Dataset Information

Saline versus albumin fluid for extracorporeal removal with slow low-efficiency dialysis (SAFER-SLED): study protocol for a pilot trial.

ABSTRACT: Background:Critically ill patients frequently develop acute kidney injury that necessitates renal replacement therapy (RRT). At some centers, critically ill patients who are hemodynamically unstable and require RRT are treated with slow low-efficiency dialysis (SLED). Unfortunately, hypotension is a frequent complication that occurs during SLED treatments and may limit the recovery of kidney function. Hypotension may also limit the amount of fluid that can be removed by ultrafiltration with SLED. Fluid overload can be exacerbated as a consequence, and fluid overload is associated with increased mortality.Occasionally, intravenous albumin fluid is given to prevent or treat low blood pressure during SLED. The intent of doing so is to increase the colloid oncotic pressure in the circulation to draw in extravascular fluid, increase the blood pressure, and enable more aggressive fluid removal with ultrafiltration. Nonetheless, there is little evidence to support this practice and theoretical reasons why it may not be especially effective at augmenting fluid removal in critically ill patients. At the same time, albumin fluid is expensive.As such, we present a protocol for a study to assess the feasibility of a randomized controlled trial evaluating the use of albumin fluid versus saline in critically ill patients receiving SLED. Methods:This study is a single-center, double-blind, and randomized controlled pilot trial with two parallel arms. It involves randomly assigning patients receiving SLED treatment in the ICU to receive either albumin (25%) boluses or normal saline fluid boluses (placebo) to prevent and treat low blood pressure. Discussion:The results of this pilot trial will help with planning a larger trial comparing the efficacy of the interventions in achieving fluid removal in critically ill patients with AKI on SLED. They will establish whether enough participants would participate in a larger study and accept the study procedures. Trial registration:This trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT03665311, registered on September 11, 2018.

SUBMITTER: Clark EG

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6542057 | biostudies-literature | 2019

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Saline versus albumin fluid for extracorporeal removal with slow low-efficiency dialysis (SAFER-SLED): study protocol for a pilot trial.

Clark Edward G EG McIntyre Lauralyn L Ramsay Tim T Tinmouth Alan A Knoll Greg G Brown Pierre-Antoine PA Watpool Irene I Porteous Rebecca R Montroy Kaitlyn K Harris Sophie S Kong Jennifer J Hiremath Swapnil S

Pilot and feasibility studies 20190530

<h4>Background</h4>Critically ill patients frequently develop acute kidney injury that necessitates renal replacement therapy (RRT). At some centers, critically ill patients who are hemodynamically unstable and require RRT are treated with slow low-efficiency dialysis (SLED). Unfortunately, hypotension is a frequent complication that occurs during SLED treatments and may limit the recovery of kidney function. Hypotension may also limit the amount of fluid that can be removed by ultrafiltration w ...[more]

PMID: 31161046

Similar Datasets

Project description: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.

Project description:IntroductionIn series of cases and animal models suffering hemorrhagic shock, the use of vasopressors has shown potential benefits regarding hemodynamics and tissue perfusion. Terlipressin is an analogue of vasopressin with a longer half-life that can be administered by bolus injection. We have previously observed that hypertonic albumin improves resuscitation following controlled hemorrhage in piglets. The aim of the present study was to analyze whether the treatment with the combination of terlipressin and hypertonic albumin can produce better hemodynamic and tissular perfusion parameters than normal saline or hypertonic albumin alone at early stages of hemorrhagic shock in an infant animal model.MethodsExperimental, randomized animal study including 39 2-to-3-month-old piglets. Thirty minutes after controlled 30 ml/kg bleed, pigs were randomized to receive either normal saline (NS) 30 ml/kg (n = 13), 5% albumin plus 3% hypertonic saline (AHS) 15 ml/kg (n = 13) or single bolus of terlipressin 15 μg/kg i.v. plus 5% albumin plus 3% hypertonic saline 15 ml/kg (TAHS) (n = 13) over 30 minutes. Global hemodynamic and tissular perfusion parameters were compared.ResultsAfter controlled bleed a significant decrease of blood pressure, cardiac index, central venous saturation, carotid and peripheral blood flow, brain saturation and an increase of heart rate, gastric PCO2 and lactate was observed. After treatment no significant differences in most hemodynamic (cardiac index, mean arterial pressure) and perfusion parameters (lactate, gastric PCO2, brain saturation, cutaneous blood flow) were observed between the three therapeutic groups. AHS and TAHS produced higher increase in stroke volume index and carotid blood flow than NS.ConclusionsIn this pediatric animal model of hypovolemic shock, albumin plus hypertonic saline with or without terlipressin achieved similar hemodynamics and perfusion parameters than twice the volume of NS. Addition of terlipressin did not produce better results than AHS.

Project description:BackgroundFluid resuscitation is the recommended management of shock, but increased mortality in febrile African children in the FEAST trial. We hypothesised that fluid bolus-induced deaths in FEAST would be associated with detectable changes in cardiovascular, neurological, or respiratory function, oxygen carrying capacity, and blood biochemistry.MethodsWe developed composite scores for respiratory, cardiovascular, and neurological function using vital sign data from the FEAST trial, and used them to compare participants from FEAST with those from four other cohorts and to identify differences between the bolus (n=2097) and no bolus (n=1044) groups of FEAST. We calculated the odds of adverse outcome for each ten-unit increase in baseline score using logistic regression for each cohort. Within FEAST participants, we also compared haemoglobin and plasma biochemistry between bolus and non-bolus patients, assessed the effects of these factors along with the vital sign scores on the contribution of bolus to mortality using Cox proportional hazard models, and used Bayesian clustering to identify subgroups that differed in response to bolus. The FEAST trial is registered with ISRCTN, number ISRCTN69856593.FindingsIncreasing respiratory (odds ratio 1·09, 95% CI 1·07-1·11), neurological (1·26, 1·21-1·31), and cardiovascular scores (1·09, 1·05-1·14) were associated with death in FEAST (all p<0·0001), and with adverse outcomes for specific scores in the four other cohorts. In FEAST, fluid bolus increased respiratory and neurological scores and decreased cardiovascular score at 1 h after commencement of the infusion. Fluid bolus recipients had mean 0·33 g/dL (95% CI 0·20-0·46) reduction in haemoglobin concentration after 8 h (p<0·0001), and at 24 h had a decrease of 1·41 mEq/L (95% CI 0·76-2·06; p=0·0002) in mean base excess and increase of 1·65 mmol/L (0·47-2·8; p=0·0070) in mean chloride, and a decrease of 0·96 mmol/L (0·45 to 1·47; p=0·0003) in bicarbonate. There were similar effects of fluid bolus in three patient subgroups, identified on the basis of their baseline characteristics. Hyperchloraemic acidosis and respiratory and neurological dysfunction induced by saline or albumin bolus explained the excess mortality due to bolus in Cox survival models.InterpretationIn the resuscitation of febrile children, albumin and saline boluses can cause respiratory and neurological dysfunction, hyperchloraemic acidosis, and reduction in haemoglobin concentration. The findings support the notion that fluid resuscitation with unbuffered electrolyte solutions may cause harm and their use should be cautioned. The effects of lower volumes of buffered solutions should be evaluated further.FundingMedical Research Council, Department for International Development, National Institute for Health Research, Imperial College Biomedical Research Centre.

Project description:Mechanical ventilation (MV) represents a lifesaving treatment for patients with respiratory failure, but it could be harmful through the development of ventilator-induced lung injury (VILI). In patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), protective MV strategies with low tidal volume to minimize VILI have been demonstrated to reduce lung injury and mortality. However, they can be limited by the emergence of uncontrolled hypercapnia. Similarly, in COPD patients, noninvasive MV failure often is associated with a progressive rise in arterial CO2 and need for endotracheal intubation, with higher risk of hospital mortality. Minimally invasive extracorporeal CO2 removal systems (ECCO2R) theoretically can remove the entire amount of the CO2 produced in the body per minute. In ARDS patients, ECCO2R may further reduce the risk of VILI ensuring ultraprotective MV and avoiding hypercapnia. In patients with exacerbation of COPD, ECCO2R may help to avoid intubation or facilitate weaning from invasive MV. In intensive care unit, concomitant renal and respiratory failure with MV is one of the strongest risk factors for hospital mortality. Combining ECCO2R and renal replacement therapy may support respiratory and renal functions and limit the side effects of MV. However, the need for systemic anticoagulation and the related risk of bleeding still represent a concern for a wider application of ECCO2R devices. In conclusion, ECCO2R is an effective support therapy to MV to limit its invasiveness and side effects, but its efficacy and safety must be proven in well-designed clinical trials. Objectives This chapter will:1 Explain the physiology of CO2 removal during extracorporeal support.2 Describe potential clinical applications of extracorporeal CO2 removal systems (ECCO2R) support therapy in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) as well as in those with acute kidney injury requiring renal replacement therapy.

Dataset Information

Saline versus albumin fluid for extracorporeal removal with slow low-efficiency dialysis (SAFER-SLED): study protocol for a pilot trial.

Publications

Saline versus albumin fluid for extracorporeal removal with slow low-efficiency dialysis (SAFER-SLED): study protocol for a pilot trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets