OBJECTIVE: To compare the clearance performances and biocompatibility between the modified cellulose membrane and the standard synthetic membrane in continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT). MATERIAL AND METHOD:Seventeen patients with acute renal failure (ARF) were treated with separated continuous veno venous hemofiltration (CVVH) system conducted with the pre-dilution mode. The modified cellulose used was a Sureflux150E (cellulose triacetate) and the standard synthetic membranes used was an AV-400. Blood and replacement flow rate were kept at 100 and 20 mL/min, respectively. Ultrafiltraion rate was 1,200 mL/hr. Samplings of blood and ultrafiltrate were collected at baseline, 2, 8, 16, and 24 hr. RESULTS: Patients in both methods could similarly tolerate CRRT with only minor complications. Sureflux 150E and AV-400 provided comparable values of sieving coefficients and clearances of small solutes. The albumin loss in ultrafiltrate by Sureflux 150E was greater than AV-400. The values of life span and biocompatability of both hemofilters were not different. CONCLUSION: Because of the excellent efficacy and the much cheaper cost, the modified cellulose membrane could be an appropriate alternative to standard synthetic membrane in CRRT.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To compare the clearance performances and biocompatibility between the modified cellulose membrane and the standard synthetic membrane in continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT). MATERIAL AND METHOD: Seventeen patients with acute renal failure (ARF) were treated with separated continuous veno venous hemofiltration (CVVH) system conducted with the pre-dilution mode. The modified cellulose used was a Sureflux150E (cellulose triacetate) and the standard synthetic membranes used was an AV-400. Blood and replacement flow rate were kept at 100 and 20 mL/min, respectively. Ultrafiltraion rate was 1,200 mL/hr. Samplings of blood and ultrafiltrate were collected at baseline, 2, 8, 16, and 24 hr. RESULTS:Patients in both methods could similarly tolerate CRRT with only minor complications. Sureflux 150E and AV-400 provided comparable values of sieving coefficients and clearances of small solutes. The albumin loss in ultrafiltrate by Sureflux 150E was greater than AV-400. The values of life span and biocompatability of both hemofilters were not different. CONCLUSION: Because of the excellent efficacy and the much cheaper cost, the modified cellulose membrane could be an appropriate alternative to standard synthetic membrane in CRRT.