IMPORTANCE Hyperoxemia may increase organ dysfunction in critically ill patients, but optimal oxygenation targets are unknown.OBJECTIVE To determine whether a low-normal PaO 2 target compared with a high-normal target reduces organ dysfunction in critically ill patients with systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS).DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Multicenter randomized clinical trial in 4 intensive care units in the Netherlands. Enrollment was from February 2015 to October 2018, with end of follow-up to January 2019, and included adult patients admitted with 2 or more SIRS criteria and expected stay of longer than 48 hours. A total of 9925 patients were screened for eligibility, of whom 574 fulfilled the enrollment criteria and were randomized.INTERVENTIONS Target PaO 2 ranges were 8 to 12 kPa (low-normal, n = 205) and 14 to 18 kPa (high-normal, n = 195). An inspired oxygen fraction greater than 0.60 was applied only when clinically indicated.MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Primary end point was SOFA RANK , a ranked outcome of nonrespiratory organ failure quantified by the nonrespiratory components of the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score, summed over the first 14 study days. Participants were ranked from fastest organ failure improvement (lowest scores) to worsening organ failure or death (highest scores). Secondary end points were duration of mechanical ventilation, in-hospital mortality, and hypoxemic measurements. RESULTS Among the 574 patients who were randomized, 400 (70%) were enrolled within 24 hours (median age, 68 years; 140 women [35%]), all of whom completed the trial. The median PaO 2 difference between the groups was −1.93 kPa (95% CI, −2.12 to −1.74; P < .001). The median SOFA RANK score was −35 points in the low-normal PaO 2 group vs −40 in the high-normal PaO 2 group (median difference, 10 [95% CI, 0 to 21]; P = .06). There was no significant difference in median duration of mechanical ventilation (3.4 vs 3.1 days; median difference, −0.15 [95% CI, −0.88 to 0.47]; P = .59) and in-hospital mortality (32% vs 31%; odds ratio, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.67 to 1.63]; P = .91). Mild hypoxemic measurements occurred more often in the low-normal group (1.9% vs 1.2%; median difference, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.30 to 1.20]; P < .001). Acute kidney failure developed in 20 patients (10%) in the low-normal PaO 2 group and 21 patients (11%) in the high-normal PaO 2 group, and acute myocardial infarction in 6 patients (2.9%) in the low-normal PaO 2 group and 7 patients (3.6%) in the high-normal PaO 2 group.CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Among critically ill patients with 2 or more SIRS criteria, treatment with a low-normal PaO 2 target compared with a high-normal PaO 2 target did not result in a statistically significant reduction in organ dysfunction. However, the study may have had limited power to detect a smaller treatment effect than was hypothesized.

BackgroundAcute kidney injury (AKI) complicates shock. Diagnosis is based on rising creatinine, a late phenomenon. Intrarenal vasoconstriction occurs earlier. Measuring flow resistance in the renal circulation, Renal Resistive Index (RRI), could become part of vital organ function assessment using Doppler ultrasound. Our aim was to determine whether RRI on ICU admission is an early predictor and discriminator of AKI developed within the first week.MethodsIn this prospective cohort of mixed ICU patients with and without shock, RRI was measured <24-h of admission. Besides routine variables, sublingual microcirculation and bioelectrical impedance were measured. AKI was defined by the Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes criteria. Uni- and multivariate regression and Receiver Operating Characteristics curve analyses were performed.ResultsNinety-nine patients were included, median age 67 years (IQR 59–75), APACHE III score 67 (IQR 53–89). Forty-nine patients (49%) developed AKI within the first week. AKI patients had a higher RRI on admission than those without: 0.71 (0.69–0.73) vs. 0.65 (0.63–0.68), p = 0.001. The difference was significant for AKI stage 2: RRI = 0.72 (0.65–0.80) and 3: RRI = 0.74 (0.67–0.81), but not for AKI stage 1: RRI = 0.67 (0.61–0.74). On univariate analysis, RRI significantly predicted AKI 2–3: OR 1.012 (1.006–1.019); Area Under the Curve (AUC) of RRI for AKI 2–3 was 0.72 (0.61–0.83), optimal cut-off 0.74, sensitivity 53% and specificity 87%. On multivariate analysis, RRI remained significant, independent of APACHE III and fluid balance; adjusted OR: 1.008 (1.000–1.016).ConclusionsHigh RRI on ICU admission was a significant predictor for development of AKI stage 2–3 during the first week. High RRI can be used as an early warning signal RRI, because of its high specificity. A combined score including RRI, APACHE III and fluid balance improved AKI prediction, suggesting that vasoconstriction or poor vascular compliance, severity of disease and positive fluid balance independently contribute to AKI development.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT02558166.

22-09-2015, retrospectively registeredThis is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND), where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0.