Overview of Renal Replacement Therapy Use in a General Intensive Care Unit

Mirela Tiglis, Ileana Peride, Iulia Alexandra Florea, Andrei Niculae, Lucian Cristian Petcu, Tiberiu Paul Neagu, Ionel Alexandru Checherita and Ioana Marina Grintescu
Additional contact information
Mirela Tiglis: Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Emergency Clinical Hospital of Bucharest, 014461 Bucharest, Romania
Ileana Peride: Clinical Department No. 3, “Carol Davila” University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 020021 Bucharest, Romania
Iulia Alexandra Florea: Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Emergency Clinical Hospital of Bucharest, 014461 Bucharest, Romania
Andrei Niculae: Clinical Department No. 3, “Carol Davila” University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 020021 Bucharest, Romania
Lucian Cristian Petcu: Department of Biophysics and Biostatistics, Faculty of Dentistry, “Ovidius” University, 900684 Constanta, Romania
Tiberiu Paul Neagu: Clinical Department No. 11, “Carol Davila” University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 020021 Bucharest, Romania
Ionel Alexandru Checherita: Clinical Department No. 3, “Carol Davila” University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 020021 Bucharest, Romania
Ioana Marina Grintescu: Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Emergency Clinical Hospital of Bucharest, 014461 Bucharest, Romania

IJERPH, 2022, vol. 19, issue 4, 1-11

Abstract: Objectives. Population-based studies regarding renal replacement therapy (RRT) used in critical care populations are useful to understand the trend and impact of medical care interventions. We describe the use of RRT and associated outcomes (mortality and length of intensive care stay) in a level 1 hospital. Design. A retrospective descriptive observational study. Patients. Critically ill patients admitted to the ICU from 1 January to 31 December 2018. Interventions. Age, gender, ward of admission, primary organ dysfunction at admission, length of hospital stay (LOS), mechanical ventilation, APACHE, SOFA and ISS scores, the use of vasopressors, transfusion, RRT and the number of RRT sessions were extracted. Results. 1703 critically ill patients were divided into two groups: the RRT-group (238 patients) and the non-RRT group (1465 patients). The mean age was 63.58 ± 17.52 (SD) in the final ICU studied patients (64.72 ± 16.64 SD in the RRT-group), 60.5% being male. Patients admitted from general surgery ward needing RRT were 41.4%. The specific scores, the use of vasopressors, transfusions and mortality were higher in the RRT-group. The ICU LOS was superior in the RRT-group, regardless of the primary organ dysfunction. Conclusions. RRT was practiced in 13.9% of patients (especially after age of 61), with mortality being the outcome for 66.8% of the RRT-group patients. All analyzed data were higher in the RRT group, especially for multiple trauma and surgical patients, or patients presenting cardiac or renal dysfunctions at admission. We found significant increased ISS scores in the RRT-group, a significant association between the need of vasopressors or transfusion requirement and RRT use, and an association in the number of RRT sessions and LOS ( p < 0.001).

Keywords: critical care; renal replacement therapy; ICU scores; length of ICU stay; mortality (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/4/2453/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/4/2453/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:4:p:2453-:d:754201

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().