88 research outputs found

    Epidemiology of acute kidney injury in Hungarian intensive care units: a multicenter, prospective, observational study

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Despite the substantial progress in the quality of critical care, the incidence and mortality of acute kidney injury (AKI) continues to rise during hospital admissions. We conducted a national, multicenter, prospective, epidemiological survey to evaluate the importance of AKI in intensive care units (ICUs) in Hungary. The objectives of this study were to determine the incidence of AKI in ICU patients; to characterize the differences in aetiology, illness severity and clinical practice; and to determine the influencing factors of the development of AKI and the patients' outcomes.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We analysed the demographic, morbidity, treatment modality and outcome data of patients (n = 459) admitted to ICUs between October 1<sup>st</sup>, 2009 and November 30<sup>th</sup>, 2009 using a prospectively filled in electronic survey form in 7 representative ICUs.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The major reason for ICU admission was surgical in 64.3% of patients and medical in the remaining 35.7%. One-hundred-twelve patients (24.4%) had AKI. By AKIN criteria 11.5% had Stage 1, 5.4% had Stage 2 and 7.4% had Stage 3. In 44.0% of patients, AKI was associated with septic shock. Vasopressor treatment, SAPS II score, serum creatinine on ICU admission and sepsis were the independent risk factors for development of any stage of AKI. Among the Stage 3 patients (34) 50% received renal replacement therapy. The overall utilization of intermittent renal replacement therapy was high (64.8%). The overall in-hospital mortality rate of AKI was 49% (55/112). The ICU mortality rate was 39.3% (44/112). The independent risk factors for ICU mortality were age, mechanical ventilation, SOFA score and AKI Stage 3.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>For the first time we have established the incidence of AKI using the AKIN criteria in Hungarian ICUs. Results of the present study confirm that AKI has a high incidence and is associated with high ICU and in-hospital mortality.</p

    CLINICAL CHARACTERISTICS, OUTCOMES AND RISK FACTORS FOR DEATH AMONG CRITICALLY ILL PATIENTS WITH HIV-RELATED ACUTE KIDNEY INJURY

    Full text link
    SUMMARY Background: The aim of this study is to describe clinical characteristics, outcomes and risk factors for death among patients with HIV-related acute kidney injury (AKI) admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU). Methods: A retrospective study was conducted with HIV-infected AKI patients admitted to the ICU of an infectious diseases hospital in Fortaleza, Brazil. All the patients with confirmed diagnosis of HIV and AKI admitted from January 2004 to December 2011 were included. A comparison between survivors and non-survivors was performed. Risk factors for death were investigated. Results: Among 256 AKI patients admitted to the ICU in the study period, 73 were identified as HIV-infected, with a predominance of male patients (83.6%), and the mean age was 41.2 ± 10.4 years. Non-survivor patients presented higher APACHE II scores (61.4 ± 19 vs. 38.6 ± 18, p = 0.004), used more vasoconstrictors (70.9 vs. 37.5%, p = 0.02) and needed more mechanical ventilation - MV (81.1 vs. 35.3%, p = 0.001). There were 55 deaths (75.3%), most of them (53.4%) due to septic shock. Independent risk factors for mortality were septic shock (OR = 14.2, 95% CI = 2.0-96.9, p = 0.007) and respiratory insufficiency with need of MV (OR = 27.6, 95% CI = 5.0-153.0, p < 0.001). Conclusion: Non-survivor HIV-infected patients with AKI admitted to the ICU presented higher severity APACHE II scores, more respiratory damage and hemodynamic impairment than survivors. Septic shock and respiratory insufficiency were independently associated to death

    Identification of Genes That Promote or Antagonize Somatic Homolog Pairing Using a High-Throughput FISH–Based Screen

    Get PDF
    The pairing of homologous chromosomes is a fundamental feature of the meiotic cell. In addition, a number of species exhibit homolog pairing in nonmeiotic, somatic cells as well, with evidence for its impact on both gene regulation and double-strand break (DSB) repair. An extreme example of somatic pairing can be observed in Drosophila melanogaster, where homologous chromosomes remain aligned throughout most of development. However, our understanding of the mechanism of somatic homolog pairing remains unclear, as only a few genes have been implicated in this process. In this study, we introduce a novel high-throughput fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) technology that enabled us to conduct a genome-wide RNAi screen for factors involved in the robust somatic pairing observed in Drosophila. We identified both candidate “pairing promoting genes” and candidate “anti-pairing genes,” providing evidence that pairing is a dynamic process that can be both enhanced and antagonized. Many of the genes found to be important for promoting pairing are highly enriched for functions associated with mitotic cell division, suggesting a genetic framework for a long-standing link between chromosome dynamics during mitosis and nuclear organization during interphase. In contrast, several of the candidate anti-pairing genes have known interphase functions associated with S-phase progression, DNA replication, and chromatin compaction, including several components of the condensin II complex. In combination with a variety of secondary assays, these results provide insights into the mechanism and dynamics of somatic pairing

    Evidence-based Kernels: Fundamental Units of Behavioral Influence

    Get PDF
    This paper describes evidence-based kernels, fundamental units of behavioral influence that appear to underlie effective prevention and treatment for children, adults, and families. A kernel is a behavior–influence procedure shown through experimental analysis to affect a specific behavior and that is indivisible in the sense that removing any of its components would render it inert. Existing evidence shows that a variety of kernels can influence behavior in context, and some evidence suggests that frequent use or sufficient use of some kernels may produce longer lasting behavioral shifts. The analysis of kernels could contribute to an empirically based theory of behavioral influence, augment existing prevention or treatment efforts, facilitate the dissemination of effective prevention and treatment practices, clarify the active ingredients in existing interventions, and contribute to efficiently developing interventions that are more effective. Kernels involve one or more of the following mechanisms of behavior influence: reinforcement, altering antecedents, changing verbal relational responding, or changing physiological states directly. The paper describes 52 of these kernels, and details practical, theoretical, and research implications, including calling for a national database of kernels that influence human behavior

    Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2008

    Get PDF
    SCOPUS: ar.jinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishe

    Management of intra-abdominal infections : recommendations by the WSES 2016 consensus conference

    Get PDF
    This paper reports on the consensus conference on the management of intra-abdominal infections (IAIs) which was held on July 23, 2016, in Dublin, Ireland, as a part of the annual World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) meeting. This document covers all aspects of the management of IAIs. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation recommendation is used, and this document represents the executive summary of the consensus conference findings.Peer reviewe

    Prevention of acute kidney injury and protection of renal function in the intensive care unit

    Get PDF
    Acute renal failure on the intensive care unit is associated with significant mortality and morbidity. To determine recommendations for the prevention of acute kidney injury (AKI), focusing on the role of potential preventative maneuvers including volume expansion, diuretics, use of inotropes, vasopressors/vasodilators, hormonal interventions, nutrition, and extracorporeal techniques. A systematic search of the literature was performed for studies using these potential protective agents in adult patients at risk for acute renal failure/kidney injury between 1966 and 2009. The following clinical conditions were considered: major surgery, critical illness, sepsis, shock, and use of potentially nephrotoxic drugs and radiocontrast media. Where possible the following endpoints were extracted: creatinine clearance, glomerular filtration rate, increase in serum creatinine, urine output, and markers of tubular injury. Clinical endpoints included the need for renal replacement therapy, length of stay, and mortality. Studies are graded according to the international Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) group system Several measures are recommended, though none carries grade 1A. We recommend prompt resuscitation of the circulation with special attention to providing adequate hydration whilst avoiding high-molecular-weight hydroxy-ethyl starch (HES) preparations, maintaining adequate blood pressure using vasopressors in vasodilatory shock. We suggest using vasopressors in vasodilatory hypotension, specific vasodilators under strict hemodynamic control, sodium bicarbonate for emergency procedures administering contrast media, and periprocedural hemofiltration in severe chronic renal insufficiency undergoing coronary intervention

    Surviving Sepsis Campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock, 2012

    Get PDF
    OBJECTIVE: To provide an update to the "Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock," last published in 2008. DESIGN: A consensus committee of 68 international experts representing 30 international organizations was convened. Nominal groups were assembled at key international meetings (for those committee members attending the conference). A formal conflict of interest policy was developed at the onset of the process and enforced throughout. The entire guidelines process was conducted independent of any industry funding. A stand-alone meeting was held for all subgroup heads, co- and vice-chairs, and selected individuals. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee served as an integral part of the development. METHODS: The authors were advised to follow the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system to guide assessment of quality of evidence from high (A) to very low (D) and to determine the strength of recommendations as strong (1) or weak (2). The potential drawbacks of making strong recommendations in the presence of low-quality evidence were emphasized. Recommendations were classified into three groups: (1) those directly targeting severe sepsis; (2) those targeting general care of the critically ill patient and considered high priority in severe sepsis; and (3) pediatric considerations. RESULTS: Key recommendations and suggestions, listed by category, include: early quantitative resuscitation of the septic patient during the first 6 h after recognition (1C); blood cultures before antibiotic therapy (1C); imaging studies performed promptly to confirm a potential source of infection (UG); administration of broad-spectrum antimicrobials therapy within 1 h of the recognition of septic shock (1B) and severe sepsis without septic shock (1C) as the goal of therapy; reassessment of antimicrobial therapy daily for de-escalation, when appropriate (1B); infection source control with attention to the balance of risks and benefits of the chosen method within 12 h of diagnosis (1C); initial fluid resuscitation with crystalloid (1B) and consideration of the addition of albumin in patients who continue to require substantial amounts of crystalloid to maintain adequate mean arterial pressure (2C) and the avoidance of hetastarch formulations (1B); initial fluid challenge in patients with sepsis-induced tissue hypoperfusion and suspicion of hypovolemia to achieve a minimum of 30 mL/kg of crystalloids (more rapid administration and greater amounts of fluid may be needed in some patients (1C); fluid challenge technique continued as long as hemodynamic improvement is based on either dynamic or static variables (UG); norepinephrine as the first-choice vasopressor to maintain mean arterial pressure ≥65 mmHg (1B); epinephrine when an additional agent is needed to maintain adequate blood pressure (2B); vasopressin (0.03 U/min) can be added to norepinephrine to either raise mean arterial pressure to target or to decrease norepinephrine dose but should not be used as the initial vasopressor (UG); dopamine is not recommended except in highly selected circumstances (2C); dobutamine infusion administered or added to vasopressor in the presence of (a) myocardial dysfunction as suggested by elevated cardiac filling pressures and low cardiac output, or (b) ongoing signs of hypoperfusion despite achieving adequate intravascular volume and adequate mean arterial pressure (1C); avoiding use of intravenous hydrocortisone in adult septic shock patients if adequate fluid resuscitation and vasopressor therapy are able to restore hemodynamic stability (2C); hemoglobin target of 7-9 g/dL in the absence of tissue hypoperfusion, ischemic coronary artery disease, or acute hemorrhage (1B); low tidal volume (1A) and limitation of inspiratory plateau pressure (1B) for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS); application of at least a minimal amount of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) in ARDS (1B); higher rather than lower level of PEEP for patients with sepsis-induced moderate or severe ARDS (2C); recruitment maneuvers in sepsis patients with severe refractory hypoxemia due to ARDS (2C); prone positioning in sepsis-induced ARDS patients with a PaO (2)/FiO (2) ratio of ≤100 mm Hg in facilities that have experience with such practices (2C); head-of-bed elevation in mechanically ventilated patients unless contraindicated (1B); a conservative fluid strategy for patients with established ARDS who do not have evidence of tissue hypoperfusion (1C); protocols for weaning and sedation (1A); minimizing use of either intermittent bolus sedation or continuous infusion sedation targeting specific titration endpoints (1B); avoidance of neuromuscular blockers if possible in the septic patient without ARDS (1C); a short course of neuromuscular blocker (no longer than 48 h) for patients with early ARDS and a PaO (2)/FI O (2) 180 mg/dL, targeting an upper blood glucose ≤180 mg/dL (1A); equivalency of continuous veno-venous hemofiltration or intermittent hemodialysis (2B); prophylaxis for deep vein thrombosis (1B); use of stress ulcer prophylaxis to prevent upper gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with bleeding risk factors (1B); oral or enteral (if necessary) feedings, as tolerated, rather than either complete fasting or provision of only intravenous glucose within the first 48 h after a diagnosis of severe sepsis/septic shock (2C); and addressing goals of care, including treatment plans and end-of-life planning (as appropriate) (1B), as early as feasible, but within 72 h of intensive care unit admission (2C). Recommendations specific to pediatric severe sepsis include: therapy with face mask oxygen, high flow nasal cannula oxygen, or nasopharyngeal continuous PEEP in the presence of respiratory distress and hypoxemia (2C), use of physical examination therapeutic endpoints such as capillary refill (2C); for septic shock associated with hypovolemia, the use of crystalloids or albumin to deliver a bolus of 20 mL/kg of crystalloids (or albumin equivalent) over 5-10 min (2C); more common use of inotropes and vasodilators for low cardiac output septic shock associated with elevated systemic vascular resistance (2C); and use of hydrocortisone only in children with suspected or proven "absolute"' adrenal insufficiency (2C). CONCLUSIONS: Strong agreement existed among a large cohort of international experts regarding many level 1 recommendations for the best care of patients with severe sepsis. Although a significant number of aspects of care have relatively weak support, evidence-based recommendations regarding the acute management of sepsis and septic shock are the foundation of improved outcomes for this important group of critically ill patients
    corecore