4.7 Article

The Effects of Alternative Resuscitation Strategies on Acute Kidney Injury in Patients with Septic Shock

出版社

AMER THORACIC SOC
DOI: 10.1164/rccm.201505-0995OC

关键词

sepsis; septic shock; resuscitation; early goal-directed therapy; acute kidney injury

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health (NIH)/National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases grant [R01 DK083961]
  2. NIH/National Institute of General Medical Sciences grant [P50 GM076659]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Rationale: Septic shock is a common cause of acute kidney injury (AKI), and fluid resuscitation is a major part of therapy. Objectives: To determine if structured resuscitation designed to alter fluid, blood, and vasopressor use affects the development or severity of AKI or outcomes. Methods: Ancillary study to the ProCESS (Protocolized Care for Early Septic Shock) trial of alternative resuscitation strategies (two protocols vs. usual care) for septic shock. Measurements and Main Results: We studied 1,243 patients and classified AKI using serum creatinine and urine output. We determined recovery status at hospital discharge, examined rates of renal replacement therapy and fluid overload, and measured biomarkers of kidney damage. Among patients without evidence of AKI at enrollment, 37.6% of protocolized care and 38.1% of usual care patients developed kidney injury (P = 0.90). AKI duration (P = 0.59) and rates of renal replacement therapy did not differ between study arms (6.9% for protocolized care and 4.3% for usual care; P = 0.08). Fluid overload occurred in 8.3% of protocolized care and 6.3% of usual care patients (P = 0.26). Among patients with severe AKI, complete and partial recovery was 50.7 and 13.2% for protocolized patients and 49.1 and 13.4% for usual care patients (P = 0.93). Sixty-day hospital mortality was 6.2% for patients without AKI, 16.8% for those with stage 1, and 27.7% for stages 2 to 3. Conclusions: In patients with septic shock, AKI is common and associated with adverse outcomes, but it is not influenced by protocolized resuscitation compared with usual care.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据