Comparison of sustained hemodiafiltration with continuous venovenous hemodiafiltration for the treatment of critically ill patients with acute kidney injury

Comparison of outcomes of different modalities of renal replacement therapy in patients of acute kidney injury: a single centre prospective observational study

BACKGROUND

Acute Kidney Injury (AKI) is one of the most important causes of in-hospital mortality. The global burden of AKI continues to rise without a marked reduction in mortality. As such, the use of renal replacement therapy (RRT) forms an integral part of AKI management, especially in critically ill patients. There has been much debate over the preferred modality of RRT between continuous, intermittent and intermediate modes. While there is abundant data from Europe and North America, data from tropical countries especially the Indian subcontinent is sparse. Our study aims to provide an Indian perspective on the dialytic management of tropical AKI in a tertiary care hospital setup.

METHODS

90 patients of AKI, 30 each undergoing Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy (CRRT), Intermittent Hemodialysis (IHD) and SLED (Sustained Low-Efficiency Dialysis) were included in this prospective cohort study. At the end of 28 days of hospital stay, discharge or death, outcome measures were ascertained which included mortality, duration of hospital stay, recovery of renal function and requirement of RRT after discharge. In addition median of the net change of renal parameters was also computed across the three groups. Lastly, Kaplan Meier analysis was performed to assess the probability of survival with the use of each modality of RRT.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in the primary outcome of mortality between the three cohorts (p=0.27). However, CRRT was associated with greater renal recovery (p= 0.015) than IHD or SLED. On the other hand, SLED and IHD were associated with a greater net reduction in blood urea (p=0.004) and serum creatinine (p=0.053).

CONCLUSION

CRRT, IHD and SLED are all complementary to each other and are viable options in the treatment of AKI patients.

Archetypal sustained low-efficiency daily diafiltration (SLEDD-f) for critically ill patients requiring kidney replacement therapy: towards an adequate therapy

Sustained low-efficiency dialysis is a hybrid form of kidney replacement therapy that has gained increasing popularity as an alternative to continuous forms of kidney replacement therapy in intensive care unit settings. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the shortage of continuous kidney replacement therapy equipment led to increasing usage of sustained low-efficiency dialysis as an alternative treatment for acute kidney injury. Sustained low-efficiency dialysis is an efficient method for treating hemodynamically unstable patients and is quite widely available, making it especially useful in resource-limited settings. In this review, we aim to discuss the various attributes of sustained low-efficiency dialysis and how it is comparable to continuous kidney replacement therapy in efficacy, in terms of solute kinetics and urea clearance, and the various formulae used to compare intermittent and continuous forms of kidney replacement therapy, along with hemodynamic stability. During the COVID-19 pandemic, there was increased clotting of continuous kidney replacement therapy circuits, which led to increased use of sustained low-efficiency dialysis alone or together with extra corporeal membrane oxygenation circuits. Although sustained low-efficiency dialysis can be delivered with continuous kidney replacement therapy machines, most centers use standard hemodialysis machines or batch dialysis systems. Even though antibiotic dosing differs between continuous kidney replacement therapy and sustained low-efficiency dialysis, reports of patient survival and renal recovery are similar for continuous kidney replacement therapy and sustained low-efficiency dialysis. Health care studies indicate that sustained low-efficiency dialysis has emerged as a cost-effective alternative to continuous kidney replacement therapy. Although there is considerable data to support sustained low-efficiency dialysis treatments for critically ill adult patients with acute kidney injury, there are fewer pediatric data, even so, currently available studies support the use of sustained low-efficiency dialysis for pediatric patients, particularly in resource-limited settings.

Switching from continuous veno-venous hemodiafiltration to intermittent sustained low-efficiency daily hemodiafiltration (SLED-f) in pediatric acute kidney injury: A prospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Continuous kidney replacement therapy (CKRT) is the preferred modality in critically ill children with acute kidney injury. Upon improvement, intermittent hemodialysis is usually initiated as a step-down therapy, which can be associated with several adverse events. Hybrid therapies such as Sustained low-efficiency daily dialysis with pre-filter replacement (SLED-f) combines the slow sustained features of a continuous treatment, ensuring hemodynamic stability, with similar solute clearance along with the cost effectiveness of conventional intermittent hemodialysis. We examined the feasibility of using SLED-f as a transition step-down therapy after CKRT in critically ill pediatric patients with acute kidney injury.

METHODS

A prospective cohort study was conducted in children admitted to our tertiary care pediatric intensive care units with multi-organ dysfunction syndrome including acute kidney injury who received CKRT for management. Those patients receiving fewer than two inotropes to maintain perfusion and failed a diuretic challenge were switched to SLED-f.

RESULTS

Eleven patients underwent 105 SLED-f sessions (mean of 9.55 +/- 4.90 sessions per patient), as a part of step-down therapy from continuous hemodiafiltration. All (100%) our patients had sepsis associated acute kidney injury with multiorgan dysfunction and required ventilation. During SLED-f, urea reduction ratio was 64.1 +/- 5.3%, Kt/V was 1.13 +/- 0.1, and beta-2 microglobulin reduction was 42.5 +/-4%. Incidence of hypotension and requirement of escalation of inotropes during SLED-f was 18.18%. Filter clotting occurred twice in one patient.

CONCLUSION

SLED-f is a safe and effective modality for use as a transition therapy between CKRT and intermittent hemodialysis in children in the PICU.

Feasibility and Efficacy of Sustained Low-Efficiency Dialysis in Critically Ill Children with Severe Acute Kidney Injury

OBJECTIVES

To examine the feasibility, efficacy, and safety of sustained low-efficiency dialysis (SLED) in hemodynamically unstable, critically ill children.

METHODS

Critically ill patients, 1-18 y old with hemodynamic instability (≥ 1 vasoactive drugs) and severe acute kidney injury (AKI) requiring kidney replacement therapy (KRT) in a tertiary care pediatric intensive care unit were prospectively enrolled. Patients weighing ≤ 8 kg or with mean arterial pressure < 5^th percentile despite > 3 vasoactive drugs, were excluded. Patients underwent SLED until hemodynamically stable and off vasoactive drugs, or lack of need for dialysis. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients in whom the first session of SLED was initiated within 12 h of its indication and completed without premature (< 6 h) termination. Efficacy was estimated by ultrafiltration, urea reduction ratio (URR), and equilibrated Kt/V. Other outcomes included: changes in hemodynamic scores, circuit clotting, adverse events, and changes in indices on point-of-care ultrasonography and echocardiography.

RESULTS

Between November 2018 and March 2020, 18 patients with median age 8.6 y and vasopressor dependency index of 83.2, underwent 41 sessions of SLED. In 16 patients, SLED was feasible within 12 h of indication. No session was terminated prematurely. Ultrafiltration achieved was 4.0 ± 2.2 mL/kg/h, while URR was 57.7 ± 16.2% and eKt/V 1.17 ± 0.56. Hemodynamic scores did not change significantly. Asymptomatic hypokalemia was the chief adverse effect. Sessions were associated with a significant improvement in indices on ultrasound and left ventricular function. Fourteen patients died.

CONCLUSIONS

SLED is feasible, safe, and effective in enabling KRT in hemodynamically unstable children with severe AKI.

Prolonged Intermittent Kidney Replacement Therapy

Kidney replacement therapy (KRT) is a vital, supportive treatment for patients with critical illness and severe AKI. The optimal timing, dose, and modality of KRT have been studied extensively, but gaps in knowledge remain. With respect to modalities, continuous KRT and intermittent hemodialysis are well-established options, but prolonged intermittent KRT is becoming more prevalent worldwide, particularly in emerging countries. Compared with continuous KRT, prolonged intermittent KRT offers similar hemodynamic stability and overall cost savings, and its intermittent nature allows patients time off therapy for mobilization and procedures. When compared with intermittent hemodialysis, prolonged intermittent KRT offers more hemodynamic stability, particularly in patients who remain highly vulnerable to hypotension from aggressive ultrafiltration over a shorter duration of treatment. The prescription of prolonged intermittent KRT can be tailored to patients' progression in their recovery from critical illness, and the frequency, flow rates, and duration of treatment can be modified to avert hemodynamic instability during de-escalation of care. Dosing of prolonged intermittent KRT can be extrapolated from urea kinetics used to calculate clearance for continuous KRT and intermittent hemodialysis. Practice variations across institutions with respect to terminology, prescription, and dosing of prolonged intermittent KRT create significant challenges, especially in creating specific drug dosing recommendations during prolonged intermittent KRT. During the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, prolonged intermittent KRT was rapidly implemented to meet the KRT demands during patient surges in some of the medical centers overwhelmed by sheer volume of patients with AKI. Ideally, implementation of prolonged intermittent KRT at any institution should be conducted in a timely manner, with judicious planning and collaboration among nephrology, critical care, dialysis and intensive care nursing, and pharmacy leadership. Future analyses and clinical trials with respect to prescription and delivery of prolonged intermittent KRT and clinical outcomes will help to guide standardization of practice.

Timing of kidney replacement therapy initiation for acute kidney injury

BACKGROUND

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a common condition among patients in intensive care units (ICUs) and is associated with high numbers of deaths. Kidney replacement therapy (KRT) is a blood purification technique used to treat the most severe forms of AKI. The optimal time to initiate KRT so as to improve clinical outcomes remains uncertain. This is an update of a review first published in 2018. This review complements another Cochrane review by the same authors: Intensity of continuous renal replacement therapy for acute kidney injury.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of different timing (early and standard) of KRT initiation on death and recovery of kidney function in critically ill patients with AKI.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant's Specialised Register to 4 August 2022 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register, ClinicalTrials and LILACS to 1 August 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We included all patients with AKI in the ICU regardless of age, comparing early versus standard KRT initiation. For safety and cost outcomes, we planned to include cohort studies and non-RCTs.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted independently by two authors. The random-effects model was used, and results were reported as risk ratios(RR) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference(MD) for continuous outcomes, with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 12 studies enrolling 4880 participants. Overall, most domains were assessed as being at low or unclear risk of bias. Compared to standard treatment, early KRT initiation may have little to no difference on the risk of death at day 30 (12 studies, 4826 participants: RR 0.97,95% CI 0.87 to 1.09; I²= 29%; low certainty evidence), and death after 30 days (7 studies, 4534 participants: RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.07; I² = 6%; moderate certainty evidence). Early KRT initiation may make little or no difference to the risk of death or non-recovery of kidney function at 90 days (6 studies, 4011 participants: RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.11; I² = 66%; low certainty evidence); CIs included both benefits and harms. Low certainty evidence showed early KRT initiation may make little or no difference to the number of patients who were free from KRT (10 studies, 4717 participants: RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.94 to1.22; I² = 55%) and recovery of kidney function among survivors who were free from KRT after day 30 (10 studies, 2510 participants: RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.07; I² = 69%) compared to standard treatment. High certainty evidence showed early KRT initiation increased the risk of hypophosphataemia (1 study, 2927 participants: RR 1.80, 95% CI 1.33 to 2.44), hypotension (5 studies, 3864 participants: RR 1.54, 95% CI 1.29 to 1.85; I² = 0%), cardiac-rhythm disorder (6 studies, 4483 participants: RR 1.35, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.75; I² = 16%), and infection (5 studies, 4252 participants: RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.77; I² = 0%); however, it is uncertain whether early KRT initiation increases or reduces the number of patients who experienced any adverse events (5 studies, 3983 participants: RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.68; I² = 91%; very low certainty evidence). Moderate certainty evidence showed early KRT initiation probably reduces the number of days in hospital (7 studies, 4589 participants: MD-2.45 days, 95% CI -4.75 to -0.14; I² = 10%) and length of stay in ICU (5 studies, 4240 participants: MD -1.01 days, 95% CI -1.60 to -0.42; I² = 0%).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on mainly low to moderate certainty of the evidence, early KRT has no beneficial effect on death and may increase the recovery of kidney function. Earlier KRT probably reduces the length of ICU and hospital stay but increases the risk of adverse events. Further adequate-powered RCTs using robust and validated tools that complement clinical judgement are needed to define the optimal time of KRT in critical patients with AKI in order to improve their outcomes. The surgical AKI population should be considered in future research.

Sustained low efficiency dialysis is non-inferior to continuous renal replacement therapy in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury: A comparative meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Critically ill adults with acute kidney injury (AKI) experience considerable morbidity and mortality. This systematic review aimed to compare the effectiveness of continuous renal replacement therapy (CCRT) versus sustained low efficiency dialysis (SLED) for individuals with AKI.

METHODS

We carried out a systematic search of existing databases according to standard methods and random effects models were used to generate the overall estimate. Heterogeneity coefficient was also calculated for each outcome measure.

RESULTS

Eleven studies having 1160 patients with AKI were included in the analyses. Meta-analysis results indicated that there was no statistically significant difference between SLED versus continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) in our primary outcomes, like mortality rate (rate ratio [RR] 0.67, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.44-1.00; P = .05), renal recovery (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.83-1.42; P = .56), and dialysis dependence (RR = 1.03, 95% CI 0.69-1.53; P = .89). Also, no statistically significant difference was observed for between SLED versus CRRT in the secondary outcomes: that is, length of intensive care unit stay (mean difference -0.16, 95% CI -0.56-0.22; P = .41) and fluid removal rate (mean difference -0.24, 95% CI -0.72-0.24; P = .32). The summary mean difference indicated that there was a significant difference in the serum phosphate clearance among patients treated with SLED and CRRT (mean difference -1.17, 95% CI -1.90 to -0.44, P = .002).

CONCLUSIONS

The analysis indicate that there was no major advantage of using continuous renal replacement compared with sustained low efficiency dialysis in hemodynamically unstable AKI patients. Both modalities are equally safe and effective in treating AKI among critically ill patients.

Acute kidney injury after cardiac surgery: Sustained low efficiency compared to continuous renal replacement therapy

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Sustained low efficiency dialysis (SLED) has been introduced as a mode of renal replacement therapy (RRT) for treating severe cardiac surgery-associated acute kidney injury (CSA-AKI) at some hospitals; SLED is performed using intermittent hemodialysis (IHD) devices but differs from conventional IHD in its duration and intensity. However, there are limited data comparing SLED against more conventional continuous RRT methods. We conducted a retrospective cohort study to compare outcomes of patients with severe CSA-AKI after an institutional transition from continuous RRT to SLED.

DESIGN

Following research ethics approval, we conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients with severe CSA-AKI requiring RRT.

SETTING

Cardiac Intensive Care Unit at the Toronto General Hospital (Toronto, Ontario, Canada) from 1 January 1999 to 31 December 2011.

PATIENTS

351 consecutive patients with severe CSA-AKI requiring RRT after cardiac surgery.

INTERVENTIONS

The RRT mode was continuous RRT before 31 March 2008, and SLED after 1 April 2008.

MEASUREMENTS

The primary outcome was low-cardiac output syndrome (LCOS) and the main secondary outcome was associated costs. Propensity score matched-pairs analyses were used to compare the outcomes of patients in the continuous RRT period versus the SLED period.

MAIN RESULTS

There were 268 patients treated with continuous RRT and 83 patients treated with SLED. The SLED group had a higher weight, higher baseline hemoglobin concentration, and higher prevalence of obstructive lung disease. In propensity score match-pairs analysis (n = 148), the SLED group experienced similar odds of low cardiac output syndrome (odds ratio [OR] 1.06, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.67), death (OR 1.09, 0.94 to 1.28), acute stroke (OR 0.97, 0.83 to 1.13), myocardial infarction (OR 0.92, 0.84 to 1.01). The use of SLED was associated with a reduced cost compared to continuous RRT. The cost differential for 83 treated patients was CAD$130,974 (CAD$178,159.50 vs CAD$309,133.50) in favor of SLED.

CONCLUSIONS

An institutional transition from continuous RRT to SLED, was associated with a significant lower cost with the use of SLED, while maintaining comparable postoperative outcomes in CSA-AKI patients.

Non-pharmacological interventions for preventing clotting of extracorporeal circuits during continuous renal replacement therapy

BACKGROUND

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a common complication amongst people who are critically ill, and it is associated with an increased risk of death. For people with severe AKI, continuous kidney replacement therapy (CKRT), which is delivered over 24 hours, is needed when they become haemodynamically unstable. When CKRT is interrupted due to clotting of the extracorporeal circuit, the delivered dose is decreased and thus leading to undertreatment.

OBJECTIVES

This review assessed the efficacy of non-pharmacological measures to maintain circuit patency in CKRT.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 25 January 2021 which includes records identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal, and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) (parallel-group and cross-over studies), cluster RCTs and quasi-RCTs that examined non-pharmacological interventions to prevent clotting of extracorporeal circuits during CKRT.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three pairs of review authors independently extracted information including participants, interventions/comparators, outcomes, study methods, and risk of bias. The primary outcomes were circuit lifespan and death due to any cause at day 28. We used a random-effects model to perform quantitative synthesis (meta-analysis). We assessed risk of bias in included studies using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias. Summary estimates of effect were obtained using a random-effects model, and results were expressed as risk ratios (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous outcomes, and mean difference (MD) and 95% CI for continuous outcomes. Confidence in the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 20 studies involving 1143 randomised participants were included in the review. The methodological quality of the included studies was low, mainly due to the unclear randomisation process and blinding of the intervention. We found evidence on the following 11 comparisons: (i) continuous venovenous haemodialysis (CVVHD) versus continuous venovenous haemofiltration (CVVH) or continuous venovenous haemodiafiltration (CVVHDF); (ii) CVVHDF versus CVVH; (iii) higher blood flow (≥ 250 mL/minute) versus standard blood flow (< 250 mL/minute); (iv) AN69 membrane (AN69ST) versus other membranes; (v) pre-dilution versus post-dilution; (vi) a longer catheter (> 20 cm) placing the tip targeting the right atrium versus a shorter catheter (≤ 20 cm) placing the tip in the superior vena cava; (vii) surface-modified double-lumen catheter versus standard double-lumen catheter with identical geometry and flow design; (viii) single-site infusion anticoagulation versus double-site infusion anticoagulation; (ix) flat plate filter versus hollow fibre filter of the same membrane type; (x) a filter with a larger membrane surface area versus a smaller one; and (xi) a filter with more and shorter hollow fibre versus a standard filter of the same membrane type. Circuit lifespan was reported in 9 comparisons. Low certainty evidence indicated that CVVHDF (versus CVVH: MD 10.15 hours, 95% CI 5.15 to 15.15; 1 study, 62 circuits), pre-dilution haemofiltration (versus post-dilution haemofiltration: MD 9.34 hours, 95% CI -2.60 to 21.29; 2 studies, 47 circuits; I² = 13%), placing the tip of a longer catheter targeting the right atrium (versus placing a shorter catheter targeting the tip in the superior vena cava: MD 6.50 hours, 95% CI 1.48 to 11.52; 1 study, 420 circuits), and surface-modified double-lumen catheter (versus standard double-lumen catheter: MD 16.00 hours, 95% CI 13.49 to 18.51; 1 study, 262 circuits) may prolong circuit lifespan. However, higher blood flow may not increase circuit lifespan (versus standard blood flow: MD 0.64, 95% CI -3.37 to 4.64; 2 studies, 499 circuits; I² = 70%). More and shorter hollow fibre filters (versus standard filters: MD -5.87 hours, 95% CI -10.18 to -1.56; 1 study, 6 circuits) may reduce circuit lifespan. Death from any cause was reported in four comparisons We are uncertain whether CVVHDF versus CVVH, CVVHD versus CVVH or CVVHDF, longer versus a shorter catheter, or surface-modified double-lumen catheters versus standard double-lumen catheters reduced death due to any cause, in very low certainty evidence. Recovery of kidney function was reported in three comparisons. We are uncertain whether CVVHDF versus CVVH, CVVHDF versus CVVH, or surface-modified double-lumen catheters versus standard double-lumen catheters increased recovery of kidney function. Vascular access complications were reported in two comparisons. Low certainty evidence indicated using a longer catheter (versus a shorter catheter: RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.74) may reduce vascular access complications, however the use of surface-modified double lumen catheters versus standard double-lumen catheters may make little or no difference to vascular access complications.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The use of CVVHDF as compared with CVVH, pre-dilution haemofiltration, a longer catheter, and surface-modified double-lumen catheter may be useful in prolonging the circuit lifespan, while higher blood flow and more and shorter hollow fibre filter may reduce circuit life. The Overall, the certainty of evidence was assessed to be low to very low due to the small sample size of the included studies. Data from future rigorous and transparent research are much needed in order to fully understand the effects of non-pharmacological interventions in preventing circuit coagulation amongst people with AKI receiving CKRT.

Short-term prognosis and influencing factors of patients with acute kidney injury treated with prolonged intermittent renal replacement therapy

BACKGROUND

Studies assessing prognosis after prolonged intermittent renal replacement therapy (PIRRT) for acute kidney injury (AKI) are scarce.

AIM

To assess the impact of PIRRT on AKI and factors associated with short-term prognosis.

METHODS

In this retrospective nested case-control study, AKI patients administered PIRRT in Shanghai General Hospital from 01/2012 to 10/2018 were assigned to the 30-day survivor and death groups. Surviving patients were further divided into the kidney recovery and non-recovery groups at 30 and 90 days post-discharge, respectively. Propensity score matching was performed.

RESULTS

Totally 576 patients were included in the non-matched study population, mortality and kidney recovery rates were 51.7% and 33.4%, respectively. After propensity score matching, there were 250 patients in each of the death and survival groups. Low PIRRT frequency (OR = 2.165, 95% CI = 1.178-3.978), infection (OR = 0.447, 95% CI = 0.251-0.795), number of damaged vital organs (OR = 0.478, 95% CI = 0.346-0.661), sodium (OR = 0.958, 95% CI = 0.928-0.988), total protein (OR = 1.047, 95% CI = 1.022-1.072), pre-dialysis thrombin time (TT; OR = 0.959, 95% CI = 0.936-0.983), pre-discharge glomerular filtration rate (GFR; OR = 1.024, 95% CI = 1.017-1.031) and admission ward [reference: renal ward; intensive care unit (OR = 0.042, 95% CI = 0.008-0.211); surgery (OR = 0.092, 95% CI = 0.018-0.465); medical (OR = 0.049, 95% C% CI = 0.009-0.259); other (OR = 0.097, 95% CI = 0.016-0.572)] independently predicted 30-day mortality. Peripherally inserted central catheter (OR = 13.970, 95% CI = 1.439-135.589), urea nitrogen (OR = 0.961, 95% CI = 0.933-0.990) and pre-discharge GFR (OR = 1.102, 95% CI = 1.067-1.137) independently predicted 30-day kidney recovery. Pre-dialysis Scr (OR = 0.997, 95% CI = 0.995-0.999), urea nitrogen (OR = 0.948, 95% CI = 0.912-0.986) and pre-discharge GFR (OR = 1.137 95% CI = 1.088-1.189) independently predicted 90-day kidney recovery.

CONCLUSIONS

PIRRT improves survival and kidney function recovery in AKI patients. In patients with previous GFR ≥ 30 mL/(min-1.73 m² ) and no prior maintenance dialysis, PIRRT at 3-5 sessions/week might be appropriate.

Comparing Renal Replacement Therapy Modalities in Critically Ill Patients With Acute Kidney Injury: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVES

To compare different modalities of renal replacement therapy in critically ill adults with acute kidney injury.

DATA SOURCES

We searched Medline, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception to 25 May, 2020. We included randomized controlled trials comparing the efficacy and safety of different renal replacement therapy modalities in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury.

STUDY SELECTION

Ten reviewers (working in pairs) independently screened studies for eligibility, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias.

DATA EXTRACTION

We performed random-effects frequentist network meta-analyses and used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach to assess certainty of evidence. The primary analysis was a four-node analysis: continuous renal replacement therapy, intermittent hemodialysis, slow efficiency extended dialysis, and peritoneal dialysis. The secondary analysis subdivided these four nodes into nine nodes including continuous veno-venous hemofiltration, continuous veno-venous hemodialysis, continuous veno-venous hemodiafiltration, continuous arterio-venous hemodiafiltration, intermittent hemodialysis, intermittent hemodialysis with hemofiltration, slow efficiency extended dialysis, slow efficiency extended dialysis with hemofiltration, and peritoneal dialysis. We set the minimal important difference threshold for mortality as 2.5% (relative difference, 0.04).

DATA SYNTHESIS

Thirty randomized controlled trials (n = 3,774 patients) proved eligible. There may be no difference in mortality between continuous renal replacement therapy and intermittent hemodialysis (relative risk, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.93-1.18; low certainty), whereas continuous renal replacement therapy demonstrated a possible increase in mortality compared with slow efficiency extended dialysis (relative risk, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.85-1.33; low certainty) and peritoneal dialysis (relative risk, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.92-1.49; low certainty). Continuous renal replacement therapy may increase renal recovery compared with intermittent hemodialysis (relative risk, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.91-1.45; low certainty), whereas both continuous renal replacement therapy and intermittent hemodialysis may be worse for renal recovery compared with slow efficiency extended dialysis and peritoneal dialysis (low certainty). Peritoneal dialysis was probably associated with the shortest duration of renal support and length of ICU stay compared with other interventions (low certainty for most comparisons). Slow efficiency extended dialysis may be associated with shortest length of hospital stay (low or moderate certainty for all comparisons) and days of mechanical ventilation (low certainty for all comparisons) compared with other interventions. There was no difference between continuous renal replacement therapy and intermittent hemodialysis in terms of hypotension (relative risk, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.72-1.16; moderate certainty) or other complications of therapy, but an increased risk of hypotension and bleeding was seen with both modalities compared with peritoneal dialysis (low or moderate certainty). Complications of slow efficiency extended dialysis were not sufficiently reported to inform comparisons.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this network meta-analysis suggest there is no difference in mortality between continuous renal replacement therapy and intermittent hemodialysis although continuous renal replacement therapy may increases renal recovery compared with intermittent hemodialysis. Slow efficiency extended dialysis with hemofiltration may be the most effective intervention at reducing mortality. Peritoneal dialysis is associated with good efficacy, and the least number of complications however may not be practical in all settings. Importantly, all conclusions are based on very low to moderate certainty evidence, limited by imprecision. At the very least, ICU clinicians should feel comfortable that the differences between continuous renal replacement therapy, intermittent hemodialysis, slow efficiency extended dialysis, and, where clinically appropriate, peritoneal dialysis are likely small, and any of these modalities is a reasonable option to employ in critically ill patients.

Intermittent Convective Therapies in Patients with Acute Kidney Injury: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

In critically ill patients requiring intermittent renal replacement therapy (RRT), the benefits of convective versus diffusive clearance remain uncertain. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the safety, clinical efficacy, and clearance efficiency of hemofiltration (HF) and hemodiafiltration (HDF) compared to hemodialysis (HD) in patients with acute kidney injury (AKI) receiving intermittent RRT.

METHOD

We searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, and PROSPERO. We included clinical trials and observational studies that reported the use of intermittent HF or HDF in adult patients with AKI. The following outcomes were included: mortality, renal recovery, clearance efficacy, intradialytic hemodynamic stability, circuit loss, and inflammation modulation.

RESULTS

A total of 3,169 studies were retrieved and screened. Four randomized controlled trials and 4 observational studies were included (n: 615 patients). Compared with conventional HD, intermittent convective therapies had no effect on in-hospital mortality (relative risk, 1.23; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.76-1.99), renal recovery at 30 days (RR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.82-1.16), time-to-renal recovery (mean difference [MD], 0.77; 95% CI, -6.56 to 8.10), and number of dialysis sessions until renal recovery (MD, -1.34; 95% CI, -3.39 to 0.72). The overall quality of included studies was low, and dialysis parameters were suboptimal for all included studies.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis suggests that there is no significant difference in short-term mortality and renal recovery in patients with severe AKI when treated with intermittent HF or HDF compared to conventional HD. This systematic review emphasizes the need for further trials evaluating optimal convective parameters in AKI patients treated with intermittent dialysis.

Renal replacement therapy modality in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury - A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

PURPOSE

This network meta-analysis aims to compare the efficacy and safety of various renal replacement therapy (RRT) modalities in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury (AKI).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched the electronic databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different RRT modalities, including continuous RRT, intermittent RRT, hybrid RRT, and peritoneal dialysis (PD), in critically ill patients with AKI through July 26, 2020. The primary outcomes were renal recovery and short-term mortality. The study protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020188115).

RESULTS

Twenty-three studies were included. No difference in the renal recovery or short-term mortality was observed among the four RRT modalities (low certainty). The four RRT modalities had similar effects on the incidence of infectious complications (low certainty). PD was associated with less fluid removal volume and lower incidence of hypotension compared with the extracorporeal modalities, yet no difference in the two outcomes was identified among the extracorporeal modalities (very low to moderate certainty).

CONCLUSIONS

No superiority of one particular RRT modality over another in terms of renal recovery and short-term mortality in critically ill patients with AKI. PD exhibited worse fluid removal and better safety in the prevention of hypotension than the extracorporeal modalities.

Renal replacement therapy in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury: 2020 nephrologist's perspective

Renal replacement therapies (RRT) as support for acute kidney injury in critically ill patients have become a routine and essential practice in their management, resulting in the widespread use of various techniques among these patients, such as intermittent hemodialysis (IHD), extended hemodialysis and continuous RRT (CRRT). In this review we aim to summarize current evidence of indication, choice of modality, timing of initiation, dosing and technical aspects of RRT. We carried out a narrative review based on guidelines, consensus documents by main working groups and the latest relevant clinical trials on RRT in the critically ill. We did not find enough evidence of any RRT modality having superior benefits in terms of patient survival, length of intensive care unit/hospital stay or renal outcomes among critically ill patients, in spite of optimization of clinical indication, modality, timing of initiation and intensity of initial therapy. This is still a controverted matter, since only early start of high-flux CRRT has been proven beneficial over IHD among hemodynamically unstable postoperative patients. Our objective is to portrait current RRT practices in multidisciplinary management of critically ill patients by intensive care and nephrology professionals. Implication of a nephrologist in the assessment of hemodynamic status, coexisting medical conditions, renal outcome expectations and management of resources could potentially have benefits at the time of RRT selection and troubleshooting.

Effect of renal replacement therapy modalities on renal recovery and mortality for acute kidney injury: A PRISMA-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis

Previous investigations showed inconsistent results for comparison in renal recovery, in-hospital, and in-intensive care unit (ICU) mortalities between acute kidney injury (AKI) patients treated with continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) and some kinds of intermittent renal replacement therapies (IRRTs). We systematically searched for articles published in the databases (PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, Medline, and Google Scholar) until June 2019. We made all statistical analysis using STATA 12.0 software. In the present meta-analysis, relative risks with 95% confidence intervals were calculated for binary outcomes (renal recovery status or mortality). The present study indicated no significant differences in renal recovery, in-hospital mortality, and in-ICU mortality between AKI patients given CRRT and those given sustained low-efficiency dialysis (SLED). Additionally, the study showed no significant difference in in-hospital mortality between AKI patients given CRRT and those given intermittent hemodialysis (IHD), whereas elevated in-ICU mortality was detected in AKI patients given CRRT, compared to those given IHD. The three modalities (CRRT, IHD, and SLED) have their own advantages and disadvantages. More rigorous trials design with large cohort should be made to explore the differences in renal recovery, in-hospital, and in-ICU mortalities between different kinds of RRTs.

Pediatric Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy (PCRRT) expert committee recommendation on prescribing prolonged intermittent renal replacement therapy (PIRRT) in critically ill children

INTRODUCTION

Recently, prolonged intermittent renal replacement therapies (PIRRT) have emerged as cost-effective alternatives to conventional CRRT and their use in the pediatric population has started to become more prominent. However, there is a lack of consensus guidelines on the use of PIRRT in pediatric patients in an intensive care setting.

METHODS

A literature search was performed on PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Google Scholar in conjunction with medical librarians from both India and the Cleveland Clinic hospital system to find relevant articles. The Pediatric Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy workgroup analyzed all articles for relevancy, proposed recommendations, and graded each recommendation for their strength of evidence.

RESULTS

Of the 60 studies eligible for review, the workgroup considered data from 37 studies to formulate guidelines for the use of PIRRT in children. The guidelines focused on the definition, indications, machines, and prescription of PIRRT.

CONCLUSION

Although the literature on the use of PIRRT in children is limited, the current studies give credence to their benefits and these expert recommendations are a valuable first step in the continued study of PIRRT in the pediatric population.

Renal Replacement Therapy Modality in the ICU and Renal Recovery at Hospital Discharge

OBJECTIVES

Acute kidney injury requiring renal replacement therapy is a major concern in ICUs. Initial renal replacement therapy modality, continuous renal replacement therapy or intermittent hemodialysis, may impact renal recovery. The aim of this study was to assess the influence of initial renal replacement therapy modality on renal recovery at hospital discharge.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study of all ICU stays from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2013, with a "renal replacement therapy for acute kidney injury" code using the French hospital discharge database.

SETTING

Two hundred ninety-one ICUs in France.

PATIENTS

A total of 1,031,120 stays: 58,635 with renal replacement therapy for acute kidney injury and 25,750 included in the main analysis.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS MAIN RESULTS

PPatients alive at hospital discharge were grouped according to initial modality (continuous renal replacement therapy or intermittent hemodialysis) and included in the main analysis to identify predictors of renal recovery. Renal recovery was defined as greater than 3 days without renal replacement therapy before hospital discharge. The main analysis was a hierarchical logistic regression analysis including patient demographics, comorbidities, and severity variables, as well as center characteristics. Three sensitivity analyses were performed. Overall mortality was 56.1%, and overall renal recovery was 86.2%. Intermittent hemodialysis was associated with a lower likelihood of recovery at hospital discharge; odds ratio, 0.910 (95% CI, 0.834-0.992) p value equals to 0.0327. Results were consistent across all sensitivity analyses with odds/hazards ratios ranging from 0.883 to 0.958.

CONCLUSIONS

In this large retrospective study, intermittent hemodialysis as an initial modality was associated with lower renal recovery at hospital discharge among patients with acute kidney injury, although the difference seems somewhat clinically limited.

Timing of renal replacement therapy initiation for acute kidney injury

BACKGROUND

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a common condition among patients in intensive care units (ICUs), and is associated with high death. Renal replacement therapy (RRT) is a blood purification technique used to treat the most severe forms of AKI. The optimal time to initiate RRT so as to improve clinical outcomes remains uncertain.This review complements another Cochrane review by the same authors: Intensity of continuous renal replacement therapy for acute kidney injury.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of different timing (early and standard) of RRT initiation on death and recovery of kidney function in critically ill patients with AKI.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant's Specialised Register to 23 August 2018 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov. We also searched LILACS to 11 September 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We included all patients with AKI in ICU regardless of age, comparing early versus standard RRT initiation. For safety and cost outcomes we planned to include cohort studies and non-RCTs.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted independently by two authors. The random-effects model was used and results were reported as risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences (MD) for continuous outcomes, with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

We included five studies enrolling 1084 participants. Overall, most domains were assessed as being at low or unclear risk of bias. Compared to standard treatment, early initiation may reduce the risk of death at day 30, although the 95% CI does not rule out an increased risk (5 studies, 1084 participants: RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.13; I2 = 52%; low certainty evidence); and probably reduces the death after 30 days post randomisation (4 studies, 1056 participants: RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.10; I2= 29%; moderate certainty evidence); however in both results the CIs included a reduction and an increase of death. Earlier start may reduce the risk of death or non-recovery kidney function (5 studies, 1076 participants: RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.05; I2= 54%; low certainty evidence). Early strategy may increase the number of patients who were free of RRT after RRT discontinuation (5 studies, 1084 participants: RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.40; I2= 58%; low certainty evidence) and probably slightly increases the recovery of kidney function among survivors who discontinued RRT after day 30 (5 studies, 572 participants: RR 1.03, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.06; I2= 0%; moderate certainty evidence) compared to standard; however the lower limit of CI includes the null effect. Early RRT initiation increased the number of patients who experienced adverse events (4 studies, 899 participants: RR 1.10, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.16; I2 = 0%; high certainty evidence). Compared to standard, earlier RRT start may reduce the number of days in ICU (4 studies, 1056 participants: MD -1.78 days, 95% CI -3.70 to 0.13; I2 = 90%; low certainty evidence), but the CI included benefit and harm.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based mainly on low quality of evidence identified, early RRT may reduce the risk of death and may improve the recovery of kidney function in critically patients with AKI, however the 95% CI indicates that early RRT might worsen these outcomes. There was an increased risk of adverse events with early RRT. Further adequate-powered RCTs using appropriate criteria to define the optimal time of RRT are needed to reduce the imprecision of the results.

The Japanese clinical practice guideline for acute kidney injury 2016

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a syndrome which has a broad range of etiologic factors depending on different clinical settings. Because AKI has significant impacts on prognosis in any clinical settings, early detection and intervention is necessary to improve the outcomes of AKI patients. This clinical guideline for AKI was developed by a multidisciplinary approach with nephrology, intensive care medicine, blood purification, and pediatrics. Of note, clinical practice for AKI management which was widely performed in Japan was also evaluated with comprehensive literature search.

The Japanese Clinical Practice Guideline for acute kidney injury 2016

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a syndrome which has a broad range of etiologic factors depending on different clinical settings. Because AKI has significant impacts on prognosis in any clinical settings, early detection and intervention are necessary to improve the outcomes of AKI patients. This clinical guideline for AKI was developed by a multidisciplinary approach with nephrology, intensive care medicine, blood purification, and pediatrics. Of note, clinical practice for AKI management which was widely performed in Japan was also evaluated with comprehensive literature search.

Prolonged intermittent renal replacement therapy in children

Wide ranges of age and weight in pediatric patients makes renal replacement therapy (RRT) in acute kidney injury (AKI) challenging, particularly in the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU), wherein children are often hemodynamically unstable. Standard hemodialysis (HD) is difficult in this group of children and continuous veno-venous hemofiltration/dialysis (CVVH/D) has been the accepted modality in the developed world. Unfortunately, due to cost constraints, CVVH/D is often not available and peritoneal dialysis (PD) remains the common mode of RRT in resource-poor facilities. Acute PD has its drawbacks, and intermittent HD (IHD) done slowly over a prolonged period has been explored as an alternative. Various modes of slow sustained IHD have been described in the literature with the recently introduced term prolonged intermittent RRT (PIRRT) serving as an umbrella terminology for all of these modes. PIRRT has been widely accepted in adults with studies showing it to be as effective as CVVH/D but with an added advantage of being more cost-effective. Pediatric data, though scanty, has been promising. In this current review, we elaborate on the practical aspects of undertaking PIRRT in children as well as summarize its current status.

On-line hemodiafiltration did not induce an overproduction of oxidative stress and inflammatory cytokines in intensive care unit-acute kidney injury

Background

Though on-line intermittent hemodiafiltration (OL-IHDF) is a routine therapy for chronic dialysis patients, it is not yet widespread used in critically ill patients. This study was undergone to evaluate efficiency and tolerance of OL-IHDF and to appreciate inflammatory consequences of its use in intensive care unit (ICU)-acute kidney injury (AKI) patients.

Methods

In this prospective cohort study conducted in a medical academic ICU in France, 30 AKI patients who underwent OL-IHDF were included. OL-HDF used an ultrapure water production: AQ 1250 line with double reverse osmosis, a generator 5008 with a 1.8m² dialyzer with Polysulfone membrane (Fresenius Medical Care). Tolerance and efficiency of OL-IHDF were evaluated as well as its inflammatory risk by the measurement of plasma concentrations of proinflammatory (Interleukin 6, IL1β, IL8, Interferon γ) and anti-inflammatory (IL4, IL10) cytokines, Epidermal growth factor (EGF), Vascular Endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and Macrophage Chemoattractive Protein-1 (MCP-1) before and after sessions.

Results

Intradialytic hypotensive events were observed during 27/203 OL-IHDF sessions accounting for a mal-tolerated session’s rate at 13.3%. Mean delivered urea Kt/V per session was 1.12 ± 0.27 with a percentage of reduction for urea, creatinine, β2-microglobulin and cystatine C at 61.6 ± 8.8%, 55.3 ± 6.7%, 51.5 ± 8.7% and 44.5 ± 9.8% respectively. Production of superoxide anion by leukocytes, mean levels of pro- and anti-inflammatory cytokines and plasmatic concentrations of EGF, VEGF and MCP-1 did not differ before and after OL-IHDF sessions. We observed however a significant decrease of mean TNFα plasmatic concentrations from 8.2 ± 5.8 to 4.8 ± 3.5 pg/ml at the end of OL-IHDF.

Conclusions

OL-IHDF was not associated with an increase in pro and anti-inflammatory cytokines, oxidative stress or EGF, VEGF and MCP-1 in AKI patients and seems therefore a secure and feasible modality in ICUs.

Effect of sustained low efficient dialysis versus continuous renal replacement therapy on renal recovery after acute kidney injury in the intensive care unit: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Critically ill adults with acute kidney injury (AKI) experience considerable morbidity and mortality. Controversy remains regarding the optimal renal replacement intervention for these patients. Our systematic review aimed to determine the effect(s) of sustained low-efficiency dialysis (SLED) compared with continuous renal replacement (CRRT) therapy on relevant patient outcomes. A systematic search of Medline, Embase, CINAHL and the Cochrane Library was conducted. Identified citations were screened independently in duplicate for relevance, and the methodological quality of included studies was evaluated. Data were extracted on study, patient and intervention characteristics and relevant clinical outcomes. Results were pooled using inverse variance fixed and random effects meta-analysis. A total of 1564 patients from 18 studies were included. Meta-analysis results indicated no statistically significant difference in our primary outcome, overall proportion of renal recovery (risk ratio (RR) 0.87, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.63-1.20, I2 = 66%). No significant difference was observed for the secondary outcome of time to renal recovery (mean difference 1.33, 95% CI 0.23-2.88, I2 = 0%). Statistically, SLED was marginally favoured over CRRT for the secondary outcome of mortality (RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.02-1.43, I2 = 47%); however, this diminished when sensitivity analysis of only randomized controlled trials was conducted (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.00-1.57, I2 = 0%). There appears to be no clear for advantage continuous renal replacement in the hemodynamically unstable patient. Currently, both modalities are safe and effective means of treating AKI in the critically ill adult.

Feasibility of sustained low efficiency dialysis in critically sick pediatric patients: A multicentric retrospective study

INTRODUCTION

Sustained low-efficiency dialysis (SLED) has emerged as a cost effective alternative to Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy in the management of hemodynamically unstable adult patients with acute kidney injury. The objective of the study was to document the SLED practices in these centers, and to look at the feasibility, and tolerability of SLED in critically sick pediatric patients.

METHODS

It was a retrospective record review from January 2010 to June 2016 done in four tertiary pediatric nephrology centers in India. All pediatric patients undergoing SLED in the collaborating centers were included in the study. Basic demographic data, prescription parameters and outcomes of patients were recorded.

FINDINGS

During the study period a total of 68 children received 211 sessions of SLED. PRISM score at admission in patients was 13.33 ± 9.15. Fifty-seven patients were ventilated (84%). Most of the patients had one or more organ system involved in addition to renal (n = 64; 94%). Heparin free sessions were achievable in 153 sessions (72%). Out of 211 sessions, 148 sessions were on at least one inotrope (70.1%). Overall premature terminations had to be done in 27 sessions (13% of all sessions), out of which 7 sessions had to be terminated due to circuit clotting (3.3%). Intradialytic hypotension or need for inotrope escalation was seen in 31 (15%) sessions but termination of the session for drop in BP was required in only 20 (9%) sessions.

CONCLUSION

SLED is a feasible method of providing renal replacement in critically ill pediatric patients.

Clinical study of blood purification therapy in critical care in Japan: results from the survey research of the Japan Society for Blood Purification in Critical Care in 2013

To clarify the clinical status of blood purification therapy (BPT) in critical care in Japan, we conducted a cohort study using data from a nationwide registry of the Japan Society for Blood Purification in Critical Care in 2013. We enrolled 2227 patients treated with BPT (female, 39.1%; mean age, 65.5 ± 12.1 years) in the intensive care units of 43 facilities. Patient characteristics, modes of BPT, and survival rate for each disease were investigated. In total, BPT was performed 3053 times. Continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) (57.9%) was the most common mode of BPT, followed by intermittent renal replacement therapy (20.2%) and direct hemoperfusion with the polymyxin B-immobilized fiber column (PMX-DHP) (11.5%). Nafamostat mesilate (84.9%) was most frequently used as the anticoagulant. The 28-day survival rate was 56.8% in all patients. The most common mode for acute kidney injury (AKI) and multiple organ failure was CRRT, while PMX-DHP and CRRT were most common for sepsis. There was no significant difference in survival rates among AKI stages 1-3. Survival rate (38.3%) was significantly lower in patients with acute lung injury (ALI) than in those with multiple organ failure (41.8%) and those with sepsis (46.6%). Multivariate regression analysis revealed that the APACHE II score and the presence of acute ALI and acute hepatic failure were significantly associated with death. This large-scale cohort study showed the clinical status of BPT in Japan. Further investigations are required to clarify the efficacy of BPT for critically ill patients.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of renal replacement therapy modalities for acute kidney injury in the intensive care unit

PURPOSE

To compare clinical outcomes among critically ill adults with acute kidney injury (AKI) treated with continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT), intermittent hemodialysis (IHD) or sustained low efficiency dialysis (SLED).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We completed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies published in 2015 or earlier using MEDLINE®, EMBASE®, Cochrane databases and grey literature. Eligible studies included randomized clinical trials (RCTs) or prospective cohort studies comparing outcomes of mortality, dialysis dependence or length of stay among critically ill adults receiving CRRT, IHD or SLED to treat AKI. Mortality and dialysis dependence from RCTs were pooled using meta-analytic techniques. Length of stay from RCTs and results from prospective cohort studies were described qualitatively.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies were eligible. RRT modality was not associated with in-hospital mortality (CRRT vs IHD: RR 1.00 [95% CI, 0.92-1.09], CRRT vs SLED: RR 1.23 [95% CI, 1.00-1.51]) or dialysis dependence (CRRT vs IHD: RR 0.90 [95% CI, 0.59-1.38], CRRT vs SLED: RR 1.15 [95% CI, 0.67-1.99]).

CONCLUSIONS

We did not find a definitive advantage for any RRT modality on short-term patient or kidney survival. Well-designed, adequately-powered trials are needed to better define the role of RRT modalities for treatment of critically ill patients with AKI.

High-volume haemofiltration for sepsis in adults

BACKGROUND

Severe sepsis and septic shock are leading causes of death in the intensive care unit (ICU), despite advances in the treatment of patients with severe sepsis and septic shock, including early recognition, appropriate treatment with antibiotics and support of organs that may have been affected by the illness. High-volume haemofiltration (HVHF) is a blood purification technique that may improve outcomes in severe sepsis or septic shock. The technique of HVHF has evolved from renal replacement therapies used in the ICU to treat critically ill patients with acute kidney injury (AKI). This review was first published in 2013 and was updated in 2016.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate whether HVHF improves outcomes in critically ill adults admitted to the intensive care unit with severe sepsis or septic shock. The primary outcome of this systematic review is patient mortality; secondary outcomes include duration of stay, severity of organ dysfunction and adverse events.

SEARCH METHODS

For this updated version, we extended searches of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, Latin American Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS), Web of Science and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) to 31 December 2015. The original search was performed in 2011. We also searched trials registers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomized trials comparing HVHF or high-volume haemodiafiltration versus standard or usual dialysis therapy, as well as RCTs and quasi-randomized trials comparing HVHF or high-volume haemodiafiltration versus no similar dialysis therapy. These studies involved adults treated in critical care units.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors independently extracted data and assessed trial quality. We sought additional information from trialists as required.

MAIN RESULTS

We included four randomized trials involving 200 participants. Owing to small numbers of studies and participants, it was not possible to combine data for all outcomes. Two trials reported 28-day mortality, and one trial reported hospital mortality; in the third trial, the number of deaths stated did not match the quoted mortality rates. The pooled risk ratio (95% confidence interval) for 28-day mortality associated with HVHF was 0.89 (0.60 to 1.32, two trials, 146 participants, low-quality evidence). One study (137 participants, low-quality evidence) reported length of stay in the ICU. Two trials (170 participants, low-quality evidence) reported organ dysfunction, but we could not pool results owing to reporting differences. Three studies (189 participants, low-quality evidence) reported on haemodynamic changes, but we could not pool results owing to reporting differences. Investigators reported no adverse events. Overall, the included studies had low risk of bias.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Investigators reported no adverse effects of HVHF (low-quality evidence). The results of this meta-analysis show that very few studies have been conducted to investigate the use of HVHF in critically ill patients with severe sepsis or septic shock (four studies, 201 participants, low-quality evidence). Researchers should consider additional randomized controlled trials that are large and multi-centred and have clinically relevant outcome measures. The cost-effectiveness of HVHF should also be studied. .

Prolonged Intermittent Renal Replacement Therapy

Prolonged intermittent renal replacement therapy (PIRRT) is becoming an increasingly popular alternative to continuous renal replacement therapy in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury. There are significant practice variations in the provision of PIRRT across institutions, with respect to prescription, technology, and delivery of therapy. Clinical trials have generally demonstrated that PIRRT is non-inferior to continuous renal replacement therapy regarding patient outcomes. PIRRT offers cost-effective renal replacement therapy along with other advantages such as early patient mobilization and decreased nursing time. However, due to lack of standardization of the procedure, PIRRT still poses significant challenges, especially pertaining to appropriate drug dosing. Future guidelines and clinical trials should work toward developing consensus definitions for PIRRT and ensure optimal delivery of therapy.

Modality of RRT and Recovery of Kidney Function after AKI in Patients Surviving to Hospital Discharge

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Observational evidence has suggested that RRT modality may affect recovery after AKI. It is unclear whether initial choice of intermittent hemodialysis or continuous RRT affects renal recovery, survival, or development of ESRD in critically ill patients when modality choice is made primarily on hemodynamics.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

We performed a retrospective cohort study examining adults (≥18 years old) admitted to intensive care units from 2000 to 2008 who received RRT for AKI and survived to hospital discharge or 90 days. We analyzed renal recovery (alive and not requiring RRT) and reasons for nonrecovery (death or ESRD) at 90 and 365 days. Conditional multivariable logistic regression was used to assess differences in renal recovery at 90 and 365 days between continuous RRT and intermittent hemodialysis. Models were stratified by propensity for continuous RRT and adjusted for age and reference creatinine.

RESULTS

Of 4738 patients with Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes stage 3 AKI, 1338 (28.2%) received RRT, and 638 (47.7%) survived to hospital discharge (353 intermittent hemodialysis and 285 continuous RRT). Recovery from AKI was lower for intermittent hemodialysis versus continuous RRT at 90 days (66.6% intermittent hemodialysis versus 75.4% continuous RRT; P=0.02) but similar at 365 days (54.1% intermittent hemodialysis versus 59.6% continuous RRT; P=0.17). In multivariable analysis, there was no difference in odds of recovery at 90 or 365 days for patients initially treated with continuous RRT versus intermittent hemodialysis (90 days: odds ratio, 1.19; 95% confidence interval, 0.91 to 1.55; P=0.20; 365 days: odds ratio, 0.93; 95% confidence interval, 0.72 to 1.2; P=0.55).

CONCLUSIONS

We found no significant difference in hazards for nonrecovery or reasons for nonrecovery (mortality or ESRD) with intermittent hemodialysis versus continuous RRT. These results suggest that, when initial RRT modality is chosen primarily on hemodynamics, renal recovery and clinical outcomes in survivors are similar between intermittent hemodialysis and continuous RRT.

Outcomes of sustained low efficiency dialysis versus continuous renal replacement therapy in critically ill adults with acute kidney injury: a cohort study

Background

Sustained low efficiency dialysis (SLED) is increasingly used as a renal replacement modality in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury (AKI) and hemodynamic instability. SLED may reduce the hemodynamic perturbations of intermittent hemodialysis, while obviating the resource demands of CRRT. Although SLED is being increasingly used, few studies have evaluated its impact on clinical outcomes.

Methods

We conducted a cohort study comparing SLED (target 8 h/session, blood flow 200 mL/min, predominantly without anticoagulation) to CRRT in four ICUs at an academic medical centre. The primary outcome was mortality 30 days after RRT initiation, adjusted for demographics, comorbidity, baseline kidney function, and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score. Secondary outcomes were persistent RRT dependence at 30 days and early clinical deterioration, defined as a rise in SOFA score or death 48 h after starting RRT.

Results

We identified 158 patients who initiated treatment with CRRT and 74 with SLED. Mortality at 30 days was 54 % and 61 % among SLED- and CRRT-treated patients, respectively [adjusted odds ratio (OR) 1.07, 95 % CI 0.56–2.03, as compared with CRRT]. Among SLED recipients, the risk of RRT dependence at 30 days (adjusted OR 1.36, 95 % CI 0.51–3.57) and early clinical deterioration (adjusted OR 0.73, 95 % CI 0.40–1.34) were not different as compared to patients who initiated CRRT.

Conclusions

Notwithstanding the limitations of this small non-randomized study, we found similar clinical outcomes for patients treated with SLED and CRRT. While we await the completion of a trial that will definitively assess the non-inferiority of SLED as compared to CRRT, SLED appears to be an acceptable alternative form of renal support in hemodynamically unstable patients with AKI.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12882-015-0123-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Extended Daily Dialysis Versus Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy for Acute Kidney Injury: A Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Extended daily dialysis (EDD) has been suggested as an effective renal replacement therapy for acute kidney injury. However, results from studies comparing EDD to continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) are inconclusive.

STUDY DESIGN

A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed by searching in MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, and a Chinese database (SinsoMed).

SETTING & POPULATION

Patients with acute kidney injury.

SELECTION CRITERIA FOR STUDIES

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies were included. EDD was defined as extended hemodialysis or hemodiafiltration for more than 6 but less than 24 hours per session using a conventional hemodialysis machine.

INTERVENTION

Renal replacement therapy comparing EDD with CRRT.

OUTCOMES

Mortality, kidney recovery, and fluid removal.

RESULTS

We included 17 studies from 2000 to 2014: 7 RCTs and 10 observational studies involving 533 and 675 patients, respectively. Meta-analysis of RCTs showed no difference in mortality rates between EDD and CRRT (relative risk, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.74-1.11; P=0.3). However, EDD was associated with lower mortality risk compared with CRRT in observational studies (relative risk, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.74-1.00; P=0.05). There was no evidence of heterogeneity in RCTs (I(2)=0%) or observational studies (I(2)=15%). In both RCTs and observational studies, there were no significant differences in recovery of kidney function, fluid removal, or days in the intensive care unit, and EDD showed similar biochemical efficacy to CRRT during treatment (serum urea, serum creatinine, and serum phosphate).

LIMITATIONS

The survival benefit of EDD is dependent on only observational studies and might have been affected by allocation or selection bias.

CONCLUSIONS

EDD is associated with similar outcomes to CRRT in RCTs. The finding that EDD is associated with a lower mortality rate relies on data from observational studies, which are potentially subject to allocation or selection bias, making further high-quality RCTs desirable.

The lower limit of intensity to control uremia during continuous renal replacement therapy

Introduction

The recommended lower limit of intensity during continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) is 20 or 25 mL/kg/h. However, limited information is available to support this threshold. We aimed to evaluate the impact of different intensities of CRRT on the clearance of creatinine and urea in critically ill patients with severe acute kidney injury (AKI).

Methods

This is a multicenter retrospective study conducted in 14 Japanese ICUs in 12 centers. All patients older than 18 years and treated with CRRT due to AKI were eligible. We evaluated the effect of CRRT intensity by two different definitions: daily intensity (the mean intensity over each 24-h period) and average intensity (the mean of daily intensity during the period while CRRT was performed). To study the effect of different CRRT intensity on clearance of urea and creatinine, all patients/daily observations were arbitrarily allocated to one of 4 groups based on the average intensity and daily intensity: <10, 10–15, 15–20, and >20 mL/kg/h.

Results

Total 316 patients were included and divided into the four groups according to average CRRT intensity. The groups comprised 64 (20.3%), 138 (43.7%), 68 (21.5%), and 46 patients (14.6%), respectively. Decreases in creatinine and urea increased as the average intensity increased over the first 7 days of CRRT. The relative changes of serum creatinine and urea levels remained close to 1 over the 7 days in the “<10” group. Total 1,101 daily observations were included and divided into the four groups according to daily CRRT intensity. The groups comprised 254 (23.1%), 470 (42.7%), 239 (21.7%), and 138 observations (12.5%), respectively. Creatinine and urea increased (negative daily change) only in the “<10” group and decreased with the increasing daily intensity in the other groups.

Conclusions

The lower limit of delivered intensity to control uremia during CRRT was approximately between 10 and 15 mL/kg/h in our cohort. A prescribed intensity of approximately 15 mL/kg/h might be adequate to control uremia for patients with severe AKI in the ICU. However, considering the limitations due to the retrospective nature of this study, prospective studies are required to confirm our findings.

Mortality risk factors in critical post-surgical patients treated using continuous renal replacement techniques

OBJECTIVE

To determine the influence of demographics, medical, and surgical variables on 30-day mortality in patients who need continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective-following study was conducted using the data of 112 patients admitted to the postoperative intensive care unit who required CRRT, between August 2006 and August 2011, and followed-up for 30 days. The following information was collected: age, gender, history of HBP, DM, cardiovascular disease, and CKD, urgent surgery, surgical speciality, organic dysfunction according to the SOFA scale, the number of organs with dysfunction, use of mechanical ventilation, diagnostic and origin of sepsis, type of CRRT, and 30-day mortality. General linear models were used for estimating the strength of association (relative risk [RR], and 95% confidence interval [CI] between variables and 30-day mortality.

RESULTS

In the univariant analysis, the following variables were identified as risk factors for 30-day mortality: age (RR 1.04; 95% CI 1.01-1.06; P=.0005), and history of cardiovascular disease (RR 1.57; 95% CI 1.02-2.41; P=.039). Among the variables included in the multivariable analysis (age, history of cardiovascular disease, sepsis, and number of organs with dysfunction), only age was identified as an independent risk factor for 30-day mortality (RR 1.03; 95% CI 1.00-1.05; P=.007).

CONCLUSION

Thirty-day mortality in postoperative, critically ill patients who require CRRT is high (41.07%). Age has been identified as an independent risk factor, with renal failure as the most common indication for the use of these therapies.

Choice of renal replacement therapy modality and dialysis dependence after acute kidney injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Choice of renal replacement therapy (RRT) modality may affect renal recovery after acute kidney injury (AKI). We sought to compare the rate of dialysis dependence among severe AKI survivors according to the choice of initial renal replacement therapy (RRT) modality applied [continuous (CRRT) or intermittent (IRRT)].

METHODS

Systematic searches of peer-reviewed publications in MEDLINE and EMBASE were performed (last update July 2012). All studies published after 2000 reporting dialysis dependence among survivors from severe AKI requiring RRT were included. Data on follow-up duration, sex, age, chronic kidney disease, illness severity score, vasopressors, and mechanical ventilation were extracted when available. Results were pooled using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

We identified 23 studies: seven randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 16 observational studies involving 472 and 3,499 survivors, respectively. Pooled analyses of RCTs showed no difference in the rate of dialysis dependence among survivors (relative risk, RR 1.15 [95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.78-1.68], I(2) = 0 %). However, pooled analyses of observational studies suggested a higher rate of dialysis dependence among survivors who initially received IRRT as compared with CRRT (RR 1.99 [95 % CI 1.53-2.59], I (2) = 42 %). These findings were consistent with adjusted analyses (performed in 7/16 studies), which found a higher rate of dialysis dependence in IRRT-treated patients [odds ratio (OR) 2.2-25 (5 studies)] or no difference (2 studies).

CONCLUSIONS

Among AKI survivors, initial treatment with IRRT might be associated with higher rates of dialysis dependence than CRRT. However, this finding largely relies on data from observational trials, potentially subject to allocation bias, hence further high-quality studies are necessary.

High-volume haemofiltration for sepsis

BACKGROUND

Severe sepsis and septic shock are leading causes of death in the intensive care unit (ICU). This is despite advances in the management of patients with severe sepsis and septic shock including early recognition, source control, timely and appropriate administration of antimicrobial agents, and goal directed haemodynamic, ventilatory and metabolic therapies. High-volume haemofiltration (HVHF) is a blood purification technique which may improve outcomes in critically ill patients with severe sepsis or septic shock. The technique of HVHF has evolved from renal replacement therapies used to treat acute kidney injury (AKI) in critically ill patients in the ICU.

OBJECTIVES

This review assessed whether HVHF improves clinical outcome in adult critically ill patients with sepsis in an ICU setting.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, 2011, Issue 7); MEDLINE (1990 to August 2011), EMBASE (1990 to August 2011); LILACS (1982 to August 2011), Web of Science (1990 to August 2011), CINAHL (1982 to August 2011) and specific websites.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomized trials comparing HVHF or high-volume haemodiafiltration to standard or usual dialysis therapy; and RCTs and quasi-randomized trials comparing HVHF or high-volume haemodiafiltration to no similar dialysis therapy. The studies involved adults in critical care units.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors independently extracted data and assessed trial quality. We sought additional information as required from trialists.

MAIN RESULTS

We included three randomized trials involving 64 participants. Due to the small number of studies and participants, it was not possible to combine data or perform sub-group analyses. One trial reported ICU and 28-day mortality, one trial reported hospital mortality and in the third, the number of deaths stated did not match the quoted mortality rates. No trials reported length of stay in ICU or hospital and one reported organ dysfunction. No adverse events were reported. Overall, the included studies had a low risk of bias.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There were no adverse effects of HVHF reported.There is insufficient evidence to recommend the use of HVHF in critically ill patients with severe sepsis and or septic shock except as interventions being investigated in the setting of a randomized clinical trial. These trials should be large, multi-centred and have clinically relevant outcome measures. Financial implications should also be assessed.

Renal replacement therapy in acute kidney injury

Although the use of renal replacement therapy (RRT) to support critically ill patients with acute kidney injury (AKI) has become routine, many of the fundamental questions regarding optimal management of RRT remain. This review summarizes current evidence regarding the timing of initiation of RRT, the selection of the specific modality of RRT, and prescription of the intensity of therapy. Although absolute indications for initiating RRT-such as hyperkalemia and overt uremic symptoms-are well recognized, the optimal timing of therapy in patients without these indications continues to be a subject of debate. There does not appear to be a difference in either mortality or recovery of kidney function associated with the various modalities of RRT. Finally, providing higher doses of RRT is not associated with improved clinical outcomes.

Comparison of outcomes by modality for critically ill patients requiring renal replacement therapy: a single-centre cohort study adjusting for time-varying illness severity and modality exposure

Prolonged intermittent renal replacement therapy (PIRRT) is a recently defined acute modality for critically ill patients, and in theory combines the superior detoxification and haemodynamic stability of continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) with the operational convenience and low cost of intermittent haemodialysis (iHD). We performed a retrospective cohort study for all critically ill adults treated with renal replacement therapy at our centre in Auckland, New Zealand from 1 January 2002 to 31 December 2008. The exposure of interest was modality (PIRRT, CRRT, iHD). Primary and secondary outcomes were patient mortality determined at hospital discharge and 90 days post renal replacement therapy inception, respectively. Co-variates included co-morbidity and baseline illness severity measured by Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation IV and Sepsis-Related Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) and time-varying illness severity measured by daily SOFA scores. We used Marginal Structural Modelling to estimate mortality risk adjusting for both time-varying illness severity and modality exposure. A total of 146 patients with 633 treatment-days had sufficient data for modelling. With PIRRT as the reference, the adjusted hazard ratios for patient hospital mortality were 1.31 (0.60 to 2.90) for CRRT and 1.22 (0.21 to 2.29) for iHD. Corresponding estimates for mortality at 90 days were 0.96 (0.39 to 2.36) and 2.22 (0.49 to 10.11), respectively, reflecting the poorer longer-term prognosis of patients still on iHD at hospital discharge with delayed or non-recovery of acute kidney injury. Our study supports the recent increased use of PIRRT, which within limits can be regarded as safe and effective.

Artificial organs 2010: a year in review

In this Editor's Review, articles published in 2010 are organized by category and briefly summarized. As the official journal of The International Federation for Artificial Organs, The International Faculty for Artificial Organs, and the International Society for Rotary Blood Pumps, Artificial Organs continues in the original mission of its founders "to foster communications in the field of artificial organs on an international level."Artificial Organs continues to publish developments and clinical applications of artificial organ technologies in this broad and expanding field of organ Replacement, Recovery, and Regeneration from all over the world. We take this time also to express our gratitude to our authors for offering their work to this journal. We offer our very special thanks to our reviewers who give so generously of time and expertise to review, critique, and especially provide such meaningful suggestions to the author's work whether eventually accepted or rejected and especially to those whose native tongue is not English. Without these excellent and dedicated reviewers the quality expected from such a journal could not be possible. We also express our special thanks to our Publisher, Wiley-Blackwell, for their expert attention and support in the production and marketing of Artificial Organs. In this Editor's Review, that historically has been widely received by our readership, we aim to provide a brief reflection of the currently available worldwide knowledge that is intended to advance and better human life while providing insight for continued application of technologies and methods of organ Replacement, Recovery, and Regeneration. We look forward to recording further advances in the coming years.

Acute renal failure requiring renal replacement therapy in the intensive care unit: impact on prognostic assessment for shared decision making

A 69-year-old female was receiving renal replacement therapy (RRT) for acute renal failure (ARF) in an intensive care unit (ICU). Consultation was requested from the palliative medicine service to facilitate a shared decision-making process regarding goals of care. Clinician responsibility in shared decision making includes the formulation and expression of a prognostic assessment providing the necessary perspective for a spokesperson to match patient values with treatment options. For this patient, ARF requiring RRT in the ICU was used as a focal point for preparing a prognostic assessment. A prognostic assessment should include the outcomes of most importance to a discussion of goals of care: mortality risk and survivor functional status, in this case including renal recovery. A systematic review of the literature was conducted to document published data regarding these outcomes for adult patients receiving RRT for ARF in the ICU. Forty-one studies met the inclusion criteria. The combined mean values for short-term mortality, long-term mortality, renal-function recovery of short-term survivors, and renal-function recovery of long-term survivors were 51.7%, 68.6%, 82.0%, and 88.4%, respectively. This case example illustrates a process for formulating and expressing a prognostic assessment for an ICU patient requiring RRT for ARF. Data from the literature review provide baseline information that requires adjustment to reflect specific patient circumstances. The nature of the acute primary process, comorbidities, and severity of illness are key modifiers. Finally, the prognostic assessment is expressed during a family meeting using recommended principles of communication.

Comparison of sustained hemodiafiltration with acetate-free dialysate and continuous venovenous hemodiafiltration for the treatment of critically ill patients with acute kidney injury

We conducted a prospective, randomized study to compare conventional continuous venovenous hemodiafiltration (CVVHDF) with sustained hemodiafiltration (SHDF) using an acetate-free dialysate. Fifty critically ill patients with acute kidney injury (AKI) who required renal replacement therapy were treated with either CVVHDF or SHDF. CVVDHF was performed using a conventional dialysate with an effluent rate of 25 mL·kg⁻¹ · ^h−1, and SHDF was performed using an acetate-free dialysate with a flow rate of 300−500 mL/min. The primary study outcome, 30 d survival rate was 76.0% in the CVVHDF arm and 88.0% in the SHDF arm (NS). Both the number of patients who showed renal recovery (40.0% and 68.0%, CVVHDF and SHDF, resp.; P < .05), and the hospital stay length (42.3 days and 33.7 days, CVVHDF and SHDF, resp.; P < .05), significantly differed between the two treatments. Although the total convective volumes did not significantly differ, the dialysate flow rate was higher and mean duration of daily treatment was shorter in the SHDF treatment arm. Our results suggest that compared with conventional CVVHDF, more intensive renal support in the form of post-dilution SHDF with acetate-free dialysate may accelerate renal recovery in critically ill patients with AKI.