Dataset Information

Restrictive versus Liberal Fluid Therapy for Post-Cesarean Acute Kidney Injury in Severe Preeclampsia: a Pilot Randomized Clinical Trial.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES:The aim of this study was to determine whether a restrictive compared to a liberal fluid therapy will increase postoperative acute kidney injury (AKI) in patients with severe preeclampsia. METHODS:A total of 46 patients (mean age, 32 years; standard deviation, 6.8 years) with severe preeclampsia were randomized to liberal (1500 ml of lactated Ringer's, n=23) or restrictive (250 ml of lactated Ringer's, n=23) intravenous fluid regimen during cesarean section. The primary outcome was the development of a postoperative renal dysfunction defined by AKI Network stage ?1. Serum cystatin C and neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL) were evaluated at postoperative days 1 and 2. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02214186. RESULTS:The rate of postoperative AKI was 43.5% in the liberal fluid group and 43.5% in the restrictive fluid group (p=1.0). Intraoperative urine output was higher in the liberal (116 ml/h, IQR 69-191) than in the restrictive fluid group (80 ml/h, IQR 37-110, p<0.05). In both groups, serum cystatin C did not change from postoperative day 1 compared to the preoperative period and significantly decreased on postoperative day 2 compared to postoperative day 1 (p<0.05). In the restrictive fluid group, NGAL levels increased on postoperative day 1 compared to the preoperative period (p<0.05) and decreased on postoperative day 2 compared to postoperative day 1 (p<0.05). CONCLUSION:Among patients with severe preeclampsia, a restrictive fluid regimen during cesarean section was not associated with increased postoperative AKI.

SUBMITTER: Silva WAD

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7362722 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Restrictive versus Liberal Fluid Therapy for Post-Cesarean Acute Kidney Injury in Severe Preeclampsia: a Pilot Randomized Clinical Trial.

Silva Wallace Andrino da WAD Varela Carlo Victor A CVA Pinheiro Aline Macedo AM Scherer Paula Castro PC Francisco Rossana P V RPV Torres Marcelo Luis Abramides MLA Carmona Maria José C MJC Bliacheriene Fernando F Andrade Lúcia C LC Pelosi Paolo P Malbouisson Luiz Marcelo S LMS

Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil) 20200722

<h4>Objectives</h4>The aim of this study was to determine whether a restrictive compared to a liberal fluid therapy will increase postoperative acute kidney injury (AKI) in patients with severe preeclampsia.<h4>Methods</h4>A total of 46 patients (mean age, 32 years; standard deviation, 6.8 years) with severe preeclampsia were randomized to liberal (1500 ml of lactated Ringer's, n=23) or restrictive (250 ml of lactated Ringer's, n=23) intravenous fluid regimen during cesarean section. The primary ...[more]

PMID: 32725073

Similar Datasets

Project description:Liberal fluid strategies in critically ill patients are associated with harm, thought to be due to endothelial and glycocalyx injury. As the restrictive versus liberal fluid therapy for major abdominal surgery trial not only failed to report survival benefit with restrictive fluids but was associated with a higher rate of acute kidney injury, we hypothesized that factors other than endothelial and glycocalyx injury were likely to account for these findings. Consequently, we measured injury biomarkers in a cohort of the restrictive versus liberal fluid therapy for major abdominal surgery trial.DesignThe restrictive versus liberal fluid therapy for major abdominal surgery trial was an international, randomized, assessor-blinded trial comparing restrictive with liberal IV fluid regimens that represented traditional care in patients undergoing major abdominal surgery.Setting and patientsCohort of restrictive versus liberal fluid therapy for major abdominal surgery bloods was collected at a single major site (161 patients) prior to, day 1 and day 3 after surgery.InterventionBloods were blindly and randomly batch analyzed for plasma markers of endothelial/glycocalyx injury-angiopoietin-1, angiopoietin-2, soluble tyrosine-protein kinase-2 receptor, soluble intracellular adhesion molecule-1, syndecan, and tumor necrosis factor-α. Data were examined as restrictive versus liberal enrollment groups and high versus low (± 5,000 mL) fluid groups. Differences were examined by linear mixed modeling.Measurement and main resultsThere were no significant differences in any biomarkers between the restrictive (n = 75) and liberal (n = 86) groups. When examined as low (n = 81) and high (n = 79) fluid groups, plasma angiopoietin-2 (p = 0.009) and soluble intracellular adhesion molecule-1 (p = 0.01) were elevated in the high fluid group. There were no differences in other biomarkers.ConclusionsAlthough these results are consistent with previous findings of vascular injury following liberal fluid therapy, they suggest alternative mechanisms underlie the clinical outcomes from restrictive versus liberal fluid therapy for major abdominal surgery study.Clinicaltrialsgov identifierNCT01424150.

Project description:BackgroundPostoperative complications impact on early and long-term patients' outcome. Appropriate perioperative fluid management is pivotal in this context; however, the most effective perioperative fluid management is still unclear. The enhanced recovery after surgery pathways recommend a perioperative zero-balance, whereas recent findings suggest a more liberal approach could be beneficial. We conducted this trial to address the impact of restrictive vs. liberal fluid approaches on overall postoperative complications and mortality.MethodsSystematic review and meta-analysis, including randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We performed a systematic literature search using MEDLINE (via Ovid), EMBASE (via Ovid) and the Cochrane Controlled Clinical trials register databases, published from 1 January 2000 to 31 December 2019. We included RCTs enrolling adult patients undergoing elective abdominal surgery and comparing the use of restrictive/liberal approaches enrolling at least 15 patients in each subgroup. Studies involving cardiac, non-elective surgery, paediatric or obstetric surgeries were excluded.ResultsAfter full-text examination, the metanalysis finally included 18 studies and 5567 patients randomised to restrictive (2786 patients; 50.0%) or liberal approaches (2780 patients; 50.0%). We found no difference in the occurrence of severe postoperative complications between restrictive and liberal subgroups [risk difference (95% CI) = 0.009 (- 0.02; 0.04); p value = 0.62; I2 (95% CI) = 38.6% (0-66.9%)]. This result was confirmed also in the subgroup of five studies having a low overall risk of bias. The liberal approach was associated with lower overall renal major events, as compared to the restrictive [risk difference (95% CI) = 0.06 (0.02-0.09); p value = 0.001]. We found no difference in either early (p value = 0.33) or late (p value = 0.22) postoperative mortality between restrictive and liberal subgroups CONCLUSIONS: In major abdominal elective surgery perioperative, the choice between liberal or restrictive approach did not affect overall major postoperative complications or mortality. In a subgroup analysis, a liberal as compared to a restrictive perioperative fluid policy was associated with lower overall complication renal major events, as compared to the restrictive.Trial registrationCRD42020218059; Registration: February 2020, https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=218059 .

Project description:Blood transfusion might affect long-term mortality by changing immune function and thus potentially increasing the risk of subsequent infections and cancer recurrence. Compared with a restrictive transfusion strategy, a more liberal strategy could reduce cardiac complications by lowering myocardial damage, thereby reducing future deaths from cardiovascular disease. We aimed to establish the effect of a liberal transfusion strategy on long-term survival compared with a restrictive transfusion strategy.In the randomised controlled FOCUS trial, adult patients aged 50 years and older, with a history of or risk factors for cardiovascular disease, and with postoperative haemoglobin concentrations lower than 100 g/L within 3 days of surgery to repair a hip fracture, were eligible for enrolment. Patients were recruited from 47 participating hospitals in the USA and Canada, and eligible participants were randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio by a central telephone system to either liberal transfusion in which they received blood transfusion to maintain haemoglobin level at 100 g/L or higher, or restrictive transfusion in which they received blood transfusion when haemoglobin level was lower than 80 g/L or if they had symptoms of anaemia. In this study, we analysed the long-term mortality of patients assigned to the two transfusion strategies, which was a secondary outcome of the FOCUS trial. Long-term mortality was established by linking the study participants to national death registries in the USA and Canada. Treatment assignment was not masked, but investigators who ascertained mortality and cause of death were masked to group assignment. Analyses were by intention to treat. The FOCUS trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00071032.Between July 19, 2004, and Feb 28, 2009, 2016 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to the two treatment groups: 1007 to the liberal transfusion strategy and 1009 to the restrictive transfusion strategy. The median duration of follow-up was 3·1 years (IQR 2·4-4·1 years), during which 841 (42%) patients died. Long-term mortality did not differ significantly between the liberal transfusion strategy (432 deaths) and the restrictive transfusion strategy (409 deaths) (hazard ratio 1·09 [95% CI 0·95-1·25]; p=0·21).Liberal blood transfusion did not affect mortality compared with a restrictive transfusion strategy in a high-risk group of elderly patients with underlying cardiovascular disease or risk factors. The underlying causes of death did not differ between the trial groups. These findings do not support hypotheses that blood transfusion leads to long-term immunosuppression that is severe enough to affect long-term mortality rate by more than 20-25% or cause of death.National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.

Dataset Information

Restrictive versus Liberal Fluid Therapy for Post-Cesarean Acute Kidney Injury in Severe Preeclampsia: a Pilot Randomized Clinical Trial.

Publications

Restrictive versus Liberal Fluid Therapy for Post-Cesarean Acute Kidney Injury in Severe Preeclampsia: a Pilot Randomized Clinical Trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure