Sustained low-efficiency daily dialysis with hemofiltration for acute kidney injury in the presence of sepsis

• Published in: Clinical nephrology Vol. 69; no. 1; p. 40
• Main Authors: Holt, B G, White, J J, Kuthiala, A, Fall, P, Szerlip, H M
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Germany 01.01.2008
• Subjects: Acute Kidney Injury - complications; Acute Kidney Injury - mortality; Acute Kidney Injury - therapy; Adult; Female; Follow-Up Studies; Hemodiafiltration - methods; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Renal Dialysis - methods; Retrospective Studies; Sepsis - complications; Sepsis - mortality; Sepsis - therapy; Survival Rate; Treatment Outcome; United States - epidemiology; United States
• DOI: 10.5414/CNP69040
• ISSN: 0301-0430

Acute kidney injury (AKI) commonly occurs in critically ill patients with sepsis and is associated with poor outcomes. Unfortunately, the ideal mode of renal replacement therapy remains unknown. Because both higher doses of dialysis and hemofiltration have been associated with improved survival, we postulated that adding hemofiltration to the diffusive clearance achieved by sustained low-efficiency daily dialysis (SLEDD-f) would provide a survival advantage over SLEDD. From December 2003 to October 2005, we retrospectively analyzed all patients with multisystem organ failure, vasopressor-dependent hypotension and oliguric acute kidney failure secondary to nonoperative sepsis who were treated with renal replacement therapy (RRT). After exclusionary criteria were applied, 8 patients received SLEDD-f and 13 patients received SLEDD. All treatments were for 8 - 16 h/day. SLEDD-f was continued until vasopressors were reduced to a minimal dose. Outcomes were mortality and recovery of renal function at 30 days after initiation of RRT. APACHE- II scores were calculated at the time of dialysis initiation to predict mortality. Despite higher APACHE II scores, 30-day survival was 100% in the SLEDD-f group and 38% in the SLEDD group. Furthermore, most of the SLEDD-f patients were able to have vasopressors weaned quickly and all patients in the SLEDD-f group recovered significant renal function to allow discontinuation of RRT. While the optimal treatment remains unknown, this small study raises the possibility that SLEDD-f offers a survival advantage and increases the chance of renal recovery while decreasing the need for vasopressors. A large randomized trial comparing SLEDD-f with other forms of renal replacement therapy is needed.