What dialysis dose should be provided in acute renal failure? A review.

Abstract

Increased dialysis dose has been shown to improve morbidity and survival in chronic hemodialysis patients. Despite improvement in care and technological aspects of renal replacement therapy, mortality rates of acute renal failure (ARF) have remained essentially unchanged for over two decades, exceeding 50% in most studies. The occurrence of ARF in older patients with more complicated medical and surgical conditions has contributed to this lack of outcome amelioration, and death of ARF patients is now more frequently caused by underlying disease than ARF itself. A recent prospective survey at this institution found a mortality rate of 79.1% among a total of 363 ARF medical and surgical intensive care unit patients, with a mean age near 60 years and a mean admission APACHE II score of over 20, who were treated by intermittent hemodialysis and continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT). Nonsurvivors had a mean of over four failed systems, in addition to the renal failure, compared with survivors who had less than four. The standards for dialysis adequacy in ARF are not currently defined. Increased catabolism seen in ARF patients in the intensive care unit may justify large dialysis dose delivery. An apparent influence of delivered dialysis dose on the outcome of ARF intensive care unit patients has been recently observed at our institution. Compared with nonsurvivors, survivors had received significantly higher dialysis dose, as assessed by Kt/V and urea reduction ratio. In ARF patients, the discrepancy between delivered versus prescribed dialysis dose may be particularly important and contributed to by the following: reduced blood flow rate and dialysis time consequent to patient intolerance; lower dialyzer in vivo clearances, particularly in heparin-free dialysis; blood recirculation when using temporary vascular access; and postdialysis urea rebound. Prolonging the course of renal failure is one of the risks attributed to frequent dialysis; hypotension and ultrafiltration combined with a deficient renal autoregulation can result in further renal damage. The detrimental effects of bioincompatible membranes have been demonstrated with an induced-delay of renal function recovery. A recent study has reported benefits of biocompatible membranes in terms of potential for renal recovery and maintenance of urine output during dialytic support when compared with bioincompatible membranes. CRRT offers many advantages over intermittent hemodialysis for ARF intensive care unit patients: better hemodynamic tolerance, avoidance of solute rebound, and removal of serum sepsis mediators. However, CRRT have not yet been firmly shown to improve survival rates. Recently, urea kinetics have been used to estimate dialysis dose provided by CRRT.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

• Authors: M Leblanc, M Tapolyai, E P Paganini
• Journal: Advances in renal replacement therapy (Adv Ren Replace Ther) Vol. 2 Issue 3 Pg. 255-64 (Jul 1995) ISSN: 1073-4449 [Print] United States
• PMID: 7614362 (Publication Type: Journal Article, Review)

Chemical References

• Membranes, Artificial

Topics

• Acute Kidney Injury (mortality, therapy)
• Humans
• Membranes, Artificial
• Renal Replacement Therapy (methods)
• Survival Analysis
• Time Factors