Impact of Initial Central Venous Pressure on Outcomes of Conservative Versus Liberal Fluid Management in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome

OBJECTIVES:In acute respiratory distress syndrome, conservative fluid management increases ventilator-free days without affecting mortality. Response to fluid management may differ based on patients’ initial central venous pressure. We hypothesized that initial central venous pressure would modify t...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Critical care medicine 2016-04, Vol.44 (4), p.782-789
Hauptverfasser: Semler, Matthew W, Wheeler, Arthur P, Thompson, B Taylor, Bernard, Gordon R, Wiedemann, Herbert P, Rice, Todd W
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 789
container_issue 4
container_start_page 782
container_title Critical care medicine
container_volume 44
creator Semler, Matthew W
Wheeler, Arthur P
Thompson, B Taylor
Bernard, Gordon R
Wiedemann, Herbert P
Rice, Todd W
description OBJECTIVES:In acute respiratory distress syndrome, conservative fluid management increases ventilator-free days without affecting mortality. Response to fluid management may differ based on patients’ initial central venous pressure. We hypothesized that initial central venous pressure would modify the effect of fluid management on outcomes. DESIGN:Retrospective analysis of the Fluid and Catheter Treatment Trial, a multicenter randomized trial comparing conservative with liberal fluid management in acute respiratory distress syndrome. We examined the relationship between initial central venous pressure, fluid strategy, and 60-day mortality in univariate and multivariable analysis. SETTING:Twenty acute care hospitals. PATIENTS:Nine hundred thirty-four ventilated acute respiratory distress syndrome patients with a central venous pressure available at enrollment, 609 without baseline shock (for whom fluid balance was managed by the study protocol). INTERVENTIONS:None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:Among patients without baseline shock, those with initial central venous pressure greater than 8 mm Hg experienced similar mortality with conservative and liberal fluid management (18% vs 18%; p = 0.928), whereas those with central venous pressure of 8 mm Hg or less experienced lower mortality with a conservative strategy (17% vs 36%; p = 0.005). Multivariable analysis demonstrated an interaction between initial central venous pressure and the effect of fluid strategy on mortality (p = 0.031). At higher initial central venous pressures, the difference in treatment between arms was predominantly furosemide administration, which was not associated with mortality (p = 0.122). At lower initial central venous pressures, the difference between arms was predominantly fluid administration, with additional fluid associated with increased mortality (p = 0.013). CONCLUSIONS:Conservative fluid management decreases mortality for acute respiratory distress syndrome patients with a low initial central venous pressure. In this population, the administration of IV fluids seems to increase mortality.
doi_str_mv 10.1097/CCM.0000000000001555
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_4792704</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1773808816</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5745-fa4208f6a06055b124c72d46aa3b215f419ffed7b717f70d952b7777323914563</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kctu1DAUhi0EokPhDRDykk2Kr3GyQaoChZGmKuK2tZzkpGNI7KntTDXvwEPjaEpVWODNWfg737HPj9BLSs4oqdWbprk8Iw8OlVI-QisqOSkIq_ljtCKkJgUXNT9Bz2L8kRkhFX-KTlipBJUVWaFf62lnuoT9gNfOJmtG3IBLIdfv4Pwc8acAMc4BsHf4ak6dnyAueONdhLA3ye4hsyFmdmNbWFovxtn2-NI4cw1T1mHr8Hk3J8CfIe5sMMmHA35nY1rk-MvB9SF7n6MngxkjvLirp-jbxfuvzcdic_Vh3Zxvik4qIYvBCEaqoTSkJFK2lIlOsV6UxvCWUTkIWg8D9KpVVA2K9LVkrcqHM17nDZT8FL09endzO0HfHT-sd8FOJhy0N1b_fePsVl_7vRaqZoqILHh9Jwj-ZoaY9GRjB-NoHOSdaZqHVaSq6DJLHNEu-BgDDPdjKNFLkDoHqf8NMre9evjE-6Y_yWWgOgK3fkx5-z_H-RaC3oIZ0_b_7t9t4Kx3</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1773808816</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Impact of Initial Central Venous Pressure on Outcomes of Conservative Versus Liberal Fluid Management in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Journals@Ovid Ovid Autoload</source><creator>Semler, Matthew W ; Wheeler, Arthur P ; Thompson, B Taylor ; Bernard, Gordon R ; Wiedemann, Herbert P ; Rice, Todd W</creator><creatorcontrib>Semler, Matthew W ; Wheeler, Arthur P ; Thompson, B Taylor ; Bernard, Gordon R ; Wiedemann, Herbert P ; Rice, Todd W ; National Institutes of Health National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Network</creatorcontrib><description>OBJECTIVES:In acute respiratory distress syndrome, conservative fluid management increases ventilator-free days without affecting mortality. Response to fluid management may differ based on patients’ initial central venous pressure. We hypothesized that initial central venous pressure would modify the effect of fluid management on outcomes. DESIGN:Retrospective analysis of the Fluid and Catheter Treatment Trial, a multicenter randomized trial comparing conservative with liberal fluid management in acute respiratory distress syndrome. We examined the relationship between initial central venous pressure, fluid strategy, and 60-day mortality in univariate and multivariable analysis. SETTING:Twenty acute care hospitals. PATIENTS:Nine hundred thirty-four ventilated acute respiratory distress syndrome patients with a central venous pressure available at enrollment, 609 without baseline shock (for whom fluid balance was managed by the study protocol). INTERVENTIONS:None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:Among patients without baseline shock, those with initial central venous pressure greater than 8 mm Hg experienced similar mortality with conservative and liberal fluid management (18% vs 18%; p = 0.928), whereas those with central venous pressure of 8 mm Hg or less experienced lower mortality with a conservative strategy (17% vs 36%; p = 0.005). Multivariable analysis demonstrated an interaction between initial central venous pressure and the effect of fluid strategy on mortality (p = 0.031). At higher initial central venous pressures, the difference in treatment between arms was predominantly furosemide administration, which was not associated with mortality (p = 0.122). At lower initial central venous pressures, the difference between arms was predominantly fluid administration, with additional fluid associated with increased mortality (p = 0.013). CONCLUSIONS:Conservative fluid management decreases mortality for acute respiratory distress syndrome patients with a low initial central venous pressure. In this population, the administration of IV fluids seems to increase mortality.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0090-3493</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1530-0293</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000001555</identifier><identifier>PMID: 26741580</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Copyright by by the Society of Critical Care Medicine and Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc</publisher><subject>Adult ; Aged ; Central Venous Pressure - drug effects ; Diuretics - administration &amp; dosage ; Female ; Fluid Therapy - methods ; Furosemide - administration &amp; dosage ; Humans ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic ; Respiration, Artificial ; Respiratory Distress Syndrome, Adult - mortality ; Respiratory Distress Syndrome, Adult - therapy ; Retrospective Studies ; Shock - drug therapy ; Water-Electrolyte Balance</subject><ispartof>Critical care medicine, 2016-04, Vol.44 (4), p.782-789</ispartof><rights>Copyright © by 2016 by the Society of Critical Care Medicine and Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All Rights Reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5745-fa4208f6a06055b124c72d46aa3b215f419ffed7b717f70d952b7777323914563</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>230,314,778,782,883,27907,27908</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26741580$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Semler, Matthew W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wheeler, Arthur P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thompson, B Taylor</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bernard, Gordon R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wiedemann, Herbert P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rice, Todd W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>National Institutes of Health National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Network</creatorcontrib><title>Impact of Initial Central Venous Pressure on Outcomes of Conservative Versus Liberal Fluid Management in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome</title><title>Critical care medicine</title><addtitle>Crit Care Med</addtitle><description>OBJECTIVES:In acute respiratory distress syndrome, conservative fluid management increases ventilator-free days without affecting mortality. Response to fluid management may differ based on patients’ initial central venous pressure. We hypothesized that initial central venous pressure would modify the effect of fluid management on outcomes. DESIGN:Retrospective analysis of the Fluid and Catheter Treatment Trial, a multicenter randomized trial comparing conservative with liberal fluid management in acute respiratory distress syndrome. We examined the relationship between initial central venous pressure, fluid strategy, and 60-day mortality in univariate and multivariable analysis. SETTING:Twenty acute care hospitals. PATIENTS:Nine hundred thirty-four ventilated acute respiratory distress syndrome patients with a central venous pressure available at enrollment, 609 without baseline shock (for whom fluid balance was managed by the study protocol). INTERVENTIONS:None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:Among patients without baseline shock, those with initial central venous pressure greater than 8 mm Hg experienced similar mortality with conservative and liberal fluid management (18% vs 18%; p = 0.928), whereas those with central venous pressure of 8 mm Hg or less experienced lower mortality with a conservative strategy (17% vs 36%; p = 0.005). Multivariable analysis demonstrated an interaction between initial central venous pressure and the effect of fluid strategy on mortality (p = 0.031). At higher initial central venous pressures, the difference in treatment between arms was predominantly furosemide administration, which was not associated with mortality (p = 0.122). At lower initial central venous pressures, the difference between arms was predominantly fluid administration, with additional fluid associated with increased mortality (p = 0.013). CONCLUSIONS:Conservative fluid management decreases mortality for acute respiratory distress syndrome patients with a low initial central venous pressure. In this population, the administration of IV fluids seems to increase mortality.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Central Venous Pressure - drug effects</subject><subject>Diuretics - administration &amp; dosage</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Fluid Therapy - methods</subject><subject>Furosemide - administration &amp; dosage</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic</subject><subject>Respiration, Artificial</subject><subject>Respiratory Distress Syndrome, Adult - mortality</subject><subject>Respiratory Distress Syndrome, Adult - therapy</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Shock - drug therapy</subject><subject>Water-Electrolyte Balance</subject><issn>0090-3493</issn><issn>1530-0293</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kctu1DAUhi0EokPhDRDykk2Kr3GyQaoChZGmKuK2tZzkpGNI7KntTDXvwEPjaEpVWODNWfg737HPj9BLSs4oqdWbprk8Iw8OlVI-QisqOSkIq_ljtCKkJgUXNT9Bz2L8kRkhFX-KTlipBJUVWaFf62lnuoT9gNfOJmtG3IBLIdfv4Pwc8acAMc4BsHf4ak6dnyAueONdhLA3ye4hsyFmdmNbWFovxtn2-NI4cw1T1mHr8Hk3J8CfIe5sMMmHA35nY1rk-MvB9SF7n6MngxkjvLirp-jbxfuvzcdic_Vh3Zxvik4qIYvBCEaqoTSkJFK2lIlOsV6UxvCWUTkIWg8D9KpVVA2K9LVkrcqHM17nDZT8FL09endzO0HfHT-sd8FOJhy0N1b_fePsVl_7vRaqZoqILHh9Jwj-ZoaY9GRjB-NoHOSdaZqHVaSq6DJLHNEu-BgDDPdjKNFLkDoHqf8NMre9evjE-6Y_yWWgOgK3fkx5-z_H-RaC3oIZ0_b_7t9t4Kx3</recordid><startdate>201604</startdate><enddate>201604</enddate><creator>Semler, Matthew W</creator><creator>Wheeler, Arthur P</creator><creator>Thompson, B Taylor</creator><creator>Bernard, Gordon R</creator><creator>Wiedemann, Herbert P</creator><creator>Rice, Todd W</creator><general>Copyright by by the Society of Critical Care Medicine and Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201604</creationdate><title>Impact of Initial Central Venous Pressure on Outcomes of Conservative Versus Liberal Fluid Management in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome</title><author>Semler, Matthew W ; Wheeler, Arthur P ; Thompson, B Taylor ; Bernard, Gordon R ; Wiedemann, Herbert P ; Rice, Todd W</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c5745-fa4208f6a06055b124c72d46aa3b215f419ffed7b717f70d952b7777323914563</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Central Venous Pressure - drug effects</topic><topic>Diuretics - administration &amp; dosage</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Fluid Therapy - methods</topic><topic>Furosemide - administration &amp; dosage</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic</topic><topic>Respiration, Artificial</topic><topic>Respiratory Distress Syndrome, Adult - mortality</topic><topic>Respiratory Distress Syndrome, Adult - therapy</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Shock - drug therapy</topic><topic>Water-Electrolyte Balance</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Semler, Matthew W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wheeler, Arthur P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thompson, B Taylor</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bernard, Gordon R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wiedemann, Herbert P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rice, Todd W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>National Institutes of Health National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Network</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Critical care medicine</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Semler, Matthew W</au><au>Wheeler, Arthur P</au><au>Thompson, B Taylor</au><au>Bernard, Gordon R</au><au>Wiedemann, Herbert P</au><au>Rice, Todd W</au><aucorp>National Institutes of Health National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Network</aucorp><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Impact of Initial Central Venous Pressure on Outcomes of Conservative Versus Liberal Fluid Management in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome</atitle><jtitle>Critical care medicine</jtitle><addtitle>Crit Care Med</addtitle><date>2016-04</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>44</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>782</spage><epage>789</epage><pages>782-789</pages><issn>0090-3493</issn><eissn>1530-0293</eissn><abstract>OBJECTIVES:In acute respiratory distress syndrome, conservative fluid management increases ventilator-free days without affecting mortality. Response to fluid management may differ based on patients’ initial central venous pressure. We hypothesized that initial central venous pressure would modify the effect of fluid management on outcomes. DESIGN:Retrospective analysis of the Fluid and Catheter Treatment Trial, a multicenter randomized trial comparing conservative with liberal fluid management in acute respiratory distress syndrome. We examined the relationship between initial central venous pressure, fluid strategy, and 60-day mortality in univariate and multivariable analysis. SETTING:Twenty acute care hospitals. PATIENTS:Nine hundred thirty-four ventilated acute respiratory distress syndrome patients with a central venous pressure available at enrollment, 609 without baseline shock (for whom fluid balance was managed by the study protocol). INTERVENTIONS:None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:Among patients without baseline shock, those with initial central venous pressure greater than 8 mm Hg experienced similar mortality with conservative and liberal fluid management (18% vs 18%; p = 0.928), whereas those with central venous pressure of 8 mm Hg or less experienced lower mortality with a conservative strategy (17% vs 36%; p = 0.005). Multivariable analysis demonstrated an interaction between initial central venous pressure and the effect of fluid strategy on mortality (p = 0.031). At higher initial central venous pressures, the difference in treatment between arms was predominantly furosemide administration, which was not associated with mortality (p = 0.122). At lower initial central venous pressures, the difference between arms was predominantly fluid administration, with additional fluid associated with increased mortality (p = 0.013). CONCLUSIONS:Conservative fluid management decreases mortality for acute respiratory distress syndrome patients with a low initial central venous pressure. In this population, the administration of IV fluids seems to increase mortality.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Copyright by by the Society of Critical Care Medicine and Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc</pub><pmid>26741580</pmid><doi>10.1097/CCM.0000000000001555</doi><tpages>8</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0090-3493
ispartof Critical care medicine, 2016-04, Vol.44 (4), p.782-789
issn 0090-3493
1530-0293
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_4792704
source MEDLINE; Journals@Ovid Ovid Autoload
subjects Adult
Aged
Central Venous Pressure - drug effects
Diuretics - administration & dosage
Female
Fluid Therapy - methods
Furosemide - administration & dosage
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
Respiration, Artificial
Respiratory Distress Syndrome, Adult - mortality
Respiratory Distress Syndrome, Adult - therapy
Retrospective Studies
Shock - drug therapy
Water-Electrolyte Balance
title Impact of Initial Central Venous Pressure on Outcomes of Conservative Versus Liberal Fluid Management in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-16T09%3A51%3A36IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Impact%20of%20Initial%20Central%20Venous%20Pressure%20on%20Outcomes%20of%20Conservative%20Versus%20Liberal%20Fluid%20Management%20in%20Acute%20Respiratory%20Distress%20Syndrome&rft.jtitle=Critical%20care%20medicine&rft.au=Semler,%20Matthew%20W&rft.aucorp=National%20Institutes%20of%20Health%20National%20Heart,%20Lung,%20and%20Blood%20Institute%20Acute%20Respiratory%20Distress%20Syndrome%20Network&rft.date=2016-04&rft.volume=44&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=782&rft.epage=789&rft.pages=782-789&rft.issn=0090-3493&rft.eissn=1530-0293&rft_id=info:doi/10.1097/CCM.0000000000001555&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E1773808816%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1773808816&rft_id=info:pmid/26741580&rfr_iscdi=true