacement therapy (RRT) in acute kidney injury (AKI) in Intensive Care Unit (ICU). We studied the impact of RRT practice changes on outcomes in AKI in ICU over a period of 8 years. Subjects and Methods: AKI patients requiring RRT in ICU referred to a nephrologist during two different periods (period-1: Between May 2004 and May 2007, n = 69; period-2: Between August 2008 and May 2011, n = 93) were studied. The major changes in the dialysis practice during the period-2, compared to period-1 were introduction of prolonged intermittent RRT (PIRRT), early dialysis for metabolic acidosis, early initiation of RRT for anuria and positive fluid balance and use of bicarbonate-based fluids for continuous RRT (CRRT) instead of lactate buffer. The primary study outcome was 28-day hospital mortality. Results: The mean age was 53.8 ± 16.1 years and 72.6% were male. Introduction of PIRRT resulted in 37% reduction in utilization of CRRT during period-2 (from 85.5% to 53.7%). The overall mortality was high (68%) but was significantly reduced during period-2 compared to period-1 (59% vs. 79.7%, P = 0.006). Metabolic acidosis but not the mode of RRT, was the significant factor which influenced mortality. Conclusions: Adaption of PIRRT resulted in 37% reduction of utilization of CRRT. The mortality rate was significantly reduced during the period of adaption of PIRRT, possibly due to early initiation of RRT in the latter period for indications such as anuria and metabolic acidosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To assess the attitudes of practitioners with respect to net ultrafiltration prescription and practice among critically ill patients with acute kidney injury treated with renal replacement therapy.Design: Multinational internet-assisted survey.Setting: Critical care practitioners involved with 14 societies in 80 countries.Subjects: Intervention: MEASUREMENT AND MAIN RESULTS:: Of 2,567 practitioners who initiated the survey, 1,569 (61.1%) completed the survey. Most practitioners were intensivists (72.7%) with a median duration of 13.2 years of practice (interquartile range, 7.2-22.0 yr). Two third of practitioners (71.0%; regional range, 55.0-95.5%) reported using continuous renal replacement therapy with a net ultrafiltration rate prescription of median 80.0 mL/hr (interquartile range, 49.0-111.0 mL/hr) for hemodynamically unstable and a maximal rate of 299.0 mL/hr (interquartile range, 200.0-365.0 mL/hr) for hemodynamically stable patients, with regional variation. Only a third of practitioners (31.5%; range, 13.7-47.8%) assessed hourly net fluid balance during continuous renal replacement therapy. Hemodynamic instability was reported in 20% (range, 20-38%) of patients and practitioners decreased the rate of fluid removal (70.3%); started or increased the dose of a vasopressor (51.5%); completely stopped fluid removal (35.8%); and administered a fluid bolus (31.6%), with significant regional variation. Compared with physicians, nurses were most likely to report patient intolerance to net ultrafiltration (73.4% vs 81.3%; p = 0.002), frequent interruptions (40.4% vs 54.5%; p < 0.001), and unavailability of trained staff (11.9% vs 15.6%; p = 0.04), whereas physicians reported unavailability of dialysis machines (14.3% vs 6.1%; p < 0.001) and costs associated with treatment as barriers (12.1% vs 3.0%; p < 0.001) with significant regional variation.Conclusions: Our study provides new knowledge about the presence and extent of international practice variation in net ultrafiltration. We also identified barriers and specific targets for quality improvement initiatives. Our data reflect the need for evidence-based practice guidelines for net ultrafiltration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]