BACKGROUNDIntravenous fluids are recommended for the treatment of patients who are in septic shock, but higher fluid volumes have been associated with harm in patients who are in the intensive care unit (ICU). METHODSIn this international, randomized trial, we assigned patients with septic shock in the ICU who had received at least 1 liter of intravenous fluid to receive restricted intravenous fluid or standard intravenous fluid therapy; patients were included if the onset of shock had been within 12 hours before screening. The primary outcome was death from any cause within 90 days after randomization. RESULTSWe enrolled 1554 patients; 770 were assigned to the restrictive-fluid group and 784 to the standard-fluid group. Primary outcome data were available for 1545 patients (99.4%). In the ICU, the restrictive-fluid group received a median of 1798 ml of intravenous fluid (interquartile range, 500 to 4366); the standard-fluid group received a median of 3811 ml (interquartile range, 1861 to 6762). At 90 days, death had occurred in 323 of 764 patients (42.3%) in the restrictive-fluid group, as compared with 329 of 781 patients (42.1%) in the standard-fluid group (adjusted absolute difference, 0.1 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], −4.7 to 4.9; P = 0.96). In the ICU, serious adverse events occurred at least once in 221 of 751 patients (29.4%) in the restrictive-fluid group and in 238 of 772 patients (30.8%) in the standard-fluid group (adjusted absolute difference, −1.7 percentage points; 99% CI, −7.7 to 4.3). At 90 days after randomization, the numbers of days alive without life support and days alive and out of the hospital were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONSAmong adult patients with septic shock in the ICU, intravenous fluid restriction did not result in fewer deaths at 90 days than standard intravenous fluid therapy. (Funded by the Novo Nordisk Foundation and others; CLASSIC ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03668236.

Disturbances in sodium concentration are common in the critically ill patient and associated with increased mortality. The key principle in treatment and prevention is that plasma [Na+] (P-[Na+]) is determined by external water and cation balances. P-[Na+] determines plasma tonicity. An important exception is hyperglycaemia, where P-[Na+] may be reduced despite plasma hypertonicity. The patient is first treated to secure airway, breathing and circulation to diminish secondary organ damage. Symptoms are critical when handling a patient with hyponatraemia. Severe symptoms are treated with 2 ml/kg 3% NaCl bolus infusions irrespective of the supposed duration of hyponatraemia. The goal is to reduce cerebral symptoms. The bolus therapy ensures an immediate and controllable rise in P-[Na+]. A maximum of three boluses are given (increases P-[Na+] about 6 mmol/l). In all patients with hyponatraemia, correction above 10 mmol/l/day must be avoided to reduce the risk of osmotic demyelination. Practical measures for handling a rapid rise in P-[Na+] are discussed. The risk of overcorrection is associated with the mechanisms that cause hyponatraemia. Traditional classifications according to volume status are notoriously difficult to handle in clinical practice. Moreover, multiple combined mechanisms are common. More than one mechanism must therefore be considered for safe and lasting correction. Hypernatraemia is less common than hyponatraemia, but implies that the patient is more ill and has a worse prognosis. A practical approach includes treatment of the underlying diseases and restoration of the distorted water and salt balances. Multiple combined mechanisms are common and must be searched for. Importantly, hypernatraemia is not only a matter of water deficit, and treatment of the critically ill patient with an accumulated fluid balance of 20 litres and corresponding weight gain should not comprise more water, but measures to invoke a negative cation balance. Reduction of hypernatraemia/hypertonicity is critical, but should not exceed 12 mmol/l/day in order to reduce the risk of rebounding brain oedema.

No abstract

Acute hyponatremia is a serious condition, which poses major challenges. Of particular importance is what determines plasma sodium concentration ([Na(+)]). Edelman introduced an explicit model to describe plasma [Na(+)] in a population as [Na(+)] = alpha.(exchangeable Na(+) + exchangeable K(+))/(total body water) - beta. Evidence for the clinical utility of the model in the individual and in acute hyponatremia is sparse. We, therefore, investigated how the measured plasma [Na(+)] could be predicted in a porcine model of hyponatremia. Plasma [Na(+)] was estimated from in vivo-determined balances of water, Na(+), and K(+), according to Edelman's equation. Acute hyponatremia was induced with desmopressin acetate and infusion of a 2.5% glucose solution in anesthetized pigs. During 480 min, plasma [Na(+)] and osmolality were reduced from 136 (SD 2) to 120 mmol/l (SD 3) and from 284 (SD 4) to 252 mosmol/kgH(2)O (SD 5), respectively. The following interpretations were made. First, Edelman's model, which, besides dilution, takes into account Na(+) and K(+), fits plasma [Na(+)] significantly better than dilution alone. Second, a common value of alpha = 1.33 (SD 0.08) and beta = -13.04 mmol/l (SD 7.68) for all pigs explains well the plasma [Na(+)] in the individual animal. Third, measured exchangeable Na(+) and calculated exchangeable Na(+) + K(+) per weight in the pigs are close to Edelman's findings in humans, whereby the methods are cross-validated. In conclusion, plasma [Na(+)] can be explained in the individual animal by external balances, according to Edelman's construct in acute hyponatremia.