P0625CONTINUOUS RENAL REPLACEMENT THERAPY WITHOUT ANTICOAGULATION IN CRITICALLY ILL PATIENTS AT HIGH RISK OF BLEEDING-A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS

2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (Supplement_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shiren Sun ◽  
Wei Zhang ◽  
Ming Bai ◽  
Lijuan Zhao ◽  
Xiaolan Chen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Renal Replacement Therapy ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Replacement Therapy ◽  
Critically Ill ◽  
Critically Ill Patients ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Bleeding Risk ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Risk Of Bleeding

Abstract Background and Aims Continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) has been widely used in the critical care setting and anticoagulation is usually necessitated. However, critically ill patients are commonly at incremental risk of bleeding, which contributed to the hesitation of anticoagulant use for CRRT in clinical practice. The current guideline recommended CRRT proceed without anticoagulation in patients with contraindication to citrate and increased bleeding risk. Nevertheless, the efficacy of anticoagulation-free CRRT remains inconsistent. Therefore, the purpose of our present systematic review is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of anticoagulant-free CRRT based on the current literatures. Method We conducted a comprehensive search of PubMed (US National Library of Medicine, Bethesda, MD, USA), Cochrane Library databases and EMBASE from database inception to January 12, 2019 for potential candidate studies. Studies included adult critically ill (age > 18 years) patients with increased bleeding risk, and underwent CRRT without anticoagulation were considered for the inclusion. Results Finally, 17 observational studies and 3 randomized controlled trials with 1615 patients were included in our present meta-analysis. There was no significant difference in filter lifespan between the anticoagulation-free and systemic heparin group. The filter lifespan was significantly prolonged in the citrate (WMD -23.01, 95%CI [-28.62, -17.39], P < 0.001; I2 = 0%, P = 0.53) and nafamostat (WMD -8.4, 95%CI [-9.9, -6.9], P < 0.001; I2 = 33.7%, P = 0.21) groups, compared with anticoagulation-free group. The averaged filter lifespan of the anticoagulation-free CRRT ranged from 10.2 to 52.5 hours. Conclusion The filter lifespan in anticoagulation-free patients with increased bleeding risk was comparable to that in patients without increased bleeding risk underwent systemic heparin anticoagulation CRRT. Nafamostat was not recommended for CRRT anticoagulation due to its drawbacks. Currently, the optimal choice of anticoagulation strategy for critically ill patients without citrate contraindications at high risk of bleeding should be regional citrate anticoagulation. Further studies should focus on the special cut-off value of activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT), international normalized ratio (INR) and platelet (PLT) count, at which the anticoagulation-free CRRT would be beneficial.

scholarly journals Continuous renal replacement therapy without anticoagulation in critically ill patients at high risk of bleeding: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wei Zhang ◽  
Ming Bai ◽  
Yan Yu ◽  
Xiaolan Chen ◽  
Lijuan Zhao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Renal Replacement Therapy ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy ◽  
Replacement Therapy ◽  
Critically Ill ◽  
Critically Ill Patients ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Bleeding Risk ◽  
Risk Of Bleeding

Abstract Abstract Background: Continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) has been widely used in the critical care setting and anticoagulation is usually necessitated. However, critically ill patients are commonly at incremental risk of bleeding, which contributed to the hesitation of anticoagulant use for CRRT in clinical practice. The current guideline recommended CRRT proceed without anticoagulation in patients with contraindication to citrate and increased bleeding risk. Nevertheless, the efficacy of anticoagulation-free CRRT remains inconsistent. Therefore, the purpose of our present systematic review is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of anticoagulant-free CRRT based on the current literatures. Methods: We conducted a comprehensive search of PubMed (US National Library of Medicine, Bethesda, MD, USA), Cochrane Library databases and EMBASE from database inception to January 12, 2019 for potential candidate studies. Studies included adult critically ill (age > 18 years) patients with increased bleeding risk, and underwent CRRT without anticoagulation were considered for the inclusion. Results: Finally, 17 observational studies and 3 randomized controlled trials with 1615 patients were included in our present meta-analysis. There was no significant difference in filter lifespan between the anticoagulation-free and systemic heparin group. The filter lifespan was significantly prolonged in the citrate (WMD -23.01, 95%CI [-28.62, -17.39], P < 0.001; I 2 = 0%, P = 0.53) and nafamostat (WMD -8.4, 95%CI [-9.9, -6.9], P < 0.001; I 2 = 33.7%, P = 0.21) groups, compared with anticoagulation-free group. The averaged filter lifespan of the anticoagulation-free CRRT ranged from 10.2 to 52.5 hours. Conclusion: The filter lifespan in anticoagulation-free patients with increased bleeding risk was comparable to that in patients without increased bleeding risk underwent systemic heparin anticoagulation CRRT. Nafamostat was not recommended for CRRT anticoagulation due to its drawbacks. Currently, the optimal choice of anticoagulation strategy for critically ill patients without citrate contraindications at high risk of bleeding should be regional citrate anticoagulation. Further studies should focus on the special cut-off value of activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT), international normalized ratio (INR) and platelet (PLT) count, at which the anticoagulation-free CRRT would be beneficial. Key words: Anticoagulation, critically ill patients, continuous renal replacement therapy, filter failure, bleeding

scholarly journals Determining the optimal time for liberation from renal replacement therapy in critically ill patients: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis (DOnE RRT)

BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (11) ◽  
pp. e023306 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abdalrhman Al Saadon ◽  
Riley Katulka ◽  
Meghan Sebastianski ◽  
Robin Featherstone ◽  
Ben Vandermeer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
Renal Replacement Therapy ◽  
Replacement Therapy ◽  
Critically Ill ◽  
Critically Ill Patients ◽  
Biochemical Markers ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Cochrane Library

IntroductionRenal replacement therapy (RRT) is a complex and expensive form of life-sustaining therapy, reserved for our most acutely ill patients. While a number of randomised trials have evaluated the optimal timing to start RRT among critically ill patients in the intensive care unit (ICU), there has been a paucity of trials providing guidance on when and under what circumstances to ideally liberate a patient from RRT. We are conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify clinical and biochemical markers that predict kidney recovery and successful liberation from acute RRT among critically ill patients with acute kidney injury.Methods and analysisOur comprehensive search strategy was developed in consultation with a research librarian and independently peer-reviewed by a second librarian. We will search electronic databases: Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase and Wiley Cochrane Library. Selected grey literature sources will also be searched. Our search strategies will focus on concepts related to RRT (ie, intermittent haemodialysis, slow low-efficiency dialysis, continuous renal replacement therapy), intensive care (ie, involving any ICU setting) and discontinuation of therapy (ie, either clinical, physiological and biochemical parameters of weaning acute RRT) from 1990 to October 10, 2017. Citation screening, selection, quality assessment and data abstraction will be performed in duplicate. Studies will, where possible, be pooled in statistical meta-analysis. When deemed sufficiently clinically homogenous, and we have four or more studies reporting, sensitivities and specificities will be pooled simultaneously using a hierarchical summary receiver operator characteristic curve and bivariate analysis.Ethics and disseminationOur systematic review will synthesise the literature on clinical and biochemical markers that predict liberation from RRT. Research ethics approval is not required.Trial registration numberCRD42018074615.

scholarly journals Accelerated versus standard initiation of renal replacement therapy for critically ill patients with acute kidney injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCT studies

Critical Care ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Heng-Chih Pan ◽  
Ying-Ying Chen ◽  
I-Jung Tsai ◽  
Chih-Chung Shiao ◽  
Tao-Min Huang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Acute Kidney Injury ◽  
Renal Replacement Therapy ◽  
Replacement Therapy ◽  
Critically Ill ◽  
Critically Ill Patients ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Kidney Injury ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
Surgical Icu

Abstract Background Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a common yet possibly fatal complication among critically ill patients in intensive care units (ICU). Although renal replacement therapy (RRT) is an important supportive management for severe AKI patients, the optimal timing of RRT initiation for these patients is still unclear. Methods In this systematic review, we searched all relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that directly compared accelerated with standard initiation of RRT from PUBMED, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cnki.net published prior to July, 20, 2020. We extracted study characteristics and outcomes of being free of dialysis, dialysis dependence and mortality. We rated the certainty of evidence according to Cochrane methods and the GRADE approach. Results We identified 56 published relevant studies from 1071 screened abstracts. Ten RCTs with 4753 critically ill AKI patients in intensive care unit (ICU) were included in this meta-analysis. In our study, accelerated and standard RRT group were not associated with all-cause mortality (log odds-ratio [OR]: − 0.04, 95% confidence intervals [CI] − 0.16 to 0.07, p = 0.46) and free of dialysis (log OR: − 0.03, 95% CI − 0.14 to 0.09, p = 0.65). In the subgroup analyses, accelerated RRT group was significantly associated with lower risk of all-cause mortality in the surgical ICU and for those who received continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT). In addition, patients in these two subgroups had higher chances of being eventually dialysis-free. However, accelerated initiation of RRT augmented the risk of dialysis dependence in the subgroups of patients treated with non-CRRT modality and whose Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score were more than 11. Conclusions In this meta-analysis, critically ill patients with severe AKI would benefit from accelerated RRT initiation regarding all-cause mortality and being eventually free of dialysis only if they were surgical ICU patients or if they underwent CRRT treatment. However, the risk of dialysis dependence was increased in the accelerated RRT group when those patients used non-CRRT modality or had high SOFA scores. All the literatures reviewed in this study were highly heterogeneous and potentially subject to biases. Trial registration CRD42020201466, Sep 07, 2020. https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=201466.

scholarly journals Determining the optimal time for liberation from renal replacement therapy in critically ill patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis (DOnE RRT)

Critical Care ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Riley Jeremy Katulka ◽  
Abdalrhman Al Saadon ◽  
Meghan Sebastianski ◽  
Robin Featherstone ◽  
Ben Vandermeer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Renal Replacement Therapy ◽  
Replacement Therapy ◽  
Critically Ill ◽  
Critically Ill Patients ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Optimal Time
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document