The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Association Between a Chloride-Liberal vs Chloride-Restrictive Intravenous Fluid Administration Strategy and Kidney Injury in Critically Ill Adults
Abstract
CONTEXT: Administration of traditional chloride-liberal intravenous fluids may precipitate acute kidney injury (AKI). OBJECTIVE: To assess the association of a chloride-restrictive (vs chloride-liberal) intravenous fluid strategy with AKI in critically ill patients. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Prospective, open-label, sequential period pilot study of 760 patients admitted consecutively to the intensive care unit (ICU) during the control period (February 18 to August 17, 2008) compared with 773 patients admitted consecutively during the intervention period (February 18 to August 17, 2009) at a university-affiliated hospital in Melbourne, Australia. INTERVENTIONS: During the control period, patients received standard intravenous fluids. After a 6-month phase-out period (August 18, 2008, to February 17, 2009), any use of chloride-rich intravenous fluids (0.9% saline, 4% succinylated gelatin solution, or 4% albumin solution) was restricted to attending specialist approval only during the intervention period; patients instead received a lactated solution (Hartmann solution), a balanced solution (Plasma-Lyte 148), and chloride-poor 20% albumin. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes included increase from baseline to peak creatinine level in the ICU and incidence of AKI according to the risk, injury, failure, loss, end-stage (RIFLE) classification. Secondary post hoc analysis outcomes included the need for renal replacement therapy (RRT), length of stay in ICU and hospital, and survival. RESULTS Chloride administration decreased by 144 504 mmol (from 694 to 496 mmol/patient) from the control period to the intervention period. Comparing the control period with the intervention period, the mean serum creatinine level increase while in the ICU was 22.6 μmol/L (95% CI, 17.5-27.7 μmol/L) vs 14.8 μmol/L (95% CI, 9.8-19.9 μmol/L) (P = .03), the incidence of injury and failure class of RIFLE-defined AKI was 14% (95% CI, 11%-16%; n = 105) vs 8.4% (95% CI, 6.4%-10%; n = 65) (P <.001), and the use of RRT was 10% (95% CI, 8.1%-12%; n = 78) vs 6.3% (95% CI, 4.6%-8.1%; n = 49) (P = .005). After adjustment for covariates, this association remained for incidence of injury and failure class of RIFLE-defined AKI (odds ratio, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.37-0.75]; P <.001) and use of RRT (odds ratio, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.33-0.81]; P = .004). There were no differences in hospital mortality, hospital or ICU length of stay, or need for RRT after hospital discharge. CONCLUSION The implementation of a chloride-restrictive strategy in a tertiary ICU was associated with a significant decrease in the incidence of AKI and use of RRT. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00885404.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Chowdhury, A. H., Cox, E. F., Francis, S. T., & Lobo, D. N. (2012) · Annals of Surgery · doi:10.1097/sla.0b013e318256be72 · Cited by 764
Cited by
Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International guidelines for management of sepsis and septic shock: 2016.
Rhodes, A., Evans, L. E., Alhazzani, W., Levy, M. M., Antonelli, M., Ferrer, R., Kumar, A., Sevransky, J. E., Sprung, C. L., Nunnally, M. E., et al. (2017) · Intensive Care Medicine · doi:10.1007/s00134-017-4683-6 · Cited by 6,621
Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International guidelines for management of sepsis and septic shock: 2016.
Rhodes, A., Evans, L. E., Alhazzani, W., Levy, M. M., Antonelli, M., Ferrer, R., Kumar, A., Sevransky, J. E., Sprung, C. L., Nunnally, M. E., et al. (2017) · Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1097/ccm.0000000000002255 · Cited by 3,652
Cecconi, M., Evans, L., Levy, M., & Rhodes, A. (2018) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(18)30696-2 · Cited by 2,254
Gustafsson, U. O., Scott, M. J., Hubner, M., Nygren, J., Demartines, N., Francis, N., Rockall, T. A., Young‐Fadok, T. M., Hill, A. G., Soop, M., et al. (2019) · World Journal of Surgery · doi:10.1007/s00268-018-4844-y · Cited by 2,119
Balanced crystalloids versus saline in critically ill adults.
Semler, M. W., Self, W. H., Wanderer, J. P., Ehrenfeld, J. M., Wang, L., Byrne, D. W., Stollings, J. L., Kumar, A. B., Hughes, C. G., Hernandez, A., et al. (2018) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1711584 · Cited by 1,433
Metadata
- Authors
- Yunos, N. M., Bellomo, R., Hegarty, C., Story, D., Ho, L., & Bailey, M.
- Venue
- JAMA
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2012-10-17
- Volume
- 308
- Issue
- 15
- Pages
- 1566
- ISSN
- 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
- 0098-7484
- OpenAlex
- W2142057837
- Cited by
- 1,210
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 73.60
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Association Between a Chloride-Liberal vs Chloride-Restrictive Intravenous Fluid Administration Strategy and Kidney Injury in Critically Ill Adults. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.2012.13356
- The paper
- Yunos, N. M., Bellomo, R., Hegarty, C., Story, D., Ho, L., & Bailey, M. (2012). Association Between a Chloride-Liberal vs Chloride-Restrictive Intravenous Fluid Administration Strategy and Kidney Injury in Critically Ill Adults. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2012.13356
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.