Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A randomized clinical trial of high volume peritoneal dialysis versus extended daily hemodialysis for acute kidney injury patients

  • Nephrology - Original Paper
  • Published:
International Urology and Nephrology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Acute kidney injury (AKI) requiring dialysis in critically ill patients is associated with an in-hospital mortality rate of 50–80 %. Extended daily hemodialysis (EHD) and high volume peritoneal dialysis (HVPD) have emerged as alternative modalities.

Methods

A double-center, randomized, controlled trial was conducted comparing EHD versus HVPD for the treatment for AKI in the intensive care unit (ICU). Four hundred and seven patients were randomized and 143 patients were analyzed. Principal outcome measure was hospital mortality, and secondary end points were recovery of renal function and metabolic and fluid control.

Results

There was no difference between the two groups in relation to median ICU stay [11 (5.7–20) vs. 9 (5.7–19)], recovery of kidney function (26.9 vs. 29.6 %, p = 0.11), need for chronic dialysis (9.7 vs. 6.5 %, p = 0.23), and hospital mortality (63.4 vs. 63.9 %, p = 0.94). The groups were different in metabolic and fluid control. Blood urea nitrogen (BUN), creatinine, and bicarbonate levels were stabilized faster in EHD group than in HVPD group. Delivered Kt/V and ultrafiltration were higher in EHD group. Despite randomization, there were significant differences between the groups in some covariates, including age, pre-dialysis BUN, and creatinine levels, biased in favor of the EHD. Using logistic regression to adjust for the imbalances in group assignment, the odds of death associated with HVPD was 1.4 (95 % CI 0.7–2.4, p = 0.19). A detailed investigation of the randomization process failed to explain the marked differences in patient assignment.

Conclusions

Despite faster metabolic control and higher dialysis dose and ultrafiltration with EHD, this study provides no evidence of a survival benefit of EHD compared with HVPD. The limitations of this study were that the results were not presented according to the intention to treat and it did not control other supportive management strategies as nutrition support and timing of dialysis initiation that might influence outcomes in AKI.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Uchino S, Kellum JA, Bellomo R et al (2005) Acute renal failure in critically ill patients: a multinational, multicenter study. JAMA 294:813–881

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Ricci Z, Ronco C, D’amico G et al (2006) Practice patterns in the management of acute renal failure in the critically Ill patient: an international survey. Nephrol Dial Transplant 21(3):690–696

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Ikizler TA, Himmelfarb J (2007) Acute kidney injury: changing lexicography, definitions, and epidemiology. Kidney Int 71:971–976

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Mehta RL et al (2001) A randomized clinical trial of continuous versus intermittent dialysis for acute renal failure. Kidney Int 60:1154–1163

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Himmelfarb J (2007) Continuous dialysis is not superior to intermittent dialysis in acute kidney injury of critically ill patient. Nat Clin Pract Nephrol 3:120–121

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Gabriel DP, Nascimento GVR, Caramori JT, Martim LC, Barretti P, Balbi AL (2006) Peritoneal dialysis in acute acute renal failure. Ren Fail 28(6):451–456

    Google Scholar 

  7. Uehlinger DE et al (2005) Comparison of continuous and intermittent renal replacement therapy for acute renal failure. Nephrol Dial Transplant 20:1630–1637

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Augustine JJ et al (2004) A randomized controlled trial comparing intermittent with continuous dialysis in patients with ARF. Am J Kidney Dis 44:1000–1007

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Vinsonneau C et al (2006) Continuous venovenous haemodiafiltration versus intermittent haemodialysis for acute renal failure in patients with multiple-organ dysfunction syndrome: a multicenter randomized trial. Lancet 368:379–385

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Marshall MR, Ma T, Galler D, Rankin APN, Williams AB (2004) Sustained low-efficiency daily diafiltration (SLEDD-f) for critically ill patients requiring renal replacement therapy: towards and adequate therapy. Nephrol Dial Transplant 19(4):877–884

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kumar VA, Craig M, Depner TA, Yeun JY (2000) A new approach to renal replacement for acute renal failure in the intensive care unit. Am J Kidney Dis 36(2):294–300

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Gabriel DP, Nascimento GVR, Caramori JT, Martim LC, Barretti P, Balbi AL (2007) High volume peritoneal diálisis for acute renal failure. Perit Dial Int 27:277–282

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Ponce D, Balbi A (2011) Peritoneal dialysis in acute kidney injury: a viable alternative. Perit Dial Int 31(4):387–389

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Gabriel DP, Caramori JT, Martim LC, Barretti P, Balbi AL (2008) Continuous peritoneal dialysis × daily hemodialysis in acute kidney injury: a prospective and randomized trial. Kidney Int 73:S87–S93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Mehta RL, Kellum JA, Shah SV, Molitoris BA, Ronco C, Warnock DG et al (2007) Acute kidney injury network: report of an initiative to improve outcomes in acute kidney injury. Crit Care 11(2):R31

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Liano F, Gallego A, Pascual J, Garcia-Martin F, Teruel JL, Marcen R et al (1993) Prognosis of acute tubular necrosis: an extended prospectively contrasted study. Nephron 63:21–23

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Du Bois D, Du Bois EF (1915) The measurement of surface area of man. Arch Int Med 15:868–881

    Google Scholar 

  18. Chumlea WC, Roche AF, Steinbaugh ML (1985) Estimating stature from knee height for persons 60 to 90 years of age. J Am Geriatric Soc 33:116–120

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Watson PE, Watson ID, Batt RD (1980) Total body water volumes for adults males and females estimated from simple anthropometric measurements. Am J Clin Nutr 33:27–39

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Daugirdas JT (2007) Physiologic principles and urea kinetic modeling. In: Daugirdas JT, Blake PG, Ing TS (eds) Handbook of dialysis, 4th edn. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia, pp 23–53

    Google Scholar 

  21. Manns M, Sigler MH, Teehan BP (1997) Intradialytic renal haemodynamics: potential consequences for the management of the patient with acute renal failure. Nephrol Dial Transplant 12:870–872

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Ronco C (2007) Can peritoneal dialysis be considered an option for the treatment of acute kidney injury? Perit Dial Int 27:251–253

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Passadakis PS, Oreopoulos GD (2007) Peritoneal dialysis in patients with acute renal failure. Adv Perit Dial 23:7–16

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Ronco C (2006) Factors affecting hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis efficiency. Contrib Nephrol 150:1–12

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Chionh CY, Soni S, Cruz DN, Ronco C (2009) Peritoneal dialysis for acute kidney injury: techniques and dose. Contrib Nephrol 163:278–284

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Phu NH, Hien TT, Mai NTH, Chau TT, Chuong LV, Loc PP et al (2002) Hemofiltration and peritoneal dialysis in infection associated acute renal failure in Vietnam. N Engl J Med 347:895–902

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. George G, Varma S, Kumar S, Thomas J, Gopi S, Pisharodi R (2011) Comparing continuous vevovenous hemodiafiltration and peritoneal dialysis in critical ill patients with acute kidney injury: a pilot study. Perit Dial Int 4:422–429

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Bazari H (2003) Hemofiltration and peritoneal dialysis in infection-associated acute renal failure. N Engl J Med 27:858–860

    Google Scholar 

  29. Burdmann EA, Chakravarthi R (2011) Peritoneal dialysis in acute kidney injury: lessons learned and applied. Semin Dial 24(2):149–156

    Google Scholar 

  30. Almeida Puatto C, Ponce D, Balbi AL (2001) Avaliacao da Mecanica Ventilatoria de Pacientes com Lesao Renal Aguda submetidos a Dialise Peritoneal Continua ou a Hemodialise Diaria. In: Presented at the Anais do XVI Congresso Paulista de Nefrologia, Atibaia, Sao Paulo, Brazil, 16–19 Sept 2001

  31. VA/NIH Acute Renal Failure Trial Network, Palevsky PM, Zhang JH, O’Connor TZ, Chertow GM, Crowley ST, Choudhury D, Finkel K, Kellum JA, Paganini E, Schein RM, Smith MW, Swanson KM, Thompson BT, Vijayan A, Watnick S, Star RA,Peduzzi P (2008) Intensity of renal support in critically Ill patients with acute kidney injury. N Engl J Med 10:359–373

    Google Scholar 

  32. RENAL Replacement Therapy Study Investigators, Bellomo R, Cass A, Cole L, Finfer S, Gallagher M, Lo S, McArthur C, McGuinness S, Myburgh J, Norton R, Scheinkestel C, Su S (2009) Intensity of continuous renal-replacement therapy in critically Ill patients. N Engl J Med 17:1627–1638

    Google Scholar 

  33. Chitalia V, Almeida AF, Rai H, Bapat M, Vipul KC, Khannal R (2002) Is peritoneal dialysis adequate for hypercatabolic acute renal failure in developing countries? Kidney Int 61:747–757

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Vijayan A, Palevsky PM (2012) Dosage of renal replacement therapy in acute kidney injury. Am J Kidney Dis 4:569–576

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Ponce D, Brito GA, Abrão JMG, Balbi AL (2011) Different peritoneal dialysis doses and outcome of acute kidney injury patients. Adv Perit Dial 27:118–124

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Chionh CY, Ronco C, Finkelstein FO, Soni SS, Cruz DN (2010) Acute peritoneal dialysis: what is the ‘adequate’ dose for acute kidney injury? Nephrol Dial Transplant 25:3155–3160

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Ponce D, Berbel MN, Almeida CTP, Goes CR, Balbi AL (2012) High volume peritoneal dialysis in acute kidney injury: indications and limitations. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 7:887–889

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

This study was supported by Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University São Paulo State (UNESP), Botucatu, Sao Paulo, Brazil

    D. Ponce, M. N. Berbel, J. M. G. Abrão, C. R. Goes & A. L. Balbi

Authors
  1. D. Ponce
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M. N. Berbel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. J. M. G. Abrão
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. C. R. Goes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. A. L. Balbi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to D. Ponce.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ponce, D., Berbel, M.N., Abrão, J.M.G. et al. A randomized clinical trial of high volume peritoneal dialysis versus extended daily hemodialysis for acute kidney injury patients. Int Urol Nephrol 45, 869–878 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-012-0301-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-012-0301-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation