Robbert Cleymaet1,2, Thomas Scheinok1, Hanne Maes1, Amber Stas1, Luca Malbrain3, Inneke De Laet4, Karen Schoonheydt4, Hilde Dits4, Niels van Regenmortel4, Michaël Mekeirele1, Andrea Minini1,5, Paolo Severgnini5,6, Adrian Wong7, Manu L N G Malbrain4,8,9. 1. Department of Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital Brussels (UZB), Jette, Belgium. 2. Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Universiteit Gent (UGent), Gent, Belgium. 3. University School of Medicine, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven (KUL), Leuven, Belgium. 4. Department of Intensive Care Medicine, Ziekenhuis Netwerk Antwerpen, ZNA Stuivenberg, Antwerp, Belgium. 5. School of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Dipartimento di Biotecnologie e Scienze della Vita, Insubria University, Varese, Italy. 6. Department of Anestesia e Rianimazione Cardiologica, ASST dei Sette Laghi, Ospedale di Circolo e Fondazione Macchi , Varese, Italy. 7. Department of Intensive Care Medicine and Anaesthesia, King's College Hospital, Denmark Hill, London, UK. 8. Faculty of Engineering, Department of Electronics and Informatics, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Brussels, Belgium. 9. International Fluid Academy, Lovenjoel, Belgium.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The non-invasive analysis of body fluid composition with bio-electrical impedance analysis (BIA) provides additional information allowing for more persona-lised therapy to improve outcomes. The aim of this study is to assess the prognostic value of fluid overload (FO) in the first week of intensive care unit (ICU) stay. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective, observational analysis of 101 ICU patients. Whole-body BIA measurements were performed, and FO was defined as a 5% increase in volume excess from baseline body weight. RESULTS: Baseline demographic data, including severity scores, were similar in both the fluid overload-positive (FO+, n = 49) patients and in patients without fluid overload (FO-, n = 52). Patients with FO+ had significantly higher cumulative fluid balance during their ICU stay compared to those without FO (8.8 ± 7.0 vs. 5.5 ± 5.4 litres; P = 0.009), VE (9.9 ± 6.5 vs. 1.5 ± 1.5 litres; P < 0.001), total body water (63.0 ± 9.5 vs. 52.8 ± 8.1%; P < 0.001), and extracellular water (27.0 ± 7.3 vs. 19.6 ± 3.7 litres; P < 0.001). The presence of 5%, 7.5%, and 10% fluid overload was directly associated with increased ICU mortality rates. The percentage fluid overload (P = 0.039) was an independent predictor for hospital mortality. CONCLUSIONS: A higher mortality rate in ICU-patients with FO was observed. FO is an independent prognostic factor because neither APACHE-II, SOFA, nor SAPS-II significantly differed on admission between survivors and non-survivors. Further research is needed to confirm these data prospectively and to evaluate whether BIA-guided deresuscitation in the subacute phase will improve mortality rates.
INTRODUCTION: The non-invasive analysis of body fluid composition with bio-electrical impedance analysis (BIA) provides additional information allowing for more persona-lised therapy to improve outcomes. The aim of this study is to assess the prognostic value of fluid overload (FO) in the first week of intensive care unit (ICU) stay. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective, observational analysis of 101 ICU patients. Whole-body BIA measurements were performed, and FO was defined as a 5% increase in volume excess from baseline body weight. RESULTS: Baseline demographic data, including severity scores, were similar in both the fluid overload-positive (FO+, n = 49) patients and in patients without fluid overload (FO-, n = 52). Patients with FO+ had significantly higher cumulative fluid balance during their ICU stay compared to those without FO (8.8 ± 7.0 vs. 5.5 ± 5.4 litres; P = 0.009), VE (9.9 ± 6.5 vs. 1.5 ± 1.5 litres; P < 0.001), total body water (63.0 ± 9.5 vs. 52.8 ± 8.1%; P < 0.001), and extracellular water (27.0 ± 7.3 vs. 19.6 ± 3.7 litres; P < 0.001). The presence of 5%, 7.5%, and 10% fluid overload was directly associated with increased ICU mortality rates. The percentage fluid overload (P = 0.039) was an independent predictor for hospital mortality. CONCLUSIONS: A higher mortality rate in ICU-patients with FO was observed. FO is an independent prognostic factor because neither APACHE-II, SOFA, nor SAPS-II significantly differed on admission between survivors and non-survivors. Further research is needed to confirm these data prospectively and to evaluate whether BIA-guided deresuscitation in the subacute phase will improve mortality rates.
Entities:
Keywords:
BIA; bio-electrical impedance analysis; crtitically ill; extracellular water; lung water.; outcome; overload; total body water; volume excess; fluids
Authors: Francesco Gavelli; Rui Shi; Jean-Louis Teboul; Danila Azzolina; Pablo Mercado; Mathieu Jozwiak; Michelle S Chew; Wolfgang Huber; Mikhail Y Kirov; Vsevolod V Kuzkov; Tobias Lahmer; Manu L N G Malbrain; Jihad Mallat; Samir G Sakka; Takashi Tagami; Tài Pham; Xavier Monnet Journal: Crit Care Date: 2022-07-06 Impact factor: 19.334
Authors: Jakub Kukliński; Karol P Steckiewicz; Sebastian P Piwowarczyk; Mateusz J Kreczko; Aleksander Aszkiełowicz; Radosław Owczuk Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2022-02-04 Impact factor: 4.241