Low-dose vasopressin restores diuresis both in patients with hepatorenal syndrome and in anuric patients with end-stage heart failure

Perioperative Management of the Patient at High-Risk for Cardiac Surgery-Associated Acute Kidney Injury

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is one of the most common major complications of cardiac surgery, and is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Cardiac surgery-associated AKI has a complex, multifactorial etiology, including numerous factors such as primary cardiac dysfunction, hemodynamic derangements of cardiac surgery and cardiopulmonary bypass, and the possibility of a large volume of blood transfusion. There are no truly effective pharmacologic therapies for the management of AKI, and, therefore, anesthesiologists, intensivists, and cardiac surgeons must remain vigilant and attempt to minimize the risk of developing renal dysfunction. This narrative review describes the current state of the scientific literature concerning the specific aspects of cardiac surgery-associated AKI, and presents it in a chronological fashion to aid the perioperative clinician in their approach to this high-risk patient group. The evidence was considered for risk prediction models, preoperative optimization, and the intraoperative and postoperative management of cardiac surgery patients to improve renal outcomes.

Acute Kidney Injury in Patients with Liver Disease

AKI is commonly encountered in patients with decompensated cirrhosis, and it is associated with unfavorable outcomes. Among factors specific to cirrhosis, hepatorenal syndrome type 1, also referred to as hepatorenal syndrome-AKI, is the most salient and unique etiology. Patients with cirrhosis are vulnerable to traditional causes of AKI, such as prerenal azotemia, acute tubular injury, and acute interstitial nephritis. In addition, other less common etiologies of AKI specifically related to chronic liver disease should be considered, including abdominal compartment syndrome, cardiorenal processes linked to cirrhotic cardiomyopathy and portopulmonary hypertension, and cholemic nephropathy. Furthermore, certain types of GN can cause AKI in cirrhosis, such as IgA nephropathy or viral hepatitis related. Therefore, a comprehensive diagnostic approach is needed to evaluate patients with cirrhosis presenting with AKI. Management should be tailored to the specific underlying etiology. Albumin-based volume resuscitation is recommended in prerenal AKI. Acute tubular injury and acute interstitial nephritis are managed with supportive care, withdrawal of the offending agent, and, potentially, corticosteroids in acute interstitial nephritis. Short of liver transplantation, vasoconstrictor therapy is the primary treatment for hepatorenal syndrome type 1. Timing of initiation of vasoconstrictors, the rise in mean arterial pressure, and the degree of cholestasis are among the factors that determine vasoconstrictor responsiveness. Large-volume paracentesis and diuretics are indicated to relieve intra-abdominal hypertension and renal vein congestion. Direct-acting antivirals with or without immunosuppression are used to treat hepatitis B/C-associated GN. In summary, AKI in cirrhosis requires careful consideration of multiple potentially pathogenic factors and the implementation of targeted therapeutic interventions.

Hepatorenal Syndrome Type 1: From Diagnosis Ascertainment to Goal-Oriented Pharmacologic Therapy

Hepatorenal syndrome type 1 (HRS-1) is a serious form of AKI that affects individuals with advanced cirrhosis with ascites. Prompt and accurate diagnosis is essential for effective implementation of therapeutic measures that can favorably alter its clinical course. Despite decades of investigation, HRS-1 continues to be primarily a diagnosis of exclusion. Although the diagnostic criteria dictated by the International Club of Ascites provide a useful framework to approach the diagnosis of HRS-1, they do not fully reflect the complexity of clinical scenarios that is often encountered in patients with cirrhosis and AKI. Thus, diagnostic uncertainty is often faced. In particular, the distinction between HRS-1 and acute tubular injury is challenging with the currently available clinical tools. Because treatment of HRS-1 differs from that of acute tubular injury, distinguishing these two causes of AKI has direct implications in management. Therefore, the use of the International Club of Ascites criteria should be enhanced with a more individualized approach and attention to the other phenotypic aspects of HRS-1 and other types of AKI. Liver transplantation is the most effective treatment for HRS-1, but it is only available to a small fraction of the affected patients worldwide. Thus, pharmacologic therapy is necessary. Vasoconstrictors aimed to increase mean arterial pressure constitute the most effective approach. Administration of intravenous albumin is an established co-adjuvant therapy. However, the risk for fluid overload in patients with cirrhosis with AKI is not negligible, and interventions intended to expand or remove volume should be tailored to the specific needs of the patient. Norepinephrine and terlipressin are the most effective vasoconstrictors, and their use should be determined by availability, ease of administration, and attention to optimal risk-benefit balance for each clinical scenario.

Reappraising the spectrum of AKI and hepatorenal syndrome in patients with cirrhosis

The occurrence of acute kidney injury (AKI) in patients with end-stage liver disease constitutes one of the most challenging clinical scenarios in in-hospital and critical care medicine. Hepatorenal syndrome type 1 (HRS-1), which is a specific type of AKI that occurs in the context of advanced cirrhosis and portal hypertension, is associated with particularly high mortality. The pathogenesis of HRS-1 is largely viewed as a functional derangement that ultimately affects renal vasculature tone. However, new insights suggest that non-haemodynamic tubulo-toxic factors, such as endotoxins and bile acids, might mediate parenchymal renal injury in patients with cirrhosis, suggesting that concurrent mechanisms, including those traditionally associated with HRS-1 and non-traditional factors, might contribute to the development of AKI in patients with cirrhosis. Moreover, histological evidence of morphological abnormalities in the kidneys of patients with cirrhosis and renal dysfunction has prompted the functional nature of HRS-1 to be re-examined. From a clinical perspective, a diagnosis of HRS-1 guides utilization of vasoconstrictive therapy and decisions regarding renal replacement therapy. Patients with cirrhosis are at risk of AKI owing to a wide range of factors. However, the tools currently available to ascertain the diagnosis of HRS-1 and guide therapy are suboptimal. Short of liver transplantation, goal-directed haemodynamically targeted pharmacotherapy remains the cornerstone of treatment for this condition; improved understanding of the underlying pathogenic mechanisms might lead to better clinical outcomes. Here, we examine our current understanding of the pathophysiology of HRS-1 and existing challenges in its diagnosis and treatment.

Concurrent Use of Calcium Chloride and Arginine Vasopressin Infusions in Pediatric Patients with Acute Cardiocirculatory Failure

Acute heart failure (AHF) can cause low cardiac output and poor end-organ perfusion. Inotropic agents along with vasodilators can improve organ perfusion. Arginine vasopressin (AVP) and calcium chloride (CaCl) infusions are increasingly being used in low cardiac output states in pediatric AHF. We retrospectively reviewed 77 patients (0-18 years) with AHF admitted between January 2014 and May 2017 who received concurrent AVP and CaCl infusions. Surrogates of cardiac output and organ perfusion included hemodynamic vital signs, laboratory parameters, and urine output (UO). Organ dysfunction and vasopressor inotropic scores were also calculated. Median (IQR) age was 0.88 years (0, 3.75), and median weight was 6.62 kg (3.5, 13.7). Congenital heart disease was present in 70% (46/77) patients. Univentricular physiology was present in 25% (25/77) patients. None of the patients were in the immediate postoperative period. Median durations of AVP and CaCl were 2 days (1, 3) and 3 days (2, 6), respectively. Using Wilcoxon-signed rank test and Bonferroni correction, post hoc comparison showed that at 8 h post infusion, all systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) results, and UO were greater than those 1 h prior to infusion. Median SBP increased from 79 mm Hg (71, 92) 1 h prior to 97 mm Hg (84, 107) 8 h post. Median DBP increased from 44 mm Hg (35, 52) 1 h prior to 54 mm Hg (44, 62) 8 h post. Heart rate showed a decrease between measurements 1 h prior to infusion and 8 h post, with median scores 146 (127, 162) and 136 (114, 150) beats per minute, respectively. Within first 8 h, median UO continuously increased from 6 mL/h. (0, 25) at 1 h post infusion to 20 mL/h. (2, 62) at 8 h post infusion. Median pediatric logarithmic organ dysfunction scores on days 4 through 7 post infusion were lower compared to day 1; median vasopressor inotropic scores on day 2 through 7 post infusion were lower compared to day 1. Serum lactate level, arterial pH, and base excess all showed favorable trend. Concurrent use of AVP and CaCl infusions may improve surrogates of cardiac output, and intensive care outcomes, and prevent organ dysfunction in children with AHF.

Therapeutic alternatives for the treatment of type 1 hepatorenal syndrome: A Delphi technique-based consensus

AIM

To propose several alternatives treatment of type 1 hepatorenal syndrome (HRS-1) what is the most severe expression of circulatory dysfunction on patients with portal hypertension.

METHODS

A group of eleven gastroenterologists and nephrologists performed a structured analysis of available literature. Each expert was designated to review and answer a question. They generated draft statements for evaluation by all the experts. Additional input was obtained from medical community. In order to reach consensus, a modified three-round Delphi technique method was used. According to United States Preventive Services Task Force criteria, the quality of the evidence and level of recommendation supporting each statement was graded.

RESULTS

Nine questions were formulated. The available evidence was evaluated considering its quality, number of patients included in the studies and the consistency of its results. The generated questions were answered by the expert panel with a high level of agreement. Thus, a therapeutic algorithm was generated. The role of terlipressin and norepinephrine was confirmed as the pharmacologic treatment of choice. On the other hand the use of the combination of octreotide, midodrine and albumin without vasoconstrictors was discouraged. The role of several other options was also evaluated and the available evidence was explored and discussed. Liver transplantation is considered the definitive treatment for HRS-1. The present consensus is an important effort that intends to organize the available strategies based on the available evidence in the literature, the quality of the evidence and the benefits, adverse effects and availability of the therapeutic tools described.

CONCLUSION

Based on the available evidence the expert panel was able to discriminate the most appropriate therapeutic alternatives for the treatment of HRS-1.

AKI associated with cardiac surgery

Approximately 18% of patients undergoing cardiac surgery experience AKI (on the basis of modern standardized definitions of AKI), and approximately 2%-6% will require hemodialysis. The development of AKI after cardiac surgery portends poor short- and long-term prognoses, with those developing RIFLE failure or AKI Network stage III having an almost 2-fold increase in the risk of death. AKI is caused by a variety of factors, including nephrotoxins, hypoxia, mechanical trauma, inflammation, cardiopulmonary bypass, and hemodynamic instability, and it may be affected by the clinician's choice of fluids and vasoactive agents as well as the transfusion strategy used. The risk of AKI may be ameliorated by avoidance of nephrotoxins, achievement of adequate glucose control preoperatively, and use of goal-directed therapy hemodynamic strategies. Remote ischemic preconditioning is an exciting future strategy, but more work is needed before widespread implementation. Unfortunately, there are no pharmacologic agents known to reduce the risk of AKI or treat established AKI.

Therapeutic response to vasoconstrictors in hepatorenal syndrome parallels increase in mean arterial pressure: a pooled analysis of clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Vasoconstrictor therapy has been advocated as treatment for hepatorenal syndrome (HRS). Our aim was to explore across all tested vasoconstrictors whether achievement of a substantial increase in arterial blood pressure is associated with recovery of kidney function in HRS.

STUDY DESIGN

Pooled analysis of published studies identified by electronic database search.

SETTING & POPULATION

Data pooled across 501 participants in 21 studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA FOR STUDIES

Human studies evaluating the efficacy of a vasoconstrictor administered for 72 hours or longer in adults with HRS type 1 or 2.

INTERVENTION

Vasoconstrictor therapy.

OUTCOMES & MEASUREMENTS

Cohorts' mean arterial pressure (MAP), serum creatinine level, urinary output, and plasma renin activity (PRA) at baseline and subsequent times during treatment. Linear regression models were constructed to estimate mean daily changes in MAP, serum creatinine level, urinary output, and PRA for each study subgroup. Correlations were used to assess for association between variables.

RESULTS

An increase in MAP is associated strongly with a decrease in serum creatinine level, but is not associated with an increase in urinary output. Associations were stronger when analyses were restricted to randomized clinical trials and were not limited to cohorts with either lower baseline MAP or lower baseline serum creatinine level. Most studies tested terlipressin as vasoconstrictor, whereas fewer studies tested ornipressin, midodrine, octreotide, or norepinephrine. Excluding cohorts of participants treated with terlipressin or ornipressin did not eliminate the association. Furthermore, a decrease in PRA correlated with improvement in kidney function.

LIMITATIONS

Studies were not originally designed to test our question. We lacked access to individual patient data.

CONCLUSIONS

An increase in MAP during vasoconstrictor therapy in patients with HRS is associated with improvement in kidney function across the spectrum of drugs tested to date. These results support consideration for a goal-directed approach to the treatment of HRS.

Terlipressin in hepatorenal syndrome

OBJECTIVE

To compare the pharmacology, dosing, and adverse reactions of vasopressin and terlipressin for the treatment of hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) and assess the efficacy of the investigational drug terlipressin for HRS.

DATA SOURCES

Articles evaluating prospective studies for vasopressin and terlipressin were discussed after being identified through PubMed (1966-November 2010), International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (1970-November 2010), and EMBASE (1985-November 2010) with combinations of the following terms: vasopressin, terlipressin, and hepatorenal syndrome. In addition, reference citations from publications identified were reviewed. Thirteen studies were identified for terlipressin, along with 4 meta-analyses and 1 case report. For vasopressin, 2 studies were identified.

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

Prospective clinical studies directly comparing terlipressin and vasopressin were evaluated, as well as prospective clinical studies and meta-analyses for terlipressin in HRS.

DATA SYNTHESIS

No randomized, placebo-controlled trials using vasopressin for the treatment of type I HRS have been published, and 4 randomized studies involving 197 patients provide the most current outcome data for use of terlipressin in HRS. Terlipressin differs significantly from vasopressin with regard to its pharmacology, dosing, and adverse drug reaction profile. There is a paucity of data on vasopressin for HRS.

CONCLUSIONS

No definitive recommendations can be made for the use of terlipressin for this indication until further, well-conducted studies are performed.

Systematic review: renal and other clinically relevant outcomes in hepatorenal syndrome trials

BACKGROUND

Although reversal of pretransplant renal dysfunction in hepatorenal syndrome reduces post-transplant complications, the overall impact on morbidity and mortality requires clarification.

AIM

To review trials of pharmacologic interventions in hepatorenal syndrome, with specific assessment of trial quality and study endpoints, including patient survival and renal outcome measures.

METHODS

Literature search and selection was carried out by a single reviewer. Data extraction and quality analysis were carried out by two independent reviewers.

RESULTS

Of 848 identified articles, 36 were eligible for inclusion. Twenty-one were full-text. Only 19% were randomized-controlled trials. About 50% of studies included only Type 1 hepatorenal syndrome patients. Serum creatinine, urine output and urine sodium were the most common renal outcome measures. Only 42% defined a primary renal endpoint. About 88% of articles reported mortality rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Existing literature of pharmacologic agents for use in hepatorenal syndrome is limited by poor study design, including non-randomization, heterogeneous study populations, lack of power, and limited use of clinically relevant outcomes. There is insufficient information in most trials to judge the impact of pharmacologic therapy on mortality or rates of transplantation. The validity of renal outcome measures as surrogate markers of more clinically relevant endpoints has not been established.

The effects of vasopressin on the renal system in vasodilatory shock

An estimated 700,000 cases of sepsis occur each year in the United States alone, over half of which will develop renal failure. Of those that develop renal failure, 70% will die. This article will examine how the use of vasopressin in sepsis may improve some aspects of renal function. The effects of vasopressin on the renal system in vasodilatory shock.

Vasopressin in the treatment of vasodilatory shock in children

BACKGROUND

Many recent studies suggest that vasopressin deficiency is an important cause of catecholamine-resistant hypotension with vasodilation in adults, but little is known about vasopressin deficiency in children.

METHODS

To clarify the usefulness of vasopressin administration in pediatric cathecolamine-resistant hypotension with preserved ventricular contractility, urinary output and blood pressure response to vasopressin were retrospectively analyzed in 12 consecutive patients (15 instances) who were treated with vasopressin. The causes of vasodilation were central nervous system disturbance (n = 5), side-effect of drug (n = 5), and infection (n = 5). Plasma vasopressin concentration was measured six times before vasopressin administration and five times during vasopressin administration.

RESULTS

Patients were divided into four groups according to their response to vasopressin administration. In group 1 (n = 5), urinary output increased to > 3 mL/kg per h within 3 h after vasopressin administration. In group 2 (n = 4), urinary output increased to > 3 mL/kg per h from 3 to 5 h after vasopressin administration. In group 3 (n = 4), urinary output did not increase to > 3 mL/kg per min within 5 h after vasopressin administration, but systolic blood pressure increased to > 120% of the level at the time of vasopressin administration. All remaining patients were classified into group 4 (n = 3). Plasma vasopressin concentration were low considering the markedly hypotensive state in all six instances. Plasma vasopressin concentration during vasopressin administration were significantly increased compared with before administration (P < 0.05). No apparent side-effects were observed in this series.

CONCLUSION

Vasopressin deficiency may occur in catecholamine-resistant hypotension of pediatric patients due to various causes including central nervous system disturbance, drug induced hypotension and sepsis. Small doses of vasopressin administration seems to be very effective in such conditions by increasing blood pressure and urinary output.

Clinical review: Vasopressin and terlipressin in septic shock patients

Vasopressin (antidiuretic hormone) is emerging as a potentially major advance in the treatment of septic shock. Terlipressin (tricyl-lysine-vasopressin) is the synthetic, long-acting analogue of vasopressin, and has comparable pharmacodynamic but different pharmacokinetic properties. Vasopressin mediates vasoconstriction via V₁ receptor activation on vascular smooth muscle. Septic shock first causes a transient early increase in blood vasopressin concentrations; these concentrations subsequently decrease to very low levels as compared with those observed with other causes of hypotension. Infusions of 0.01–0.04 U/min vasopressin in septic shock patients increase plasma vasopressin concentrations. This increase is associated with reduced need for other vasopressors. Vasopressin has been shown to result in greater blood flow diversion from nonvital to vital organ beds compared with adrenaline (epinephrine). Of concern is a constant decrease in cardiac output and oxygen delivery, the consequences of which in terms of development of multiple organ failure are not yet known. Terlipressin (one or two boluses of 1 mg) has similar effects, but this drug has been used in far fewer patients. Large randomized clinical trials should be conducted to establish the utility of these drugs as therapeutic agents in patients with septic shock.

[Indications of vasopressin in the management of septic shock]

OBJECTIVE

Vasopressin (antidiuretic hormone) is emerging as a potentially major advancement in the treatment of septic shock. Vasopressin is both a vasopressor and an antidiuretic hormone. It also has haemostatic, gastrointestinal, and thermoregulatory effects. This article reviews the physiology of vasopressin and all the relevant clinical literature on its use in the treatment of septic shock.

DATA SOURCES AND EXTRACTION

Extraction from Pubmed database of French and English articles on the physiology and clinical use of vasopressin. The following key words were selected: vasodilatory shock, vasopressin, septic shock, catecholamines, norepinephrine, renal function, diuresis, mesenteric haemodynamic. The collected articles were reviewed and selected according to their quality and originality.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Vasopressin mediates vasoconstriction via V1-receptor activation on vascular smooth muscle. Septic shock causes first a transient early increase in blood vasopressin concentrations that decreases later to very low concentrations compared to other causes of hypotension. Vasopressin infusion of 0.01-0.04 U min(-1) in septic shock patients increases plasma vasopressin concentrations. This increase is associated with a lesser need for other vasopressors. Vasopressin has been shown to produce greater blood flow diversion from non-vital to vital organ beds than does adrenaline. A large randomized clinical trial should be performed to assess its place as a therapeutic agent of septic shock patient.

Vasopressors and the kidney

The changes in renal perfusion induced by vasopressors depend on their effects on systemic hemodynamics and renal vascular resistance. Both effects are largely influenced by the patient's underlying condition such as myocardial contractility and vascular responsiveness. A beneficial effect can be expected if mean arterial pressure increases without decreasing cardiac output and if the effect on renal vascular resistance is less pronounced than on systemic vascular resistance. Acute renal failure is associated with loss of renal autoregulation and sepsis is associated with blood pressures below the autoregulatory threshold. Both conditions might therefore benefit from the administration of vasopressors. Many experimental and clinical data indeed suggest a beneficial effect of norepinephrine on the urine output in sepsis. A beneficial effect on renal function (glomerular filtration) is a less consistent finding suggesting that pressure diuresis might be partially responsible for the pressor-induced diuresis. Administration of vasopressors to patients with oliguria should be considered in fluid-resuscitated patients with distributive shock. Whether other vasopressors offer advantages over norepinephrine requires further investigation.

Pathophysiology of renal disease associated with liver disorders: implications for liver transplantation. Part I

Renal and hepatic function are often intertwined through both the existence of associated primary organ diseases and hemodynamic interrelationships. This connection occasionally results in the chronic failure of both organs, necessitating combined liver-kidney transplantation (LKT). Since 1988, more than 850 patients in the United States have received such transplants, with patient survival somewhat less than that for patients receiving either organ alone. Patients with renal failure caused by acute injury or hepatorenal syndrome have classically not been included as candidates for combined transplantation because of the reversibility of renal dysfunction after liver transplantation. However, the rate and duration of renal failure before liver transplantation is increasing in association with prolonged waiting list times. Thus, the issue of acquired permanent renal damage in the setting of hepatic failure continues to confront the transplant community. The following article and its sequel (Part II, to be published in vol 8, no 3 of this journal) attempt to review the problem of primary and secondary renal disease in patients with end-stage liver disease, elements involved in renal disease progression and recovery, the impact of renal disease on liver transplant outcome, and results of combined LKT; outline the steps in the pretransplantation renal evaluation; and provide the beginnings of an algorithm for making the decision for combined LKT.

Physiology of vasopressin relevant to management of septic shock

Vasopressin is emerging as a rational therapy for the hemodynamic support of septic shock and vasodilatory shock due to systemic inflammatory response syndrome. The goal of this review is to understand the physiology of vasopressin relevant to septic shock in order to maximize its safety and efficacy in clinical trials and in subsequent therapeutic use. Vasopressin is both a vasopressor and an antidiuretic hormone. It also has hemostatic, GI, and thermoregulatory effects, and is an adrenocorticotropic hormone secretagogue. Vasopressin is released from the axonal terminals of magnocellular neurons in the hypothalamus. Vasopressin mediates vasoconstriction via V1-receptor activation on vascular smooth muscle and mediates its antidiuretic effect via V2-receptor activation in the renal collecting duct system. In addition, vasopressin, at low plasma concentrations, mediates vasodilation in coronary, cerebral, and pulmonary arterial circulations. Septic shock causes first a transient early increase in blood vasopressin concentrations that decrease later in septic shock to very low levels compared to other causes of hypotension. Vasopressin infusion of 0.01 to 0.04 U/min in patients with septic shock increases plasma vasopressin levels to those observed in patients with hypotension from other causes, such as cardiogenic shock. Increased vasopressin levels are associated with a lesser need for other vasopressors. Urinary output may increase, and pulmonary vascular resistance may decrease. Infusions of > 0.04 U/min may lead to adverse, likely vasoconstriction-mediated events. Because clinical studies have been relatively small, focused on physiologic end points, and because of potential adverse effects of vasopressin, clinical use of vasopressin should await a randomized controlled trial of its effects on clinical outcomes such as organ failure and mortality.

Improvement of hepatorenal syndrome with extracorporeal albumin dialysis MARS: results of a prospective, randomized, controlled clinical trial

In hepatorenal syndrome (HRS), renal insufficiency is often progressive, and the prognosis is extremely poor under standard medical therapy. The molecular adsorbent recirculating system (MARS) is a modified dialysis method using an albumin-containing dialysate that is recirculated and perfused online through charcoal and anion-exchanger columns. MARS enables the selective removal of albumin-bound substances. A prospective controlled trial was performed to determine the effect of MARS treatment on 30-day survival in patients with type I HRS at high risk (bilirubin level, > or =15 mg/dL) compared with standard treatment. Thirteen patients with cirrhosis with type I HRS were included from 1997 to 1999. All were Child's class C, with Child-Turcotte-Pugh scores of 12.4 +/- 1. 0, United Network for Organ Sharing status 2A, and total bilirubin values of 25.7 +/- 14.0 mg/dL. Eight patients were treated with the MARS method in addition to hemodiafiltration (HDF) and standard medical therapy, and 5 patients were in the control group (HDF and standard medical treatment alone). None of these patients underwent liver transplantation or received a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt or vasopressin analogues during the observation period. In the MARS group, 5.2 +/- 3.6 treatments (range, 1 to 10 treatments) were performed for 6 to 8 hours daily per patient. A significant decrease in bilirubin and creatinine levels (P <.01) and increase in serum sodium level and prothrombin activity (P <.01) were observed in the MARS group. Mortality rates were 100% in the control group at day 7 and 62.5% in the MARS group at day 7 and 75% at day 30, respectively (P <.01). We conclude that the removal of albumin-bound substances with the MARS method can contribute to the treatment of type I HRS.