| ||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||




*Department of Anesthesia, Medical School of Medicine, University of Udine;
Institute of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medical and Morphological Research, University of Udine; and
Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Unit, University of Rome "La Sapienza," Rome, Italy
Address correspondence and reprint requests to Giorgio Della Rocca, MD, C.so Trieste 169/A., 00198 Rome, Italy. Address e-mail to giorgio.dellarocca{at}uniud.it
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
IMPLICATIONS: We evaluated renal function comparing fenoldopam versus dopamine in liver transplantation recipients. In the fenoldopam-treated group, serum creatinine and BUN improved. There were more "interventions" of furosemide to maintain urine output >1 mL · kg1 · h1 in the dopamine group.
| Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
receptor antagonist, with greater activity at
2 than at
1 receptors (68). Fenoldopam exerts renal vasodilatory effects at doses of
0.01 µg · kg1 · min1 (9,10), plateauing at 0.5 µg · kg1 · min1 (10,11). In contrast, systemic vasodilatory effects occur at doses of
0.1 µg · kg1 · min1 (11). Glomerular filtration increases or is maintained during fenoldopam infusion (10). The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the incidence of intraoperative and postoperative renal failure and/or dysfunction in patients undergoing LTx comparing fenoldopam to small-dose dopamine. The second objective was to evaluate the urine output and the number of "interventions" of furosemide and/or mannitol needed to maintain urine output >1 mL · kg1 · h1.
| Methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Patients
After approval of the study protocol by the Institutional Ethics Committee and obtaining patients signed written informed consent, 43 patients (35 men and 8 women) scheduled for LTx were consecutively enrolled into the study. Patients with preexisting renal, (CRE >1.4 mg/dL) pulmonary (hypoxia and/or hypercarbia), and/or cardiac (coronary artery disease and/or previous myocardial infarction) diseases were excluded.
The same anesthetic management was applied to all individuals to mitigate the influence of anesthetic drugs.
All patients were monitored with a lead II/V5 electrocardiograph, pulse oximetry (SpO2), and radial artery catheterization for invasive mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) (PCM SpaceLabs, Inc., Redmond, WA), pulmonary artery catheter (Intellicath®; Edwards Laboratories, Irvine, CA) for intermittent conventional pulmonary artery thermodilution cardiac output, continuous cardiac output, and mixed venous oxygen saturation measurement and to monitor central venous pressure (CVP), mean pulmonary artery pressure (mPAP), pulmonary artery occlusion pressure (PAOP), and body temperature.
In all patients undergoing LTx, a 4F thermistor-tipped catheter (Pulsiocath PV2014L®; Pulsion Medical Systems, Munich, Germany) was placed through the right femoral artery, and connected to the PiCCO® System (Pulsion Medical Systems) to monitor transpulmonary cardiac index, intrathoracic blood volume index (ITBVI normal values 8001000 mL/m2), and extravascular lung water index (EVLWI n.v. 47 mL/kg).
For guidance of volume loading, ITBVI <800 mL/m2 was corrected with volume replacement whereas ITBVI >1000 mL/m2 required the use of diuretic therapy; EVLWI was maintained <7 mL/kg. In addition, standard hemodynamic monitoring was used to optimize cardiovascular function (cardiac index >3 L · min1 · m2, CVP approximately 8 cm H2O, PAOP
12 mm Hg, mean arterial pressure >70 mm Hg, and mPAP >18 mm Hg). The intraoperative goal to maintain urine output at
1 mL · kg1 · h1 was: if urine output decreased to <1 mL · kg1 · h1, a mannitol 18% IV bolus (0.30.5 g/kg) was administered and, if the goal was still not reached, furosemide 0.3 mg/kg was given.
All volumetric and pressure-derived variables were indexed to the body surface area (BSA) to improve the interindividual comparison.
After the end of surgery, all patients were transferred to the intensive care unit (ICU).
Postoperative analgesia was provided with sufentanil continuous infusion 4 µg/h for 48 h. IV cyclosporine immunosuppression was begun on postoperative day (POD) 1 at a dose of 2 mg/kg per day. Goal cyclosporine trough levels were 250350 ng/mL during the first several PODs.
Hemodynamic-volumetric data (heart rate, MAP, CVP, PAOP, mPAP, cardiac index, ITBVI, and EVLWI), fluid-balance, and urine output (mL · kg1 · h1) were collected at baseline after the induction of anesthesia, during the anhepatic phase, and at the end of surgery. Use of mannitol and furosemide was recorded during all intraoperative and postoperative phases. Blood urea nitrogen (BUN) and CRE were collected preoperatively (Preop), at the end of surgery (Final), and on the third POD (3POD), and creatinine clearance (CreCl) was recorded Preop and on the 3POD.
CreCl was calculated using the following formula:
|
|
where UC is CRE concentration in the urine (mg/dL), UV is urine volume (mL/min), and CRE is the concentration in serum (mg/dL).
Based on the work of Bellomo et al. (3), we defined acute renal injury as a CRE >1.4 mg/dL and BUN >22 mg/dL or urine output <800 mL/24 h or <200 mL/6 h within 72 h of surgery. ARF syndrome (ARFS) was defined as a CRE >2.9 mg/dL and BUN >45 mg/dL or urine output <400 mL/24 h or <100 mL/6 h and severe ARFS was defined by the need for renal replacement therapy in the presence of acute renal injury or ARFS criteria within 72 h of surgery (3).
For this pilot study, a formal sample size was 20 patients per group. The power analysis revealed that the actual sample size had a 79% power to detect the observed difference in CRE change from baseline at 3POD with a 5%
error.
Descriptive statistics were obtained for all variables. Mean and standard deviation were used for continuous normally distributed variables, median and interquartile range (IQR) for continuous non-normally distributed variables, count and percentage for categorical variables.
The differences between Preop and 3POD (as well as differences between Preop and Final) in CRE, CreCl, and BUN were calculated.
The total number of mannitol and furosemide interventions needed to maintain adequate urine output for each patient was determined by adding all doses administered in each phase.
Because the measurements we made were objective, the study was not blinded throughout all the study.
All tests were two-tailed. Because of the small sample size, all between-groups comparisons were made by means of the Mann-Whitney test. Exact P values are presented.
To take into account repeated measures over time, generalized least squares models with autocorrelation of order 1 were used to assess differences between groups in terms of intraoperatory diuresis.
Analyses were performed with STATA (release 7.0, 2001; StataCorp, College Station, TX). The randomization list was generated using STATA, and the treatment allocation was concealed to investigators.
| Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
|
|
Differences between Preop and 3POD in CRE, CreCl, and BUN are presented in Figure 1. Fenoldopam and dopamine patients were different only in terms of median CRE change from Preop at 3POD 0.2 (IQR 0.20.5) versus 0.5 (IQR 0.30.9) mg/dL, respectively (P = 0.004) and median BUN change from Preop at 3POD 2 (IQR 28) versus 8.5 (IQR 512) mg/dL, respectively (P = 0.01) (Fig. 1). CreCl was not different between the two groups (Table 2 and Fig. 1). Urine output in both groups was maintained to similar values (Table 2), however, to do so, significantly fewer fenoldopam patients required furosemide compared with dopamine patients; the median total number of furosemide interventions needed was 1 (IQR 03) in the fenoldopam versus 3 (IQR 24) in the dopamine group (P = 0.003), whereas the total mannitol doses needed were not different at 1 (IQR 01) versus 1 (IQR 11), respectively (P = 0.38) (Fig. 2). ICU and hospital length of stay were similar in the two groups (Table 1). All patients but one were tracheally extubated in the operating room at the end of surgery. Only the 5 patients who died stayed in ICU >48 h. Five patients, three in the dopamine group and two in the fenoldopam group, died because of primary nonfunction/multiple organ failure and/or sepsis. The data from the five patients who died were excluded from the results.
|
|
| Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Urine output was maintained in both groups to similar values; however, to do so, significantly fewer fenoldopam patients required furosemide compared with dopamine patients; median 1 (IQR 03) versus 3 (IQR 24) (P = 0.003). Maintenance of urine output is protectant because a nonoliguric renal failure has been shown to have a survival benefit (15). The present prospective study suggests that the selective DA1 agonist, fenoldopam, results in significantly reduced need for loop diuretics compared with low-dose dopamine. Dopamine 2 µg · kg1 · min1 and not 3 µg · kg1 · min1 was chosen in this study because, at this dosage, the dopaminergic effects tend to predominate, although even at this small dose, wide variability can exist among patients and clinical conditions (1618). Despite the difference in CRE and in BUN, there were no differences between ICU lengths of stay between the two groups.
To avoid confounding in this renal functional study by volume and systemic hemodynamics, care was taken to equalize hemodynamic-volumetric assessments based on PiCCO® monitoring, such that the effective intravascular blood volume was optimized in both groups. The essential elements of perioperative renal preservation are perioperative optimization of fluid status and cardiovascular performance, maintenance of renal perfusion, and avoidance of nephrotoxins.
Cyclosporine causes renal vasoconstriction and reduces renal blood flow that may contribute to chronic and acute nephrotoxicity. In our study, preservation of CRE was seen in patients even though they received cyclosporine. Our data are consistent with those of Jorkasky et al. (19) who demonstrated that fenoldopam reverses the renal vasoconstriction caused by cyclosporine in renal transplant patients, with a significant increase of renal plasma flow.
Furosemide, mannitol, and dopamine have all been used for renal protection with controversial results (20,21). Dopamine proved to be renoprotective in animal models of renal failure, but it failed in the clinical applications. In a retrospective study on patients undergoing LTx, prophylactic small-dose dopamine decreased the incidence of dialysis-dependent ARF from 27% to 9.5% (22) of patients, but later, Swygert et al. (23) failed to demonstrate that it had any beneficial effect on intraoperative urine flow, postoperative renal clearance, ARF, or mortality. Lassnigg et al. (21) demonstrated that continuous infusion of renal-dose dopamine failed to exert any advantage over placebo for renal vasodilatation in well hydrated patients after cardiac surgery; continuous infusion of furosemide was not only ineffective, but was even detrimental and induced renal dysfunction. A possible explanation for these controversial results is that in all animal models of renal failure there was a very high vasoconstrictive tone, because these models used either large norepinephrine infusion, or total occlusion of the renal artery to produce renal failure (24). However, in most clinical situations, kidneys never experience such an extreme vasoconstriction and, under these conditions, dopamine exerts its effects by acting on both DA1 and DA2 receptors, resulting in decreasing renal blood flow, glomerular filtration rate, and sodium excretion (25). These two classes of receptors have opposing effects on renal vasculature and this may explain the conflicting results in clinical trials. In fact, DA1 receptors are postsynaptic and, when activated, elicit vasodilation and inhibition of sodium-potassium adenosine triphosphatase consequently promoting diuresis and natriuresis, whereas DA2 receptors are less well understood. They are located presynaptically and, when activated, inhibit adenylate cyclase activity (in contrast to DA1 receptors) and norepinephrine release (18,26). Blockade of DA2 receptors increases renal blood flow and glomerular filtration rate, indicating that DA2 receptors activation decreases renal blood flow (26). In a meta-analysis of 15 studies containing 970 subjects, Marik (27) found that the incidence of renal dysfunction was 31% in the small-dose dopamine group compared with 33% in the control group. The study concluded that dopamine has no renal vasodilator effect; moreover, considering the potential side effects of the drug, there is little justification for the continued use of small-dose dopamine as a renal vasodilator drug. Holmes and Walley (28) found that, in addition to the lack of renal efficacy, small-dose dopamine worsens splanchnic oxygenation, impairs gastroenteric function, impairs the endocrine and immunologic system, and blunts ventilatory drives.
In this study, we compared fenoldopam to dopamine without a placebo group because during the last decades small-dose dopamine has been used as the standard clinical approach for major surgery. An investigation with a larger number of patients, however, should include a control (placebo) group.
Another limitation may be the lack of consistent investigator blinding to the study group assignment. However, when the measurements made are objective, as in this case, to blind the study is less problematic.
An additional limitation could be the normal preoperative renal function of the patients we studied; it could be useful to study patients with abnormal preoperative renal function.
We did not address the question of the titration of fenoldopam and dopamine administration, which may have led to different results.
Finally, a simple size with >79% power in larger trials might lead to more consistent results.
In conclusion, fenoldopam, at a dose that does not interfere with hemodynamics, seems to preserve CRE and BUN values in patients undergoing LTx. The fenoldopam dose of 0.1 µg · kg1 · min1 should be the best compromise of tubular and renal vascular effects. We conclude that fenoldopam may have a role as a new pharmacological option for perioperative renal vasodilation in high-risk surgical patients. A larger study population is necessary to validate the preliminary hypothesis of the renal vasodilatory effect of fenoldopam in patients undergoing LTx.
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
-adrenoreceptor antagonist activity of fenoldopam in the anesthetized dog. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1988; 11: 1236.[Medline]
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
G. D. Rocca and L. Pompei To Dilate or Not To Dilate Anesth. Analg., October 1, 2005; 101(4): 1242 - 1242. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
G. Lema and N. Aeschlimann To Dilate or Not To Dilate Anesth. Analg., October 1, 2005; 101(4): 1241 - 1242. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|