Volume control strategy and patient survival in sepsis-associated acute kidney injury receiving continuous renal replacement therapy: a randomized controlled trial with secondary analysis

Cheol Ho Park,Hee Byung Koh,Jin Hyeog Lee,Hui-Yun Jung,Joohyung Ha,Hyung Woo Kim,Jung Tak Park,Seung Hyeok Han,Shin-Wook Kang,Tae-Hyun Yoo
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-64224-z
IF: 4.6
2024-06-23
Scientific Reports
Abstract:Optimal strategy for volume control and the clinical implication of achieved volume control are unknown in patients with sepsis-associated acute kidney injury (AKI) receiving continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT). This randomized controlled trial aimed to compare the survival according to conventional or bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA)-guided volume control strategy in patients with sepsis-associated AKI receiving CRRT. We also compared patient survival according to achieved volume accumulation rate ([cumulative fluid balance during 3 days × 100]/fluid overload measured by BIA at enrollment) as a post-hoc analysis. We randomly assigned patients to conventional volume control strategy (n = 39) or to BIA-guided volume control strategy (n = 34). There were no differences in 28-day mortality (HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.63–2.23) or 90-day mortality (HR, 0.99; 95% CI 0.57–1.75) between conventional and BIA-guided volume control group. In the secondary analysis, achieved volume accumulation rate was significantly associated with patient survival. Compared with the achieved volume accumulation rate of ≤ − 50%, the HRs (95% CIs) for the risk of 90-day mortality were 1.21 (0.29–5.01), 0.55 (0.12–2.48), and 7.18 (1.58–32.51) in that of − 50–0%, 1–50%, and > 50%, respectively. Hence, BIA-guided volume control in patients with sepsis-associated AKI receiving CRRT did not improve patient outcomes. In the secondary analysis, achieved volume accumulation rate was associated with patient survival.
multidisciplinary sciences
What problem does this paper attempt to address?