Evidence Hub

Trajectories of fluid management after the initiation of renal replacement therapy in critically ill patients: a secondary analysis of the STARRT-AKI trial

W. Beaubien-Souligny, Ehsan Gamarian, J. Côté, Javier A. Neyra, Frédéric Baroz, N. Adhikari, Kevin Thorpe, Sean M. Bagshaw et al.

Critical Care, 2025

855 participants · 7 citations

Abstract

Fluid management is an essential component of renal replacement therapy (RRT) in critically ill patients. Both a positive cumulative fluid balance (CFB) and a high net ultrafiltration (NUF) rate have been reported to be associated with adverse outcomes in epidemiological studies, although the overall trajectory of fluid balance after RRT initiation is not well-described. We aimed to characterize trajectories of fluid management parameters during RRT and analyse the effect of CFB/NUF on outcomes as a trajectory rather than single or aggregated time points over the first week after initiation of RRT. This is a secondary analysis using fluid balance data focusing on individuals enrolled in the standard-strategy arm of the STARRT-AKI trial who initiated RRT. Cumulative fluid balance (CFB) following RRT initiation and daily net ultrafiltration (NUF) adjusted for body weight during the first 7 days after initiation of RRT were the main independent exposures. We modeled the trajectory of fluid parameters using spline functions and used latent trajectory analysis methods to identify predominant trajectories to compare patients’ characteristics and outcomes. We employed logistic regression and multivariable joint longitudinal models to compare the odds and determine the time-dependent association between fluid parameters (CFB and NUF) and 90-day mortality across and within the trajectory classes identified. We included 855 patients in the primary analysis. After excluding erroneous…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a secondary / pooled analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 855 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free