4.5 Article

Utility of N-acetylcysteine to kidney injury after cardiac surgery:: A randomized controlled trial

期刊

AMERICAN HEART JOURNAL
卷 155, 期 6, 页码 1143-1149

出版社

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ahj.2008.01.013

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Acute kidney injury (AKI) after heart surgery is associated with increased mortality. We sought to determine whether prophylactic perioperative administration of N-acetylcysteine (NAC) prevents postoperative AKI in patients with chronic kidney disease undergoing cardiac surgery (clinical trials gov identifier NCT002 1 1653). Methods In this prospective, randomized, placebo-con trolled, double-blinded clinical trial, 102 patients with chronic kidney disease who underwent heart surgery at the Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Medical Center were randomized to either NAC (n = 50) 600 mg PO twice daily or placebo (n = 52) for a total of 14 doses (3 preoperative). The primary outcome was maximum change in creatinine from baseline within 7 days after surgery. Secondary outcome was AKI (ie, > 0.5 mg/dL or >= 25% increase in creatinine from baseline). Results Creatinine increased in both groups (0.45 +/- 0.7 mg/dL in NAC vs 0.55 +/- 0.9 mg/dL in placebo, P =.53) and peaked on postoperative day 5. Acute kidney injury occurred in 41 patients (22 NAC vs 19 placebo, P =.44) by postoperative day 5, but persisted in only 14 (7 NAC vs 7 placebo, P =.94) by day 30. In multivariable analysis, perioperative NAC was unassociated with AKI (relative risk 1.2, 95% Cl, 0.8-1.9, P =.34). Five patients (3 NAC vs 2 placebo, P =.68) underwent hemodialysis, and 5 (2 NAC vs 3 placebo, P = 1.0) died perioperatively. There was no difference in lengths of stay in the intensive care unit (4.9 +/- 7 days in NAC vs 6.5 +/- 9 days in placebo, P =.06) and the hospital (13.2 +/- 13 days in NAC vs 16.7 +/- 17 days in placebo, P =.12). Conclusion Prophylactic perioperative NAC administration does not prevent AKI after cardiac surgery.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据