Elastic Bandage vs Hypertonic Albumin for Diuretic-Resistant Volume-Overloaded Patients in Intensive Care Unit: A Propensity-Match Study

Objective: To compare elastic bandage (EB) vs hypertonic albumin solution administration to increase fluid removal by enhancing loop diuretic efficiency (DE) in patients with volume overload and diuretic resistance. Patients and Methods: In this historic cohort study with propensity matching, we included diuretic-resistant adult (>= 18 years) patients with volume overload after fluid resuscitation admitted in the intensive care unit from January 1, 2006, through June 30, 2017. Regression models and propensity matching were used to assess the associations of these interventions with changes in DE and other clinical outcomes. Results: Of 1147 patients (median age, 66; interquartile range [IQR], 56-76 years; 51% [n=590] men), 384 (33%) received EB and 763 (67%) received hypertonic albumin solution. In adjusted models, EB was significantly associated with higher DE compared with hypertonic albumin solution (odds ratio, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.81; P=.004). After propensity matching of 345 pairs, DE remained significantly different between the 2 groups (median, 2111; IQR, 1092 to 4665 mL for EB vs median, 1829; IQR, 1032 to 3436 mL for hypertonic albumin solution; P=.02). EB, male sex, lower baseline serum urea nitrogen level, lower Charlson Comorbidity Index score, and higher baseline left ventricular ejection fraction were DE determinants. The lowest DE quartile (<1073 mL/40-mg furosemide equivalent) following adjustment for known predictors of mortality remained independently associated with higher 90-day death rate (odds ratio, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.13 to 2.36; P=.009). Conclusion: EB use is associated with greater DE than hypertonic albumin solution during the deescalation phase of sepsis resuscitation. Prospective clinical trials would validate the findings of this hypothesis-generating study. (C) 2020 Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research