Matthew W Semler1, Jonathan P Wanderer2,3, Jesse M Ehrenfeld2,3, Joanna L Stollings4, Wesley H Self5, Edward D Siew6, Li Wang7, Daniel W Byrne7, Andrew D Shaw2, Gordon R Bernard1, Todd W Rice1. 1. 1 Division of Allergy, Pulmonary, and Critical Care Medicine. 2. 2 Department of Anesthesiology. 3. 3 Department of Biomedical Informatics. 4. 4 Department of Pharmaceutical Services. 5. 5 Department of Emergency Medicine. 6. 6 Vanderbilt Center for Kidney Disease and Integrated Program for AKI, Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, and. 7. 7 Department of Biostatistics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee.
Abstract
RATIONALE: Saline is the intravenous fluid most commonly administered to critically ill adults, but it may be associated with acute kidney injury and death. Whether use of balanced crystalloids rather than saline affects patient outcomes remains unknown. OBJECTIVES: To pilot a cluster-randomized, multiple-crossover trial using software tools within the electronic health record to compare saline to balanced crystalloids. METHODS: This was a cluster-randomized, multiple-crossover trial among 974 adults admitted to a tertiary medical intensive care unit from February 3, 2015 to May 31, 2015. The intravenous crystalloid used in the unit alternated monthly between saline (0.9% sodium chloride) and balanced crystalloids (lactated Ringer's solution or Plasma-Lyte A). Enrollment, fluid delivery, and data collection were performed using software tools within the electronic health record. The primary outcome was the difference between study groups in the proportion of isotonic crystalloid administered that was saline. The secondary outcome was major adverse kidney events within 30 days (MAKE30), a composite of death, dialysis, or persistent renal dysfunction. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Patients assigned to saline (n = 454) and balanced crystalloids (n = 520) were similar at baseline and received similar volumes of crystalloid by 30 days (median [interquartile range]: 1,424 ml [500-3,377] vs. 1,617 ml [500-3,628]; P = 0.40). Saline made up a larger proportion of the isotonic crystalloid given in the saline group than in the balanced crystalloid group (91% vs. 21%; P < 0.001). MAKE30 did not differ between groups (24.7% vs. 24.6%; P = 0.98). CONCLUSIONS: An electronic health record-embedded, cluster-randomized, multiple-crossover trial comparing saline with balanced crystalloids can produce well-balanced study groups and separation in crystalloid receipt. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT 02345486).
RCT Entities:
RATIONALE: Saline is the intravenous fluid most commonly administered to critically ill adults, but it may be associated with acute kidney injury and death. Whether use of balanced crystalloids rather than saline affects patient outcomes remains unknown. OBJECTIVES: To pilot a cluster-randomized, multiple-crossover trial using software tools within the electronic health record to compare saline to balanced crystalloids. METHODS: This was a cluster-randomized, multiple-crossover trial among 974 adults admitted to a tertiary medical intensive care unit from February 3, 2015 to May 31, 2015. The intravenous crystalloid used in the unit alternated monthly between saline (0.9% sodium chloride) and balanced crystalloids (lactated Ringer's solution or Plasma-Lyte A). Enrollment, fluid delivery, and data collection were performed using software tools within the electronic health record. The primary outcome was the difference between study groups in the proportion of isotonic crystalloid administered that was saline. The secondary outcome was major adverse kidney events within 30 days (MAKE30), a composite of death, dialysis, or persistent renal dysfunction. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:Patients assigned to saline (n = 454) and balanced crystalloids (n = 520) were similar at baseline and received similar volumes of crystalloid by 30 days (median [interquartile range]: 1,424 ml [500-3,377] vs. 1,617 ml [500-3,628]; P = 0.40). Saline made up a larger proportion of the isotonic crystalloid given in the saline group than in the balanced crystalloid group (91% vs. 21%; P < 0.001). MAKE30 did not differ between groups (24.7% vs. 24.6%; P = 0.98). CONCLUSIONS: An electronic health record-embedded, cluster-randomized, multiple-crossover trial comparing saline with balanced crystalloids can produce well-balanced study groups and separation in crystalloid receipt. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT 02345486).
Authors: Kirsten Colpaert; Eric A Hoste; Kristof Steurbaut; Dominique Benoit; Sofie Van Hoecke; Filip De Turck; Johan Decruyenaere Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2012-04 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Bram Rochwerg; Waleed Alhazzani; Anees Sindi; Diane Heels-Ansdell; Lehana Thabane; Alison Fox-Robichaud; Lawrence Mbuagbaw; Wojciech Szczeklik; Fayez Alshamsi; Sultan Altayyar; Wang-Chun Ip; Guowei Li; Michael Wang; Anna Wludarczyk; Qi Zhou; Gordon H Guyatt; Deborah J Cook; Roman Jaeschke; Djillali Annane Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2014-09-02 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Katie R Famous; Kevin Delucchi; Lorraine B Ware; Kirsten N Kangelaris; Kathleen D Liu; B Taylor Thompson; Carolyn S Calfee Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2017-02-01 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: John A Myburgh; Simon Finfer; Rinaldo Bellomo; Laurent Billot; Alan Cass; David Gattas; Parisa Glass; Jeffrey Lipman; Bette Liu; Colin McArthur; Shay McGuinness; Dorrilyn Rajbhandari; Colman B Taylor; Steven A R Webb Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2012-10-17 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Nor'azim Mohd Yunos; Rinaldo Bellomo; Colin Hegarty; David Story; Lisa Ho; Michael Bailey Journal: JAMA Date: 2012-10-17 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Simon Finfer; Bette Liu; Colman Taylor; Rinaldo Bellomo; Laurent Billot; Deborah Cook; Bin Du; Colin McArthur; John Myburgh Journal: Crit Care Date: 2010-10-15 Impact factor: 9.097
Authors: Kianoush Kashani; Ali Al-Khafaji; Thomas Ardiles; Antonio Artigas; Sean M Bagshaw; Max Bell; Azra Bihorac; Robert Birkhahn; Cynthia M Cely; Lakhmir S Chawla; Danielle L Davison; Thorsten Feldkamp; Lui G Forni; Michelle Ng Gong; Kyle J Gunnerson; Michael Haase; James Hackett; Patrick M Honore; Eric A J Hoste; Olivier Joannes-Boyau; Michael Joannidis; Patrick Kim; Jay L Koyner; Daniel T Laskowitz; Matthew E Lissauer; Gernot Marx; Peter A McCullough; Scott Mullaney; Marlies Ostermann; Thomas Rimmelé; Nathan I Shapiro; Andrew D Shaw; Jing Shi; Amy M Sprague; Jean-Louis Vincent; Christophe Vinsonneau; Ludwig Wagner; Michael G Walker; R Gentry Wilkerson; Kai Zacharowski; John A Kellum Journal: Crit Care Date: 2013-02-06 Impact factor: 9.097
Authors: Johan Mårtensson; Shailesh Bihari; Jonathan Bannard-Smith; Neil J Glassford; Patryck Lloyd-Donald; Luca Cioccari; Nora Luethi; Aiko Tanaka; Marco Crisman; Nicolas Rey de Castro; Marcus Ottochian; Agnes Huang; Maria Cronhjort; Andrew D Bersten; Shivesh Prakash; Michael Bailey; Glenn M Eastwood; Rinaldo Bellomo Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2018-10-21 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Matthew W Semler; Wesley H Self; Li Wang; Gordon R Bernard; Todd W Rice Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2018-05-15 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: M Joannidis; S J Klein; S John; M Schmitz; D Czock; W Druml; A Jörres; D Kindgen-Milles; J T Kielstein; M Oppert; V Schwenger; C Willam; A Zarbock Journal: Med Klin Intensivmed Notfmed Date: 2018-03-28 Impact factor: 0.840
Authors: Andrew C McKown; Li Wang; Jonathan P Wanderer; Jesse Ehrenfeld; Todd W Rice; Gordon R Bernard; Matthew W Semler Journal: J Med Syst Date: 2017-08-31 Impact factor: 4.460