| Literature DB >> 23883472 |
Christian Forster, Jens Schriewer, Stefan John, Kai-Uwe Eckardt, Carsten Willam.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Lung-protective ventilation in patients with ARDS and multiorgan failure, including renal failure, is often paralleled with a combined respiratory and metabolic acidosis. We assessed the effectiveness of a hollow-fiber gas exchanger integrated into a conventional renal-replacement circuit on CO₂ removal, acidosis, and hemodynamics.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23883472 PMCID: PMC4056563 DOI: 10.1186/cc12833
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Crit Care ISSN: 1364-8535 Impact factor: 9.097
Figure 1Scheme of the renal circuit with implementation of a hollow-filter gas exchanger.
Baseline patients’ characteristics and outcomes of the 10 patients treated with the hollow-fiber gas-exchange device included in the renal-replacement circuit
| 1 | 51 | M | 180 | 90 | 35 | 95 | 31 | 11 | H1N1- pneumonia | Died on ICU day 3 | ECMO contraindication |
| 2 | 47 | M | 178 | 75 | 23 | 91 | 34 | 1 | H1N1- pneumonia | Died on ICU day 4 | ECMO contraindication |
| 3 | 57 | F | 160 | 55 | 17 | 141 | 28 | 13 | Pneumonia | Weaning and recovery | |
| 4 | 67 | M | 175 | 80 | 25 | 265 | 32 | 3 | COPD | Weaning and recovery | |
| 5 | 47 | M | 180 | 80 | 25 | 58 | 22 | 4 | Pneumonia, COPD | Bridging to ECMO | Died on multiple organ failure 12 days later |
| 6 | 74 | M | 170 | 90 | 31 | 93 | 35 | 1 | Pneumonia | Weaning and recovery | |
| 7 | 73 | F | 155 | 88 | 37 | 267 | 32 | 3 | COPD | Weaning and recovery | |
| 8 | 73 | F | 148 | 115 | 53 | 130 | 33 | 6 | Pneumonia | Weaning | Died 25 days later – mesenteric ischemia |
| 9 | 55 | M | 172 | 86 | 29 | 100 | 25 | 18 | H1N1 – pneumonia | Weaning and recovery | |
| 10 | 54 | M | 180 | 98 | 30 | 200 | 24 | 1 | Pneumonia | Weaning and recovery |
Treatment modalities for low-flow CO removal integrated into the RRT circuit
| 1 | 1 | 250 | 300 | 4.0 | 4.0 | 100 | 200 | −645 | 6 | 1.00 | 30 |
| 2 | 1 | 330 | 400 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 200 | 0 | −705 | 4 | 1.00 | 84 |
| 3 | 1 | 400 | 400 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 0 | 150 | 605 | 4 | 0.50 | 45 |
| 4 | 1 | 400 | 400 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 0 | 100 | 1,715 | 6 | 0.40 | 215 |
| 5 | 2 | 300a | n.a. | 2.0 a | n.a. | 100 a | n.a. | n.a. | 6 | 0.21 | 2.5 |
| 6 | 1 | 500 | 450 | 3.0 | 3.0 | 0 | 100 | 1,340 | 6 | 0.21 | 191 |
| 7 | 1 | 320 | 250 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 100 | 150 | −3,345 | 4 | 0.21 | 83 |
| 8 | 2 | 400 | 450 | 2.0 | 1.5 | 40 | 100 | −2,055 | 6 | 0.21 | 71 |
| 9 | 1 | 400 | 500 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 0 | 0 | 180 | 6 | 0.21 | 92 |
| 10 | 1 | 250 | 250 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 50 | 0 | 2,945 | 4 | 0.21 | 134 |
Patient 5 was switched to ECMO after 2.5 hours of treatment and was therefore not applicable at t = 4 hours and t = 24 hours. at = 2.5 hours. n.a., not applicable.
Changes in systemic arterial pH, pCO, bicarbonate (HCO) from the beginning ( = 0 hours), 4 hours ( = 4 hours), and 24 hours ( = 24 hours) after starting low-flow COremoval
| 1 | 7.17 | 7.25 | 0.08 | 58 | 47 | −11 | 20 | 20 | 0 |
| 2 | 7.24 | 7.28 | 0.04 | 56 | 51 | −5 | 22 | 24 | 2 |
| 3 | 7.10 | 7.29 | 0.19 | 77 | 49 | −28 | 23 | 23 | 0 |
| 4 | 7.18 | 7.34 | 0.16 | 69 | 52 | −17 | 25 | 27 | 2 |
| 5 | 7.24 | 7.21a | −0.03 | 88 | 90a | 2 | 37 | 34a | −3 |
| 6 | 7.07 | 7.18 | 0.11 | 77 | 57 | −20 | 20 | 19 | −1 |
| 7 | 7.37 | 7.44 | 0.07 | 55 | 44 | −11 | 31 | 30 | −1 |
| 8 | 7.16 | 7.24 | 0.09 | 66 | 55 | −11 | 23 | 23 | 0 |
| 9 | 7.18 | 7.31 | 0.13 | 79 | 55 | −24 | 29 | 27 | −2 |
| 10 | 7.18 | 7.37 | 0.19 | 65 | 36 | −29 | 23 | 21 | −2 |
Deltas indicate differences between t = 0 and t = 4 hours. Patient 5 was switched to ECMO after 2.5 hours of treatment and was therefore excluded from calculation of means and deltas at t = 4 hours. at = 2.5 hours.
Ventilator settings from the beginning ( = 0 hours), 4 hours ( = 4 hours) and 24 hours ( = 24 hours) after starting low-flow COremoval
| 1 | 0.85 | 0.95 | 1.00 | 14 | 14 | 14 | 8.6 | 8.0 | 8.6 | 22 | 22 | 23 | 32 | 32 | 32 | 25 | 23 | 20 |
| 2 | 1.00 | 0.95 | 1.00 | 14 | 16 | 20 | 7.5 | 5.8 | 5.1 | 22 | 22 | 23 | 32 | 32 | 30 | 22 | 22 | 30 |
| 3 | 0.55 | 0.55 | 0.50 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 8.3 | 8.2 | 7.6 | 19 | 18 | 19 | 35 | 32 | 34 | 30 | 28 | 28 |
| 4 | 0.40 | 0.40 | 0.35 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8.2 | 8.2 | 7.2 | 17 | 17 | 15 | 32 | 31 | 27 | 20 | 20 | 20 |
| 5 | 1.00 | 1.00a | n.a. | 13 | 13 a | n.a. | 8.6 | 6.5 a | n.a. | 23 | 23 a | n.a. | 40 | 40 a | n.a. | 20 | 24 a | n.a. |
| 6 | 1.00 | 0.95 | 0.60 | 12 | 12 | 12 | 9.0 | 8.8 | 8.0 | 20 | 19 | 19 | 34 | 33 | 31 | 20 | 20 | 20 |
| 7 | 0.37 | 0.37 | 0.37 | 12 | 12 | 10 | 9.6 | 9.5 | 8.1 | 16 | 14 | 13 | 27 | 23 | 21 | 12 | 12 | 14 |
| 8 | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.50 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 9.8 | 8.4 | 6.7 | 21 | 21 | 21 | 33 | 33 | 30 | 20 | 20 | 26 |
| 9 | 0.80 | 0.70 | 0.60 | 12 | 12 | 14 | 7.9 | 9.6 | 7.7 | 19 | 19 | 18 | 28 | 28 | 25 | 28 | 28 | 24 |
| 10 | 0.40 | 0.40 | 0.50 | 12 | 12 | 12 | 6.6 | 8.6 | 7.1 | 19 | 19 | 18 | 32 | 32 | 28 | 26 | 26 | 26 |
n.a., not applicable. Patient 5 was switched to ECMO after 2.5 hours of treatment and was therefore excluded from calculation of means at t = 4 hours and t = 24 hours. at = 2.5 hours.
Figure 2Clinical effects of low-flow COremoval 4 and 24 hours after commencement of treatment. Graphs illustrate mean changes of values for pH (A), pCO2(B), pO2(C), tidal volume on respirator (D), norepinephrine dose at mg/h (E), and average changes in Pmax on the ventilator (F).
Hemodynamic parameters from the beginning ( = 0 h), 4 hours ( = 4 h), and 24 hours ( = 24 h) after starting low-flow COremoval
| 1 | 83 | 73 | 66 | 120 | 110 | 100 | 2.6 | 3.2 | 5.2 | 0.48 | 0.59 | 0.96 | 49 | 59 | 124 |
| 2 | 57 | 73 | 80 | 120 | 110 | 125 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.4 | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.08 | 12 | 12 | 4.2 |
| 3 | 80 | 87 | 73 | 80 | 85 | 90 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.06 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 7 | 9 | 6 |
| 4 | 80 | 80 | 87 | 110 | 105 | 100 | 0.6 | 0.5 | 0.3 | 0.13 | 0.10 | 0.06 | 14 | 16 | 18 |
| 5 | 73 | 76a | n.a. | 110 | 100 a | n.a. | 0.2 | 0.3 a | n.a. | 0.04 | 0.06 a | n.a. | 11 | 9 a | n.a. |
| 6 | 70 | 77 | 93 | 110 | 90 | 90 | 5.0 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 0.93 | 0.37 | 0.18 | 43 | 47 | 12 |
| 7 | 70 | 73 | 90 | 70 | 65 | 95 | 0.1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.02 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 6 | 7 | 9 |
| 8 | 66 | 63 | 73 | 110 | 90 | 90 | 1.2 | 1.2 | 0.9 | 0.17 | 0.17 | 0.13 | 12 | 13 | 14 |
| 9 | 80 | 82 | 73 | 105 | 110 | 110 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 7 | 7 | 8 |
| 10 | 73 | 87 | 93 | 100 | 85 | 80 | 1.9 | 0.9 | 0.0 | 0.32 | 0.15 | 0.00 | 10 | 12 | 9 |
n.a., not applicable. Patient 5 was switched to ECMO after 2.5 hours of treatment and was therefore excluded from calculation of means at t = 4 hours and t = 24 hours.
at = 2.5 hours.
Figure 3Exemplary time courses for clinical effects of low-flow COremoval in two patients. Patient 10 had acute pneumonia (A, B, C); patient 6 had cardiomyopathy and acute pneumonia (D, E, F) for pH, pCO2, and norepinephrine dose, respectively.