Abstract
Objective
To assess the effect on circuit life in continuous venovenous haemodiafiltration (CVVHD) by manipulating heparin dilution and point of administration.
Design
Repeated crossover design. Cases were randomised for first circuit and heparin dilution, after which crossovers occurred until treatment was stopped.
Setting
A 24-bed combined general and surgical intensive care unit admitting 1900 patients a year. On average, 54 cases a year receive CVVHD.
Patients
26 critically ill adult patients requiring CVVHD were enrolled, 18 of whom used at least one standard circuit and one modified circuit.
Interventions
Two circuit configurations and heparin dilutions were compared. In combination A, standard CVVHD blood lines and heparin concentration (100 units/ml) were used. In combination B, heparin was delivered in a more dilute volume (10 units/ml) via a modified circuit design with an administration port immediately adjacent to the venous access.
Measurements and results
18 randomised crossovers of circuits A and B occurred. Mean/median circuit life for the standard heparin/circuit combination A was 20.1/17.5 (SD 14.6) and for the modified combination B 21.4/15.4 (SD 19.2). There was no significant difference between circuits (pairedt-test,p=0.8175). To identify other factors which could have influenced circuit life (platelet count, heparin dose and pre- and post-filter activated partial thromboplastin time, APTT) all circuits terminated for the reasons identified (n=105) were analysed using linear modelling. Survival analysis was used to determine the survival function of the circuit. Pre-heparin APTT was the only factor associated with an increase in filter life (p=0.0325). The hazard rate for filter failure was 0.049/h (95% confidence interval 0.04 to 0.06), the range of time until filters failed was 1.8 to 78.5 h.
Conclusions
Proximally administered dilute heparin is not associated with a significant increase in circuit life.
References
Tam PY-W, Huraib S, Mahan B, LeBlanc D, Lunski CA, Holtzer C, Doyle CE, Vas SI, Uldall PR (1988) Slow continuous hemodialysis for the management of complicated acute renal failure in an intensive care unit. Clin Nephrol 30: 79–83
Henrich WL (1993) Arteriovenous or venovenous continuous therapies are not superior to standard hemodialysis in all patients with acute renal failure Semin Dialysis 6: 174–176
Relton S, Greenberg A, Palevsky PM (1992) Dialysate and blood flow dependence of diffusive solute clearance during CVVHD. Trans Am Soc Artif Intern Organs 38: M691-M696
Mehta RL (1993) Renal replacement therapy for acute renal failure: matching the method to the patient. Semin Dialysis 6: 253–259
Schurek HJ, Biela D (1983) Continuous arteriovenous hemofiltration: improvement in the handling of fluid balance and heparinization. Blood Purif 1: 189–196
Golper TA, Ronco C, Kaplan AA (1988) Continuous arteriovenous hemofiltration: improvements, modifications and future directions. Semin Dialysis 1: 50–54
Firth JD (1993) Renal replacement therapy on the intensive care unit. Q J Med 86: 75–77
Harris D (1990) Acute renal replacement — which treatment is best? Aust NZ J Med 20: 197–199
Singer M, McNally T, Screaton G, Mackie I, Machin S, Cohen SL (1994) Heparin clearance during continuous veno-venous haemofiltration Intensive Care Med 20: 212–215
Mehta RL, Dobos GJ, Ward DM (1992) Anticoagulation in continuous renal replacement procedures. Semin Dialysis 5: 61–68
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Study performed at the Intensive Care Unit, Royal Perth Hospital, Perth, Western Australia
The study was supported in part by a grant from Hospal Industries (Lyon, France) and Gambro Australia
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Leslie, G.D., Jacobs, I.G. & Clarke, G.M. Proximally delivered dilute heparin does not improve circuit life in continuous venovenous haemodiafiltration. Intensive Care Med 22, 1261–1264 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01709346
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01709346