The impact of crystalloid and colloid infusion on the kidney in rodent sepsis

Klinik und Poliklinik für Anästhesiologie, Zentrum für Operative Medizin, University of Würzburg, Oberdürrbacherstrasse 6, 97080 Würzburg, Germany.
Intensive Care Medicine (Impact Factor: 7.21). 11/2009; 36(3):541-8. DOI: 10.1007/s00134-009-1704-0
Source: PubMed


Volume replacement remains one of the pillars of sepsis therapy. The effect of different volume solutions on kidney function in sepsis still remains unclear. We therefore determined the impact of crystalloid and colloid solutions on kidney function in a rodent model of abdominal sepsis induced by cecal ligation and puncture (CLP).
Anesthetized rats underwent the CLP procedure, whereas control animals were sham operated. Septic animals were treated with crystalloid and colloid solutions. Hemodynamic variables and blood gases were measured. After 24 h animals were re-anesthetized, the kidneys were harvested, and creatinine (crea), urea, cystatin C and neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL) were investigated.
Septic animals exhibited a mortality rate of 19% after 24 h. Gelatin-treated animals showed significantly increased levels of crea and urea. Colloids [gelatin 4% (Gel) or hydroxyethyl starch 6% 130/0.4 (HES)] as volume replacement resulted in elevated levels of NGAL. The histopathological observations revealed that Gel- and HES-treated animals showed vesicles within epithelial cells of the tubulus system and an overall increased injury. In contrast, total injury scores in groups treated with crystalloids [0.9% NaCl (NaCl) and Sterofundin ISO (SteroIso)] were not significantly different compared to sham-treated animals.
None of the examined volume solution was inert to the kidney. In a CLP rodent sepsis model, animals infused with balanced crystalloid SteroIso exhibited the least effects on kidney function. Both hydroxyethyl starch 6% 130/0.4 and gelatin 4% derogated the kidney, whereas gelatin was more harmful when compared with hydroxyethyl starch.

Download full-text


Available from: Christian Wunder,
119 Reads
  • Source
    • "In a 24-hour CLP model in rats Schick and colleagues found higher serum level of the early kidney injury marker NGAL when fluid resuscitation was performed with colloids (gelatin 4% or HES 6% 130/0.42), whereas the balanced crystalloid Sterofundin ISO caused the least effects on kidney function [16]. Similar to our study no significant differences in vital parameters such as MAP, heart rate and oxygenation were observed among the different fluid management groups. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The use of hydroxyethyl starch (HES) in sepsis has been shown to increase mortality and acute kidney injury. However, the knowledge of the exact mechanism by which several fluids, especially starch preparations may impair end-organ function particularly in the kidney, is still missing. The aim of this study was to measure the influence of different crystalloid and colloid fluid compositions on the inflammatory response in the kidney, the liver and the lung using a rodent model of acute endotoxemia. Rats were anesthetized and mechanically ventilated. Lipopolysaccharide (5 mg/kg) was administered intravenously. After one hour crystalloids [lactate-buffered (RLac) or acetate-buffered (RAc)] were infused i.v. (30 ml/kg) in all groups. At 2 hours rats either received different crystalloids (75 ml/kg of RLac or RAc) or colloids (25 ml/kg of HES in saline or HES in RAc or gelatin in saline). Expression of messenger RNA for cytokine-induced neutrophil chemoattractant-1 (CINC-1), monocyte chemotactic protein-1 (MCP-1), necrosis factor α (TNFα) and intercellular adhesion molecule 1 (ICAM-1) was assessed in kidney, liver and lung tissue by real-time PCR after 4 hours. The use of acetate-buffered solutions was associated with a significantly higher expression of CINC-1 and TNFα mRNA in the liver, in the kidney and in the lung. Only marginal effects of gelatin and hydroxyethyl starch on mRNA expression of inflammatory mediators were observed. The study provides evidence that the type of buffering agent of different colloidal and crystalloid solutions might be a crucial factor determining the extent of early end-organ inflammatory response in sepsis.
    PLoS ONE 04/2014; 9(4):e93863. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0093863 · 3.23 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Little is known about the impact of different fluid solutions on different intestinal organs, and there is still an ongoing discussion about the ideal fluid solution in sepsis. The scepticism about the benefit of synthetic colloids in volume therapy is increasing [10,12,24]. Colloid solutions should have a greater volume effect than crystalloids. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background Septic acute liver and intestinal failure is associated with a high mortality. We therefore investigated the influence of volume resuscitation with different crystalloid or colloid solutions on liver and intestine injury and microcirculation in septic rodents. Methods Sepsis was induced by cecal ligation and puncture (CLP) in 77 male rats. Animals were treated with different crystalloids (NaCl 0.9% (NaCl), Ringer’s acetate (RA)) or colloids (Gelafundin 4% (Gel), 6% HES 130/0.4 (HES)). After 24 h animals were re-anesthetized and intestinal (n = 6/group) and liver microcirculation (n = 6/group) were obtained using intravital microscopy, as well as macrohemodynamic parameters were measured. Blood assays and organs were harvested to determine organ function and injury. Results HES improved liver microcirculation, cardiac index and DO2-I, but significantly increased IL-1β, IL-6 and TNF-α levels and resulted in a mortality rate of 33%. Gel infused animals revealed significant reduction of liver and intestine microcirculation with severe side effects on coagulation (significantly increased PTT and INR, decreased haemoglobin and platelet count). Furthermore Gel showed severe hypoglycemia, acidosis and significantly increased ALT and IL-6 with a lethality of 29%. RA exhibited no derangements in liver microcirculation when compared to sham and HES. RA showed no intestinal microcirculation disturbance compared to sham, but significantly improved the number of intestinal capillaries with flow compared to HES. All RA treated animals survided and showed no severe side effects on coagulation, liver, macrohemodynamic or metabolic state. Conclusions Gelatine 4% revealed devastated hepatic and intestinal microcirculation and severe side effects in CLP induced septic rats, whereas the balanced crystalloid solution showed stabilization of macro- and microhemodynamics with improved survival. HES improved liver microcirculation, but exhibited significantly increased pro-inflammatory cytokine levels. Crystalloid infusion revealed best results in mortality and microcirculation, when compared with colloid infusion.
    BMC Gastroenterology 12/2012; 12(1):179. DOI:10.1186/1471-230X-12-179 · 2.37 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "This latter effect was independent of the filtration pressure, which was identical in the two HES groups. Most recently, Schick and colleagues confirmed these nephrotoxic properties of HES in rats with CLP-induced sepsis: despite a significantly higher cardiac output, HES and gelatine were associated with a more severe histological tissue injury and higher neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin serum levels than treatment with normal saline or balanced crystalloid solutions [52]. These results confirm the warnings raised in a recent review on this topic [53]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The research papers on shock that have been published in Critical Care throughout 2009 are related to four major subjects: first, alterations of heart function and, second, the role of the sympathetic central nervous system during sepsis; third, the impact of hemodynamic support using vasopressin or its synthetic analog terlipressin, and different types of fluid resuscitation; as well as, fourth, experimental studies on the treatment of acute respiratory distress syndrome. The present review summarizes the key results of these studies together with a brief discussion in the context of the relevant scientific and clinical background published both in this and other journals.
    Critical care (London, England) 11/2010; 14(6):239. DOI:10.1186/cc9261 · 4.48 Impact Factor
Show more