Literature DB >> 34519356

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

Yasushi Tsujimoto1,2,3, Sho Miki4, Hiroki Shimada5, Hiraku Tsujimoto6, Hideto Yasuda7, Yuki Kataoka3,8,9,10, Tomoko Fujii1,11,12.   

Abstract

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.
Copyright © 2021 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34519356      PMCID: PMC8438600          DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013330.pub2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev        ISSN: 1361-6137


  142 in total

1.  Catheter dysfunction and dialysis performance according to vascular access among 736 critically ill adults requiring renal replacement therapy: a randomized controlled study.

Authors:  Jean-Jacques Parienti; Bruno Mégarbane; Marc-Olivier Fischer; Alexandre Lautrette; Nicole Gazui; Nathalie Marin; Jean-Luc Hanouz; Michel Ramakers; Cédric Daubin; Jean-Paul Mira; Pierre Charbonneau; Damien du Cheyron
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 7.598

2.  A multicenter comparison of dialysis membranes in the treatment of acute renal failure requiring dialysis.

Authors:  J Himmelfarb; N Tolkoff Rubin; P Chandran; R A Parker; R L Wingard; R Hakim
Journal:  J Am Soc Nephrol       Date:  1998-02       Impact factor: 10.121

3.  Acute kidney injury: effect of hemodialysis membrane on Hgf and recovery of renal function.

Authors:  Carmelo Libetta; Pasquale Esposito; Vincenzo Sepe; Teresa Rampino; Manuela Zucchi; Michele Canevari; Antonio Dal Canton
Journal:  Clin Biochem       Date:  2012-10-22       Impact factor: 3.281

4.  Early acid-base and blood pressure effects of continuous renal replacement therapy intensity in patients with metabolic acidosis.

Authors:  Rinaldo Bellomo; Miklos Lipcsey; Paolo Calzavacca; Michael Haase; Anjia Haase-Fielitz; Elisa Licari; Augustine Tee; Louise Cole; Alan Cass; Simon Finfer; Martin Gallagher; Joanne Lee; Serigne Lo; Colin McArthur; Shay McGuinness; John Myburgh; Carlos Scheinkestel
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2013-01-11       Impact factor: 17.440

5.  Pharmacological interventions for preventing clotting of extracorporeal circuits during continuous renal replacement therapy.

Authors:  Hiraku Tsujimoto; Yasushi Tsujimoto; Yukihiko Nakata; Tomoko Fujii; Sei Takahashi; Mai Akazawa; Yuki Kataoka
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2020-12-14

6.  Polyethyleneimine-treated polyacrylonitrile membrane hemofilter for critically ill patients receiving anticoagulant-free prolonged intermittent renal replacement therapy: a single-center, prospective, self-controlled pilot study.

Authors:  Tao Su; Qizhuang Jin; Zhongyuan Liu
Journal:  BMC Nephrol       Date:  2017-06-30       Impact factor: 2.388

7.  A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial of Comparison between Extended Daily Hemodialysis and Continuous Veno-venous Hemodialysis in Patients of Acute Kidney Injury with Septic Shock.

Authors:  Shakti Bedanta Mishra; Afzal Azim; Narayan Prasad; Ratendra Kumar Singh; Banani Poddar; Mohan Gurjar; Arvind Kumar Baronia
Journal:  Indian J Crit Care Med       Date:  2017-05

8.  Intensity of renal replacement therapy in acute kidney injury: perspective from within the Acute Renal Failure Trial Network Study.

Authors:  Paul M Palevsky; Theresa Z O'Connor; Glenn M Chertow; Susan T Crowley; Jane Hongyuan Zhang; John A Kellum
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2009-08-11       Impact factor: 9.097

9.  Sustained low efficiency dialysis using a single-pass batch system in acute kidney injury - a randomized interventional trial: the REnal Replacement Therapy Study in Intensive Care Unit PatiEnts.

Authors:  Vedat Schwenger; Markus A Weigand; Oskar Hoffmann; Ralf Dikow; Lars P Kihm; Jörg Seckinger; Nexhat Miftari; Matthias Schaier; Stefan Hofer; Caroline Haar; Peter P Nawroth; Martin Zeier; Eike Martin; Christian Morath
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2012-07-27       Impact factor: 9.097

10.  Mortality and Recovery of Renal Function in Acute Kidney Injury Patients Treated with Prolonged Intermittent Hemodialysis Sessions Lasting 10 versus 6 Hours: Results of a Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Bianca Ballarin Albino; Mariele Gobo-Oliveira; André Luís Balbi; Daniela Ponce
Journal:  Int J Nephrol       Date:  2018-08-13
View more
  2 in total

Review 1.  Non-pharmacological interventions for preventing clotting of extracorporeal circuits during continuous renal replacement therapy.

Authors:  Yasushi Tsujimoto; Sho Miki; Hiroki Shimada; Hiraku Tsujimoto; Hideto Yasuda; Yuki Kataoka; Tomoko Fujii
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2021-09-14

Review 2.  How to Prolong Filter Life During Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy?

Authors:  Yasushi Tsujimoto; Tomoko Fujii
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2022-03-22       Impact factor: 9.097

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.