Continuous renal replacement therapy: A worldwide practice survey
- First Online:
- Cite this article as:
- Uchino, S., Bellomo, R., Morimatsu, H. et al. Intensive Care Med (2007) 33: 1563. doi:10.1007/s00134-007-0754-4
Little information is available regarding current practice in continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) for the treatment of acute renal failure (ARF) and the possible clinical effect of practice variation.
Prospective observational study.
A total of 54 intensive care units (ICUs) in 23 countries.
Patients and participants
A cohort of 1006 ICU patients treated with CRRT for ARF.
Collection of demographic, clinical and outcome data.
Measurements and results
All patients except one were treated with venovenous circuits, most commonly as venovenous hemofiltration (52.8%). Approximately one-third received CRRT without anticoagulation (33.1%). Among patients who received anticoagulation, unfractionated heparin (UFH) was the most common choice (42.9%), followed by sodium citrate (9.9%), nafamostat mesilate (6.1%), and low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH; 4.4%). Hypotension related to CRRT occurred in 19% of patients and arrhythmias in 4.3%. Bleeding complications occurred in 3.3% of patients. Treatment with LMWH was associated with a higher incidence of bleeding complications (11.4%) compared to UFH (2.3%, p = 0.0083) and citrate (2.0%, p = 0.029). The median dose of CRRT was 20.4 ml/kg/h. Only 11.7% of patients received a dose of > 35 ml/kg/h. Most (85.5%) survivors recovered to dialysis independence at hospital discharge. Hospital mortality was 63.8%. Multivariable analysis showed that no CRRT-related variables (mode, filter material, drug for anticoagulation, and prescribed dose) predicted hospital mortality.
This study supports the notion that, worldwide, CRRT practice is quite variable and not aligned with best evidence.