Timing of Dialysis in Sepsis and Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome

Timing of renal replacement therapy for patients with acute kidney injury: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Acute kidney injury is associated with high mortality, and the optimal time to start renal replacement therapy for acute kidney injury is unknown despite several randomised controlled trials on the subject. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the effect of earlier initiation of renal replacement therapy for acute kidney injury on mortality and reported secondary outcomes.

METHODS

All literature in databases EMBASE, MEDLINE and CENTRAL was searched from January 1970 to March 2019 using terms related to renal replacement therapy, timing and randomised controlled trials. All randomised controlled trials with 25 or more adult participants suffering from acute kidney injury comparing timing of renal replacement therapy were included. The results of the selected studies were pooled and expressed in terms of risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) using a random effects model.

RESULTS

A total of 7008 records were identified; 94 were selected for full text review of which 10 were included in the final meta-analysis. The 10 studies comprised 1956 participants (989 'early' group; 967 'late' group) with 918 total deaths; the analysis demonstrated no significant differences between the 'early' and 'late' renal replacement therapy groups (RR = 0.98 (95% CI = 0.84, 1.15)) for mortality. No significant differences between groups were evident for period-wise mortality; dialysis dependence; recovery of renal function; length of intensive care unit or hospital stay; or number of renal replacement therapies, mechanical ventilation and vasopressor-free days.

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence does not support the use of early renal replacement therapy for patients with acute kidney injury. Data from ongoing and future randomised controlled trials are required to strengthen the evidence base in the area.

Timing of Renal Replacement Therapy for Severe Acute Kidney Injury in Critically Ill Patients

Acute kidney injury (AKI) affects many ICU patients and is responsible for increased morbidity and mortality. Although lifesaving in many situations, renal replacement therapy (RRT) may be associated with complications, and the appropriate timing of its initiation is still the subject of intense debate. An early initiation strategy can prevent some metabolic complications, whereas a delayed one may allow for renal function recovery in some patients without need for this costly and potentially dangerous technique. For years, most of the knowledge on this issue stemmed from observational studies or small randomized controlled trials. Recent randomized controlled trials have indicated that a watchful waiting strategy (in the absence of life-threatening conditions such as severe hyperkalemia or pulmonary edema) during severe AKI allowed many patients to escape RRT and did not seem to adversely affect survival compared with a strategy of immediate RRT. In addition, data suggest that a delayed strategy may reduce the rate of complications (such as catheter infection) and favor renal function recovery. Ongoing studies will have to both confirm these conclusions and clarify to what extent the delay in initiating RRT can be prolonged. Pending those results, the bulk of evidence suggests that, in the absence of potential severe complications of AKI, delaying RRT is a valid and safe strategy that may also allow for considerable cost savings.

Retarder une épuration extrarénale dans l’insuffisance rénale aiguë : la nuit nous appartient

Les indications de l’épuration extrarénale (EER) dans le contexte d’insuffisance rénale aiguë en réanimation sont débattues avec une certaine passion. Il est évident que les situations qui peuvent menacer immédiatement le pronostic vital (hyperkaliémie ou acidose métabolique réfractaire et sévère ou oedème pulmonaire de surcharge chez le patient anurique) nécessitent un recours urgent à l’EER. Hormis ces situations extrêmes, des études de haut niveau de preuve ont récemment montré que retarder l’indication de l’EER n’affecte pas la survie des patients et pourrait même favoriser la récupération de la fonction rénale par comparaison à une EER trop précoce. Cette mise au point se propose de discuter les risques théoriques liés au fait de différer l’EER et s’attache à montrer qu’ils constituent plus des craintes que des réalités.