Acute renal failure in renal allograft recipients and patients with native kidneys

In order to evaluate the role of underlying disease in the high mortality observed in acute renal failure (ARF) and risk factors related to the development of oliguric ARF in renal allograft recipients, two groups were selected: 34 patients with native kidneys, aged 16 and 57 years, and presenting ischemic ARF caused by cardiovascular collapse, with no signs of infection at the time of diagnosis; and 34 renal allograft recipients who developed ARF immediately after transplantation, without rejection. ARF was defined either as 30% increase of basal plasmatic creatinine in patients with native kidneys or non-normalization of plasmatic creatinine at day 5 after transplantation in renal allograft recipients; oliguria as diuresis ≤ 400 mL/24 h. There were no differences in age, male frequency, oliguria presence and duration, need for dialysis, and infection episodes for renal allograft recipients and patients with native kidneys. The development of sepsis (3% and 41%) and death rate (3% and 44%) were higher in patients with native kidneys (p < 0.01). The renal allograft recipients with both oliguric (n = 18) and nonoliguric (n = 16) ARF were evaluated and no difference was observed in the recipient's age, donor's age, cold ischemia time, time elapsed until plasmatic creatinine normalization, donor's plasmatic creatinine or urea, and mean arterial pressure. No differences were observed between the groups regarding frequency of infection episodes during ARF and frequency of death. In conclusion, renal allograft recipients presented a lower death rate and were less susceptible to sepsis. Cold ischemia time, age, and hemodynamic characteristics of the donor did not affect the development of oliguria.

Peritoneal dialysis in acute renal failure

The definition of adequate dialysis in acute renal failure (ARF) is complex and involves the time of referral to dialysis, dose, and dialytic method. Nephrologist experience with a specific procedure and the availability of different dialysis modalities play an important role in these choices. There is no consensus in literature on the best method or ideal dialysis dose in ARF. Peritoneal dialysis (PD) is used less and less in ARF patients, and is being replaced by continuous venovenous therapies. However, it should not be discarded as a worthless therapeutic option for ARF patients. PD offers several advantages over hemodialysis, such as its technical simplicity, excellent cardiovascular tolerance, absence of an extracorporeal circuit, lack of bleeding risk, and low risk of hydro-electrolyte imbalance. PD also has some limitations, though: it needs an intact peritoneal cavity, carries risks of peritoneal infection and protein losses, and has an overall lower effectiveness. Because daily solute clearance is lower with PD than with daily HD, there have been concerns that PD cannot control uremia in ARF patients. Controversies exist concerning its use in patients with severe hypercatabolism; in these cases, daily hemodialysis or continuous venovenous therapy have been preferred. There is little literature on PD in ARF patients, and what exists does not address fundamental parameters such as adequate quantification of dialysis and patient catabolism. Given these limitations, there is a pressing need to re-evaluate the adequacy of PD in ARF using accepted standards. Therefore, new studies should be undertaken to resolve these problems. Copyright © Informa Healthcare.

Different prescribed doses of high-volume peritoneal dialysis and outcome of patients with acute kidney injury.

The optimal dialysis dose for the treatment of acute kidney injury (AKI) is controversial. No studies have directly examined the effects of peritoneal dialysis (PD) dose on outcomes in AKI. From January 2005 to January 2007, we randomly assigned critically ill patients with AKI to receive higher- or lower-intensity PD therapy (prescribed Kt/Vof 0.8 and 0.5 per session respectively). The main outcome measure was death within 30 days. Of the 61 enrolled patients, 30 were randomly assigned to higher-intensity therapy, and 31, to a lower-intensity PD dose. The two study groups had similar baseline characteristics and received treatment for 6.1 days and 5.7 days respectively (p = 0.42). At 30 days after randomization, 17 deaths had occurred in the higher-intensity group (55%), and 16 deaths, in the lower-intensity group (53%, p = 0.83). There was a significant difference between the groups in the PD dose prescribed compared with the dose delivered (higher-intensity group: 0.8 vs. 0.59, p = 0.04; lower-intensity group: 0.5 vs. 0.49, p = 0.89). The groups had similar metabolic control after 4 PD sessions (blood urea nitrogen: 69.3 +/- 14.4 mg/dL and 60.3 +/- 11.1 mg/dL respectively, p = 0. 71). In critically ill patients with AKI, an intensive PD dose did not lower the mortality or improve the recovery of kidney function or metabolic control. The PD dose is limited by dialysate flow and membrane permeability, and clearance per exchange can decrease if a shorter dwell time is applied.

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

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. © 2012 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht.

Can Delivery Dialysis Dose Affect Survival of Acute Kidney Injury Patients?

Intensity of dialysis dose in acute kidney injury (AKI) might benefit critically ill patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of intermittent hemodialysis (IHD) dose on mortality in patients with AKI. Methods: Prospective observational study was performed on AKI patients treated with IHD. The delivered dialysis dose per session was calculated based on single-pool Kt/V urea. Patients were allocated in two groups according to the weekly delivered median Kt/V: higher intensity dialysis dose (HID: Kt/V higher than median) and lower intensity dialysis dose (LID: Kt/V lower than median). Thereafter, AKI patients were divided according to the presence or absence of sepsis and urine output. Clinical and lab characteristics and survival of AKI patients were compared. Results: A total of 121 AKI patients were evaluated. Forty-two patients did not present with sepsis and 45 did not present with oliguria. Mortality rate after 30 days was lower in the HID group without sepsis (14.3% x 47.6%; p = 0.045) and without oliguria (31.8% x 69.5%; p = 0.025). Survival curves also showed that the HID group had higher survival rate when compared with the LID group in non-septic and non-oliguric patients (p = 0.007 and p = 0.003, respectively). Conclusion: Higher dialysis doses can be associated with better survival of less seriously ill AKI patients.

Advances in Peritoneal Dialysis in Acute Kidney Injury

Peritoneal dialysis (PD) is a simple, safe, cheap, and efficient renal replacement therapy method. It can correct metabolic disorders and fluid overload in acute kidney injury (AKI) patients both in and out of the intensive care unit. Use of PD in AKI is enhanced by placement of a Tenckhoff catheter, which can be safely accomplished at the bedside. Some PD modalities, such as high-volume PD and continuous-flow PD, can provide dialysis doses and efficiency comparable to extracorporeal blood purification methods. PD is particularly suitable for neonates, children, and patients with refractory heart failure or who are otherwise hemodynamically unstable. PD should be considered in situations where systemic anticoagulation and/or vascular access are problematic. PD is limited by a lower efficiency that may produce inadequate renal replacement in larger and/or severely hypercatabolic patients. Fluid removal can be unpredictable, there is a risk of infection, and possible issues with mechanical ventilation. In this article, we discuss the use of PD in AKI, with emphasis on recent advances. Copyright (c) 2012 S. Karger AG, Basel

When is dialysis indicated in acute kidney injury?

The indications for dialysis in patients with acute kidney injury (AKI), as well as the dose and timing of initiation, remain uncertain. Recent data have suggested that early initiation of renal replacement therapy (RRT) may be associated with decreased mortality but not with the recovery of kidney function. A blood urea nitrogen (BUN) level of 75 mg/dL is a useful indicator for dialysis in asymptomatic patients, but one that is based on studies with limitations. Different parameters, including absolute and relative indicators, are needed. Currently, nephrologists should consider the trajectory of disease, and the clinical condition and prognosis of the patient are more important than numerical values in the decision to initiate dialysis.

Continuous peritoneal dialysis compared with daily hemodialysis in patients with acute kidney injury

Background: In some parts of the world, peritoneal dialysis is widely used for renal replacement therapy (RRT) in acute kidney injury (AKI), despite concerns about its inadequacy. It has been replaced in recent years by hemodialysis and, most recently, by continuous venovenous therapies. We performed a prospective study to determine the effect of continuous peritoneal dialysis (CPD), as compared with daily hemodialysis (dHD), on survival among patients with AKI.Methods: A total of 120 patients with acute tubular necrosis (ATN) were assigned to receive CPD or dHD in a tertiary-care university hospital. The primary endpoint was hospital survival rate; renal function recovery and metabolic, acid-base, and fluid controls were secondary endpoints.Results: of the 120 patients, 60 were treated with CPD (G1) and 60 with dHD (G2). The two groups were similar at the start of RRT with respect to age (64.2 +/- 19.8 years vs 62.5 +/- 21.2 years), sex (men: 72% vs 66%), sepsis (42% vs 47%), shock (61% vs 63%), severity of AKI [Acute Tubular Necrosis Individual Severity Score (ATNISS): 0.68 +/- 0.2 vs 0.66 +/- 0.22; Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II: 26.9 +/- 8.9 vs 24.1 +/- 8.2], pre-dialysis blood urea nitrogen [BUN (116.4 +/- 33.6 mg/dL vs 112.6 +/- 36.8 mg/dL)], and creatinine (5.85 +/- 1.9 mg/dL vs 5.95 +/- 1.4 mg/dL). In G1, weekly delivered Kt/V was 3.59 +/- 0.61, and in G2, it was 4.76 +/- 0.65 (p < 0.01). The two groups were similar in metabolic and acid-base control (after 4 sessions, BUN < 55 mg/dL: 46 +/- 18.7 mg/dL vs 52 +/- 18.2 mg/dL; pH: 7.41 vs 7.38; bicarbonate: 22.8 +/- 8.9 mEq/L vs 22.2 +/- 7.1 mEq/L). Duration of therapy was longer in G2 (5.5 days vs 7.5 days; p = 0.02). Despite the delivery of different dialysis methods and doses, the survival rate did not differ between the groups (58% in G1 vs 52% in G2), and recovery of renal function was similar (28% vs 26%).Conclusion: High doses of CPD provided appropriate metabolic and pH control, with a rate of survival and recovery of renal function similar to that seen with dHD. Therefore, CPD can be considered an alternative to other forms of RRT in AKI.

Intra-abdominal pressure as a predictor of acute kidney injury in postoperative abdominal surgery

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to determine if intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) could predict acute renal injury (AKI) in the postoperative period of abdominal surgeries, and which would be its cutoff value. Patients and methods: A prospective observational study was conducted in the period from January 2010 to March 2011 in the Intensive Care Units (ICUs) of the University Hospital of Botucatu Medical School, UNESP. Consecutive patients undergoing abdominal surgery were included in the study. Initial evaluation, at admission in ICU, was performed in order to obtain demographic, clinical surgical and therapeutic data. Evaluation of IAP was obtained by the intravesical method, four times per day, and renal function was evaluated during the patient's stay in the ICU until discharge, death or occurrence of AKI. Results: A total of 60 patients were evaluated, 16 patients developed intra-abdominal hypertension (IAH), 45 developed an abnormal IAP (>7 mmHg) and 26 developed AKI. The first IAP at the time of admission to the ICU was able to predict the occurrence of AKI (area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve was 0.669; p=0.029) with the best cutoff point (by Youden index method) >= 7.68 mmHg, sensitivity of 87%, specificity of 46% at this point. The serial assessment of this parameter did not added prognostic value to initial evaluation. Conclusion: IAH was frequent in patients undergoing abdominal surgeries during ICU stay, and it predicted the occurrence of AKI. Serial assessments of IAP did not provided better discriminatory power than initial evaluation.

Peritoneal dialysis in acute kidney injury: trends in the outcome across time periods

Peritoneal dialysis (PD) should be considered a suitable method of renal replacement therapy in acute kidney injury (AKI) patients. This study is the largest cohort providing patient characteristics, clinical practice, patterns and their relationship to outcomes in a developing country. Its objective was to describe the main determinants of patient and technique survival, including trends over time of PD treatment in AKI patients. This was a Brazilian prospective cohort study in which all adult AKI patients on PD were studied from January/2004 to January/2014. For comparison purposes, patients were divided into 2 groups according to the year of treatment: 2004-2008 and 2009-2014. Patient survival and technique failure (TF) were analyzed using the competing risk model of Fine and Gray. A total of 301 patients were included, 51 were transferred to hemodialysis (16.9%) during the study period. The main cause of TF was mechanical complication (47%) followed by peritonitis (41.2%). There was change in TF during the study period: compared to 2004-2008, patients treated at 2009-2014 had relative risk (RR) reduction of 0.86 (95% CI 0.77-0.96) and three independent risk factors were identified: period of treatment at 2009 and 2014, sepsis and age>65 years. There were 180 deaths (59.8%) during the study. Death was the leading cause of dropout (77.9% of all cases) mainly by sepsis (58.3%), followed cardiovascular disease (36.1%). The overall patient survival was 41% at 30 days. Patient survival improved along study periods: compared to 2004-2008, patients treated at 2009-2014 had a RR reduction of 0.87 (95% CI 0.79-0.98). The independent risk factors for mortality were sepsis, age>70 years, ATN-ISS > 0.65 and positive fluid balance. As conclusion, we observed an improvement in patient survival and TF along the years even after correction for several confounders and using a competing risk approach.

Dialysis complications in acute kidney injury patients treated with prolonged intermittent renal replacement therapy sessions lasting 10 versus 6 hours: results of a randomized clinical trial

Prolonged intermittent renal replacement therapy (PIRRT) has emerged as an alternative to continuous renal replacement therapy in the management of acute kidney injury (AKI) patients. This trial aimed to compare the dialysis complications occurring during different durations of PIRRT sessions in critically ill AKI patients. We included patients older than 18 years with AKI associated with sepsis admitted to the intensive care unit and using noradrenaline doses ranging from 0.3 to 0.7 mu g/kg/min. Patients were divided into two groups randomly: in G1, 6-h sessions were performed, and in G2, 10-h sessions were performed. Seventy-five patients were treated with 195 PIRRT sessions for 18 consecutive months. The prevalence of hypotension, filter clotting, hypokalemia, and hypophosphatemia was 82.6, 25.3, 20, and 10.6%, respectively. G1 was composed of 38 patients treated with 100 sessions, whereas G2 consisted of 37 patients treated with 95 sessions. G1 and G2 were similar in male predominance (65.7 vs. 75.6%, P=0.34), age (63.6 +/- 14 vs. 59.9 +/- 15.5 years, P=0.28) and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score (SOFA; 13.1 +/- 2.4 vs. 14.2 +/- 3.0, P=0.2). There was no significant difference between the two groups in hypotension (81.5 vs. 83.7%, P=0.8), filter clotting (23.6 vs. 27%, P=0.73), hypokalemia (13.1 vs. 8.1%, P=0.71), and hypophosphatemia (18.4 vs. 21.6%, P=0.72). However, the group treated with sessions of 10h were refractory to clinical measures for hypotension, and dialysis sessions were interrupted more often (9.5 vs. 30.1%, P=0.03). Metabolic control and fluid balance were similar between G1 and G2 (blood urea nitrogen [BUN]: 81 +/- 30 vs. 73 +/- 33mg/dL, P=1.0; delivered Kt/V: 1.09 +/- 0.24 vs. 1.26 +/- 0.26, P=0.09; actual ultrafiltration: 1731 +/- 818 vs. 2332 +/- 947mL, P=0.13) and fluid balance (-731 +/- 125 vs. -652 +/- 141mL, respectively) . In conclusion, intradialysis hypotension was common in AKI patients treated with PIRRT. There was no difference in the prevalence of dialysis complications in patients undergoing different durations of PIRRT.

Early initiation of dialysis: mortality and renal function recovery in acute kidney injury patients

INTRODUÇÃO: A decisão de quando iniciar a diálise em pacientes com lesão renal aguda (LRA) que apresentam síndrome urêmica está bem estabelecida, entretanto, com ureia < 200 mg/dl o melhor momento para iniciar a diálise torna-se incerto. OBJETIVO: Este estudo teve como objetivo avaliar a mortalidade e a recuperação da função renal em pacientes com LRA, cujo início da diálise ocorreu em diferentes níveis de ureia. MÉTODOS: Estudo retrospectivo desenvolvido em hospital escola, no estado de São Paulo, Brasil, envolvendo 86 pacientes submetidos à diálise. RESULTADOS: A diálise foi iniciada com uréia > 150 mg/dl em 23 pacientes (grupo I) e uréia > 150 mg/dl em 63 pacientes (grupo II). Hipervolemia e mortalidade foram mais frequentes no grupo I que no grupo II (65,2 x 14,2% - p < 0,05; 39,1 x 68,9% - p < 0,05, respectivamente). Entre os sobreviventes, a recuperação renal foi maior no grupo I (71,4 e 36,8%, respectivamente, p < 0,05). A análise multivariada mostrou risco independente de mortalidade relacionado à sepse, idade > 60 anos, diálise peritoneal e uréia > 150 mg/dl no início da diálise. CONCLUSÃO: Menor mortalidade e maior recuperação renal estão associadas com o diálise iniciada precocemente, conforme baixos níveis de ureia, em pacientes com LRA.

High volume peritoneal dialysis vs daily hemodialysis: A randomized, controlled trial in patients with acute kidney injury

There is no consensus in the literature on the best renal replacement therapy (RRT) in acute kidney injury (AKI), with both hemodialysis (HD) and peritoneal dialysis (PD) being used as AKI therapy. However, there are concerns about the inadequacy of PD as well as about the intermittency of HD complicated by hemodynamic instability. Recently, continuous replacement renal therapy (CRRT) have become the most commonly used dialysis method for AKI around the world. A prospective randomized controlled trial was performed to compare the effect of high volume peritoneal dialysis (HVPD) with daily hemodialysis (DHD) on AKI patient survival. A total of 120 patients with acute tubular necrosis (ATN) were assigned to HVPD or DHD in a tertiary-care university hospital. The primary end points were hospital survival rate and renal function recovery, with metabolic control as the secondary end point. Sixty patients were treated with HVPD and 60 with DHD. The HVPD and DHD groups were similar for age ( 64.2 +/- 19.8 and 62.5 +/- 21.2 years), gender ( male: 72 and 66%), sepsis ( 42 and 47%), hemodynamic instability ( 61 and 63%), severity of AKI ( Acute Tubular Necrosis-Index Specific Score (ATN-ISS): 0.68 +/- 0.2 and 0.66 +/- 0.2), Acute Physiology, Age, and Chronic Health Evaluation Score (APACHE II) (26.9 +/- 8.9 and 24.1 +/- 8.2), pre-dialysis BUN (116.4 +/- 33.6 and 112.6 +/- 36.8mg per 100 ml), and creatinine ( 5.8 +/- 1.9 and 5.9 +/- 1.4 mg per 100 ml). Weekly delivered Kt/V was 3.6 +/- 0.6 in HVPD and 4.7 +/- 0.6 in DHD ( P<0.01). Metabolic control, mortality rate ( 58 and 53%), and renal function recovery ( 28 and 26%) were similar in both groups, whereas HVPD was associated with a significantly shorter time to the recovery of renal function. In conclusion, HVPD and DHD can be considered as alternative forms of RRT in AKI.