Ramachandran Rameshkumar1, Muthu Chidambaram2, Singanamalla Bhanudeep2, Kandamaran Krishnamurthy3, Abraar Sheriff2, Tamil Selvan4, Subramanian Mahadevan2. 1. Division of Pediatric Critical Care, Department of Pediatrics, Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research (JIPMER), Puducherry, 605006, India. krramesh_iway@yahoo.co.in. 2. Division of Pediatric Critical Care, Department of Pediatrics, Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research (JIPMER), Puducherry, 605006, India. 3. Faculty of Medical Sciences, University of West Indies, Bridgetown, Barbados. 4. Department of Pediatrics, Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research (JIPMER), Puducherry, India.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To study the association of cumulative fluid balance and clinical outcomes in a pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) practicing restrictive fluid protocol. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study, children aged less than 13 y admitted for more than 48 h were screened. Children with unstable hemodynamics throughout the stay were excluded. Fluid balance was calculated by percentage fluid overload (%FO) for the first 7 d. Patients were divided into positive fluid and negative fluid balance groups. The primary outcome was all-cause 28-d mortality. RESULTS: A total of 888 patients (positive fluid balance group = 531, negative fluid balance group = 357) were analyzed. Mean (SD) cumulative %FO was 1.52 (0.67) vs. -1.18 (0.71), p = < 0.001, and minimum and maximum cumulative %FO were -3.0% and 3.1%, respectively. There was no significant difference in all-cause 28-d mortality between the two groups (n = 104/531, 19.6% vs. n = 60/357, 16.8%, RR = 1.17, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.55; p = 0.29). There was no difference in organ dysfunction [mean (SD) sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score 3.3 (0.7) vs. 3.3 (0.6)], acute kidney injury (65% vs. 63.6%), need for renal replacement therapy (14% vs. 13%), and duration of ventilation (median, IQR 4, 2-6 vs. 4, 2-6 d). Longer stay in PICU (5, 3-9 vs. 4, 3-7 d; p = 0.014) and in hospital (8, 5-11 vs. 7, 4-10 d; p = 0.007) were noted in the positive fluid balance group. CONCLUSION: Cumulative fluid balance within 3% using restrictive fluid protocol was not associated with a significant difference in PICU mortality and morbidity.
OBJECTIVE: To study the association of cumulative fluid balance and clinical outcomes in a pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) practicing restrictive fluid protocol. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study, children aged less than 13 y admitted for more than 48 h were screened. Children with unstable hemodynamics throughout the stay were excluded. Fluid balance was calculated by percentage fluid overload (%FO) for the first 7 d. Patients were divided into positive fluid and negative fluid balance groups. The primary outcome was all-cause 28-d mortality. RESULTS: A total of 888 patients (positive fluid balance group = 531, negative fluid balance group = 357) were analyzed. Mean (SD) cumulative %FO was 1.52 (0.67) vs. -1.18 (0.71), p = < 0.001, and minimum and maximum cumulative %FO were -3.0% and 3.1%, respectively. There was no significant difference in all-cause 28-d mortality between the two groups (n = 104/531, 19.6% vs. n = 60/357, 16.8%, RR = 1.17, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.55; p = 0.29). There was no difference in organ dysfunction [mean (SD) sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score 3.3 (0.7) vs. 3.3 (0.6)], acute kidney injury (65% vs. 63.6%), need for renal replacement therapy (14% vs. 13%), and duration of ventilation (median, IQR 4, 2-6 vs. 4, 2-6 d). Longer stay in PICU (5, 3-9 vs. 4, 3-7 d; p = 0.014) and in hospital (8, 5-11 vs. 7, 4-10 d; p = 0.007) were noted in the positive fluid balance group. CONCLUSION: Cumulative fluid balance within 3% using restrictive fluid protocol was not associated with a significant difference in PICU mortality and morbidity.