In ESKD patients, BIA-based interventions for correction of overhydration have little to no effect on all-cause mortality, whereas BIA improved systolic blood pressure control. Our results should be interpreted with caution as the size and power of the included studies are low. Further studies, larger or with a longer follow-up period, should be performed to better describe the effect of BIA-based strategies on survival.

Background In routine intensive care unit (ICU) practice, fluids are often administered without a safety limit, which may lead to fluid overload and decreased survival. Recently, B-lines score (BLS) has been validated as a lung ultrasound (LUS) quantification of pulmonary congestion. This suggests that LUS may provide a safety threshold to conduct fluid therapy and to avoid overhydration. However, there is no randomized study to test the utility of LUS in guiding fluid management in ICU patients by using a pre-specified BLS cut-off value as a threshold for fluid removal. Methods LUS Guided Fluid Management Protocol for the Critically Ill Patient is a prospective, multi-centre, randomized controlled trial. Five hundred ICU patients will be randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio, to protocolized LUS-based fluid management or usual care. The trial intervention will start on ICU admission and will consist in daily assessment of BLS and triggered evacuation of excessive fluids with loop diuretics (Furosemide) when BLS ≥ 15. If rebalancing volume status with diuretics fails, forced evacuation by ultrafiltration will be used. The main endpoint is death from all causes at 28 days from randomization. The secondary outcomes are presence and time-course evolution of organ dysfunctions, ICU- and hospital length of stay, all-cause mortality at 90 days, and health economics data. Discussion If study results will show that LUS guided fluid management protocol improves outcome in ICU patients, it will be the base for other studies to refine this protocol or track those categories of critically ill patients to whom it may bring maximum benefits. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03393065 . Registered on 8 January 2018. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-019-3345-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Water retention and intercompartmental redistribution occur frequently in association with adverse postoperative outcomes, yet the available strategies for non-invasive assessment are limited. One such approach for evaluating body water composition in various circumstances is bio-electrical impedance analysis (BIA). This study aims to appraise the usefulness of the Body Composition Monitor (BCM, Fresenius Medical Care, Germany) in assessing body fluid composition and intercompartmental shifts before and after open major abdominal surgery. This prospective, clinician blinded observational study enrolled all the patients scheduled consecutively for elective major open abdominal surgery during a 1-year period starting from January 1st, 2016. BIA parameters-total body water (TBW), extracellular water (ECW), intracellular water (ICW), absolute fluid overload (AFO), and relative fluid overload (RFO) were measured before and after surgery. The results were compared with fluid balance and outcome parameters such as organ dysfunction, ICU-and hospital length of stay (-LOS). The study population included 71 patients aged 60.2 ± 12 of whom 60.6% men and with a BMI of 26.3 ± 5.1 kg/m 2 . Postoperative acute kidney injury, respiratory dysfunction, and infections occurred in 14.0%, 19.7% and 28.1% of cases, respectively. The median LOS in ICU was 20 h and the hospital-LOS was 10 days. Positive intraoperative fluid balance (2.4 ± 1.0 L) resulted in a significant increase of TBW (1.4 ± 2.4 L) and of ECW (1.4 ± 1.2 L). Intraoperative fluid balance significantly correlated with TBW change (r = 0.23, p = 0.04) and with AFO change (r = 0.31, p < 0.01). A significant correlation was found between pre-and postoperative AFO and RFO on one hand, and ICU-LOS on the other. BIA may be a useful tool for the perioperative assessment of volume status.

According to the latest international resuscitation guidelines, extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) involves the utilization of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) in specific patients experiencing cardiac arrest, and it can be considered in situations where standard cardiopulmonary resuscitation efforts fail if they have a potentially reversible underlying cause, among which we can also find hypothermia. In cases of cardiac arrest, both witnessed and unwitnessed, hypothermic patients have higher chances of survival and favorable neurological outcomes compared to normothermic patients. ECPR is a multifaceted procedure that requires a proficient team, specialized equipment, and comprehensive multidisciplinary support within a healthcare system. However, it also carries the risk of severe, life-threatening complications. With the increasing use of ECPR in recent years and the growing number of centers implementing this technique outside the intensive care units, significant uncertainties persist in both prehospital and emergency department (ED) settings. Proper organization is crucial for an ECPR program in emergency settings, especially given the challenges and complexities of these treatments, which were previously not commonly used in ED. Therefore, within a narrative review, we have incorporated the initial case of ECPR in an ED in Romania, featuring a successful resuscitation in the context of severe hypothermia (20 °C) and a favorable neurological outcome (CPC score of 1).

The value of lung ultrasound (LU) in assessing extravascular lung water (EVLW) was demonstrated by comparing LU with gold-standard methods for EVLW assessment. However, few studies have analysed the value of B-Line score (BLS) in guiding fluid management during critical illness. The purpose of this trial was to evaluate if a BLS-guided fluid management strategy could improve fluid balance and short-term mortality in surgical intensive care unit (ICU) patients. We conducted a randomised, controlled trial within the ICUs of two university hospitals. Critically ill patients were randomised upon ICU admission in a 1:1 ratio to BLS-guided fluid management (active group) or standard care (control group). In the active group, BLS was monitored daily until ICU discharge or day 28 (whichever came first). On the basis of BLS, different targets for daily fluid balance were set with the aim of avoiding or correcting moderate/severe EVLW increase. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. Over 24 months, 166 ICU patients were enrolled in the trial and included in the final analysis. Trial results showed that daily BLS monitoring did not lead to a different cumulative fluid balance in surgical ICU patients as compared to standard care. Consecutively, no difference in 28-day mortality between groups was found (10.5% vs. 15.6%, p = 0.34). However, at least 400 patients would have been necessary for conclusive results.