Kyle James, MD

Clinical question: Does early renal replacement therapy (RRT) initiation affect clinical outcomes in patients with severe acute kidney injury (AKI) in the setting of septic shock or acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS)?

Background: Critically ill patients with AKI can benefit from RRT via improvement of electrolyte abnormalities, volume overload, and acid-base status. Potential harm from RRT includes complications of central venous access, intradialytic hypotension, and the bleeding risk of anticoagulation. The optimal timing of the elective initiation of RRT for AKI in septic shock or ARDS is unknown.

Study design: A post hoc subgroup study of a randomized, controlled trial.

Setting: Thirty-one ICUs in France.

Synopsis: Using data from the Artificial Kidney Initiation in Kidney Injury trial, the authors evaluated 619 patients with severe AKI and requirement for catecholamine infusion and/or invasive mechanical ventilation. Patients were randomly given RRT in an early or a delayed time frame. The early strategy involved RRT as soon as possible after randomization. In addition to the other parameters, the patients in the delayed group were given RRT for the following: anuria/oliguria 72 hours after randomization, blood urea nitrogen greater than 112 mg/dL, serum potassium greater than 6 mmol/L, metabolic acidosis with pH less than 7.15, or pulmonary edema from fluid overload causing severe hypoxia.

Early RRT did not show significant improvement in 60-day mortality, length of mechanical ventilation, or length of stay, compared with delayed RRT. The delayed RRT strategy was significantly associated with renal function recovery, with hazard ratios of 1.7 in ARDS (P = .009) and 1.9 in septic shock (P less than .001). Additionally, the likelihood of adequate urinary output was greater in the delayed RRT group.

Bottom line: A delayed RRT strategy in those with severe AKI and septic shock or ARDS may safely afford time for renal recovery in some patients.

Citation: Gaudry S et al. Timing of renal support and outcome of septic shock and acute respiratory distress syndrome. A post hoc analysis of the AKIKI randomized clinical trial. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2018;198(1):58-66.

Dr. James is a hospitalist at Emory University Hospital Midtown and an assistant professor at Emory University, both in Atlanta.

Clinical question: Does early renal replacement therapy (RRT) initiation affect clinical outcomes in patients with severe acute kidney injury (AKI) in the setting of septic shock or acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS)?

Background: Critically ill patients with AKI can benefit from RRT via improvement of electrolyte abnormalities, volume overload, and acid-base status. Potential harm from RRT includes complications of central venous access, intradialytic hypotension, and the bleeding risk of anticoagulation. The optimal timing of the elective initiation of RRT for AKI in septic shock or ARDS is unknown.

Study design: A post hoc subgroup study of a randomized, controlled trial.

Setting: Thirty-one ICUs in France.

Synopsis: Using data from the Artificial Kidney Initiation in Kidney Injury trial, the authors evaluated 619 patients with severe AKI and requirement for catecholamine infusion and/or invasive mechanical ventilation. Patients were randomly given RRT in an early or a delayed time frame. The early strategy involved RRT as soon as possible after randomization. In addition to the other parameters, the patients in the delayed group were given RRT for the following: anuria/oliguria 72 hours after randomization, blood urea nitrogen greater than 112 mg/dL, serum potassium greater than 6 mmol/L, metabolic acidosis with pH less than 7.15, or pulmonary edema from fluid overload causing severe hypoxia.

Early RRT did not show significant improvement in 60-day mortality, length of mechanical ventilation, or length of stay, compared with delayed RRT. The delayed RRT strategy was significantly associated with renal function recovery, with hazard ratios of 1.7 in ARDS (P = .009) and 1.9 in septic shock (P less than .001). Additionally, the likelihood of adequate urinary output was greater in the delayed RRT group.

Bottom line: A delayed RRT strategy in those with severe AKI and septic shock or ARDS may safely afford time for renal recovery in some patients.

Citation: Gaudry S et al. Timing of renal support and outcome of septic shock and acute respiratory distress syndrome. A post hoc analysis of the AKIKI randomized clinical trial. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2018;198(1):58-66.

Dr. James is a hospitalist at Emory University Hospital Midtown and an assistant professor at Emory University, both in Atlanta.

Clinical question: Does early renal replacement therapy (RRT) initiation affect clinical outcomes in patients with severe acute kidney injury (AKI) in the setting of septic shock or acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS)?

Background: Critically ill patients with AKI can benefit from RRT via improvement of electrolyte abnormalities, volume overload, and acid-base status. Potential harm from RRT includes complications of central venous access, intradialytic hypotension, and the bleeding risk of anticoagulation. The optimal timing of the elective initiation of RRT for AKI in septic shock or ARDS is unknown.

Study design: A post hoc subgroup study of a randomized, controlled trial.

Setting: Thirty-one ICUs in France.

Synopsis: Using data from the Artificial Kidney Initiation in Kidney Injury trial, the authors evaluated 619 patients with severe AKI and requirement for catecholamine infusion and/or invasive mechanical ventilation. Patients were randomly given RRT in an early or a delayed time frame. The early strategy involved RRT as soon as possible after randomization. In addition to the other parameters, the patients in the delayed group were given RRT for the following: anuria/oliguria 72 hours after randomization, blood urea nitrogen greater than 112 mg/dL, serum potassium greater than 6 mmol/L, metabolic acidosis with pH less than 7.15, or pulmonary edema from fluid overload causing severe hypoxia.

Early RRT did not show significant improvement in 60-day mortality, length of mechanical ventilation, or length of stay, compared with delayed RRT. The delayed RRT strategy was significantly associated with renal function recovery, with hazard ratios of 1.7 in ARDS (P = .009) and 1.9 in septic shock (P less than .001). Additionally, the likelihood of adequate urinary output was greater in the delayed RRT group.

Bottom line: A delayed RRT strategy in those with severe AKI and septic shock or ARDS may safely afford time for renal recovery in some patients.

Citation: Gaudry S et al. Timing of renal support and outcome of septic shock and acute respiratory distress syndrome. A post hoc analysis of the AKIKI randomized clinical trial. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2018;198(1):58-66.

Dr. James is a hospitalist at Emory University Hospital Midtown and an assistant professor at Emory University, both in Atlanta.

Clinical question: Does sodium bicarbonate treatment improve clinical outcomes in critically ill patients with severe metabolic acidosis?

Background: Severe acidemia is associated with impaired cardiac function, decreased perfusion, and increased mortality. Many physicians use sodium bicarbonate to improve hemodynamic stability in critically ill patients with acidemia. However, the use of sodium bicarbonate in this role remains controversial because the evidence to support it is limited.

Study design: Multicenter, open-label, randomized, controlled trial.

Setting: Twenty-six ICUs in France.

Synopsis: Investigators randomized 389 adult patients with severe acidemia and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores of 4 or greater or serum lactate level of 2 mmol/L or greater to receive either no sodium bicarbonate or 4.2% intravenous sodium bicarbonate. The primary composite outcome was at least organ failure at day 7 or mortality by day 28.

When compared as a whole, the treatment group did not demonstrate improvement in the primary outcome. However, patients with Acute Kidney Injury Network scores of 2 or 3 at enrollment who received bicarbonate had lower rates of the composite primary outcome (70% vs. 82%; P = .462). Additionally, 35% of the treatment group utilized a renal replacement therapy (RRT) during their ICU stay versus 52% of the control group (P = .0009).

Limitations of the study included unblinding of the ICU physicians and the lack of a control intravenous solution. Notably, 47 of the 194 patients in the control group received sodium bicarbonate as salvage therapy.

Bottom line: Sodium bicarbonate treatment may decrease the need for RRT in patients with significant metabolic acidemia and may decrease the likelihood of death or organ failure in those with severe acute kidney injury.

Citation: Jaber S et al. Sodium bicarbonate therapy for patients with severe metabolic acidaemia in the intensive care unit (BICAR-ICU): A multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2018;392(10141):31-40.

Dr. James is a hospitalist at Emory University Hospital Midtown and an assistant professor at Emory University, both in Atlanta

Clinical question: Does sodium bicarbonate treatment improve clinical outcomes in critically ill patients with severe metabolic acidosis?

Background: Severe acidemia is associated with impaired cardiac function, decreased perfusion, and increased mortality. Many physicians use sodium bicarbonate to improve hemodynamic stability in critically ill patients with acidemia. However, the use of sodium bicarbonate in this role remains controversial because the evidence to support it is limited.

Study design: Multicenter, open-label, randomized, controlled trial.

Setting: Twenty-six ICUs in France.

Synopsis: Investigators randomized 389 adult patients with severe acidemia and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores of 4 or greater or serum lactate level of 2 mmol/L or greater to receive either no sodium bicarbonate or 4.2% intravenous sodium bicarbonate. The primary composite outcome was at least organ failure at day 7 or mortality by day 28.

When compared as a whole, the treatment group did not demonstrate improvement in the primary outcome. However, patients with Acute Kidney Injury Network scores of 2 or 3 at enrollment who received bicarbonate had lower rates of the composite primary outcome (70% vs. 82%; P = .462). Additionally, 35% of the treatment group utilized a renal replacement therapy (RRT) during their ICU stay versus 52% of the control group (P = .0009).

Limitations of the study included unblinding of the ICU physicians and the lack of a control intravenous solution. Notably, 47 of the 194 patients in the control group received sodium bicarbonate as salvage therapy.

Bottom line: Sodium bicarbonate treatment may decrease the need for RRT in patients with significant metabolic acidemia and may decrease the likelihood of death or organ failure in those with severe acute kidney injury.

Citation: Jaber S et al. Sodium bicarbonate therapy for patients with severe metabolic acidaemia in the intensive care unit (BICAR-ICU): A multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2018;392(10141):31-40.

Dr. James is a hospitalist at Emory University Hospital Midtown and an assistant professor at Emory University, both in Atlanta

Clinical question: Does sodium bicarbonate treatment improve clinical outcomes in critically ill patients with severe metabolic acidosis?

Background: Severe acidemia is associated with impaired cardiac function, decreased perfusion, and increased mortality. Many physicians use sodium bicarbonate to improve hemodynamic stability in critically ill patients with acidemia. However, the use of sodium bicarbonate in this role remains controversial because the evidence to support it is limited.

Study design: Multicenter, open-label, randomized, controlled trial.

Setting: Twenty-six ICUs in France.

Synopsis: Investigators randomized 389 adult patients with severe acidemia and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores of 4 or greater or serum lactate level of 2 mmol/L or greater to receive either no sodium bicarbonate or 4.2% intravenous sodium bicarbonate. The primary composite outcome was at least organ failure at day 7 or mortality by day 28.

When compared as a whole, the treatment group did not demonstrate improvement in the primary outcome. However, patients with Acute Kidney Injury Network scores of 2 or 3 at enrollment who received bicarbonate had lower rates of the composite primary outcome (70% vs. 82%; P = .462). Additionally, 35% of the treatment group utilized a renal replacement therapy (RRT) during their ICU stay versus 52% of the control group (P = .0009).

Limitations of the study included unblinding of the ICU physicians and the lack of a control intravenous solution. Notably, 47 of the 194 patients in the control group received sodium bicarbonate as salvage therapy.

Bottom line: Sodium bicarbonate treatment may decrease the need for RRT in patients with significant metabolic acidemia and may decrease the likelihood of death or organ failure in those with severe acute kidney injury.

Citation: Jaber S et al. Sodium bicarbonate therapy for patients with severe metabolic acidaemia in the intensive care unit (BICAR-ICU): A multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2018;392(10141):31-40.

Dr. James is a hospitalist at Emory University Hospital Midtown and an assistant professor at Emory University, both in Atlanta