Introduction
Rhabdomyolysis, which resulted from the rapid breakdown of damaged skeletal muscle, potentially leads to acute kidney injury.
Aim
To determine the incidence and associated risk of kidney injury following rhabdomyolysis in critically ill patients.
Methods
All critically ill patients admitted from January 2016 to December 2017 were screened. A creatinine kinase level of > 5 times the upper limit of normal (> 1000 U/L) was defined as rhabdomyolysis, and kidney injury was determined based on the Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcome (KDIGO) score. In addition, trauma, prolonged surgery, sepsis, antipsychotic drugs, hyperthermia were included as risk factors for kidney injury.
Results
Out of 1620 admissions, 149 (9.2%) were identified as having rhabdomyolysis and 54 (36.2%) developed kidney injury. Acute kidney injury, by and large, was related to rhabdomyolysis followed a prolonged surgery (18.7%), sepsis (50.0%) or trauma (31.5%). The reduction in the creatinine kinase levels following hydration treatment was statistically significant in the non- kidney injury group (Z= -3.948, p<0.05) compared to the kidney injury group (Z= -0.623, p=0.534). Significantly, odds of developing acute kidney injury were 1.040 (p<0.001) for mean BW >50kg, 1.372(p<0.001) for SOFA Score >2, 5.333 (p<0.001) for sepsis and the multivariate regression analysis showed that SOFA scores >2 (p<0.001), BW >50kg (p=0.016) and sepsis (p<0.05) were independent risk factors. The overall mortality due to rhabdomyolysis was 15.4% (23/149), with significantly higher incidences of mortality in the kidney injury group (35.2%) vs the non- kidney injury (3.5%) [ p<0.001].
Conclusions
One-third of rhabdomyolysis patients developed acute kidney injury with a significantly high mortality rate. Sepsis was a prominent cause of acute kidney injury. Both sepsis and a SOFA score >2 were significant independent risk factors.
Insertion of the laryngeal mask airway (LMA) without muscle relaxant requires adequate obtundation of airway reflexes, which may otherwise lead to incorrect or failed LMA placement. This study compared topical lignocaine spray vs. intravenous (IV) fentanyl, during propofol induction for insertion of the ProSeal™ LMA (PLMA). This was a prospective, randomized, double blind study, in ASA I or II patients, for elective or emergency surgery. Seventy patients (n = 70) who fulfilled the inclusion criteria were randomly assigned to receive IV fentanyl 2 mcg/kg or topical lignocaine spray 40 mg, prior to anesthesia induction with IV propofol (2–2.5 mg/kg). ProSeal™ LMA insertion condition was regarded optimal in the absence of adverse responses (gag, cough, laryngospasm and body movements), and successful LMA placement at the first attempt. Hemodynamic parameters were recorded and patients were assessed for sore throat and hoarseness post operatively. Seventy patients were analyzed. The number of patients with optimal PLMA insertion conditions were comparable between the groups (60% vs. 57%, P = 0.808). All hemodynamic parameters were comparable between groups with the exception of heart rate. Sympathetic obtundation of heart rate was greater with IV fentanyl than topical lignocaine (P < 0.05). The proportion of patients with postoperative sore throat significantly increased with the number of insertion attempts (P < 0.05). Topical lignocaine spray to the pharynx is as effective, and may be an alternative to IV fentanyl, during propofol induction for PLMA insertion. Success rate and optimal insertion condition at the first attempt, propofol requirement, blood pressure, adverse events and airway complications were comparable. Heart rate obtundation was less with topical lignocaine spray but remained within clinically acceptable values.
The anaesthetic trainee doctors were better than the nursing anaesthetic assistants in cricoid cartilage identification but both groups were equally poor in their knowledge and application of cricoid pressure.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.