Intensity of continuous renal-replacement therapy in critically ill patients
- PMID: 19846848
- DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa0902413
Intensity of continuous renal-replacement therapy in critically ill patients
Abstract
Background: The optimal intensity of continuous renal-replacement therapy remains unclear. We conducted a multicenter, randomized trial to compare the effect of this therapy, delivered at two different levels of intensity, on 90-day mortality among critically ill patients with acute kidney injury.
Methods: We randomly assigned critically ill adults with acute kidney injury to continuous renal-replacement therapy in the form of postdilution continuous venovenous hemodiafiltration with an effluent flow of either 40 ml per kilogram of body weight per hour (higher intensity) or 25 ml per kilogram per hour (lower intensity). The primary outcome measure was death within 90 days after randomization.
Results: Of the 1508 enrolled patients, 747 were randomly assigned to higher-intensity therapy, and 761 to lower-intensity therapy with continuous venovenous hemodiafiltration. Data on primary outcomes were available for 1464 patients (97.1%): 721 in the higher-intensity group and 743 in the lower-intensity group. The two study groups had similar baseline characteristics and received the study treatment for an average of 6.3 and 5.9 days, respectively (P=0.35). At 90 days after randomization, 322 deaths had occurred in the higher-intensity group and 332 deaths in the lower-intensity group, for a mortality of 44.7% in each group (odds ratio, 1.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.81 to 1.23; P=0.99). At 90 days, 6.8% of survivors in the higher-intensity group (27 of 399), as compared with 4.4% of survivors in the lower-intensity group (18 of 411), were still receiving renal-replacement therapy (odds ratio, 1.59; 95% CI, 0.86 to 2.92; P=0.14). Hypophosphatemia was more common in the higher-intensity group than in the lower-intensity group (65% vs. 54%, P<0.001).
Conclusions: In critically ill patients with acute kidney injury, treatment with higher-intensity continuous renal-replacement therapy did not reduce mortality at 90 days. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00221013.)
2009 Massachusetts Medical Society
Comment in
-
Renal support in acute kidney injury--how much is enough?N Engl J Med. 2009 Oct 22;361(17):1699-701. doi: 10.1056/NEJMe0907831. N Engl J Med. 2009. PMID: 19846856 No abstract available.
-
Intensity of continuous renal-replacement therapy.N Engl J Med. 2010 Feb 4;362(5):466; author reply 467-8. doi: 10.1056/NEJMc0911473. N Engl J Med. 2010. PMID: 20130257 No abstract available.
-
ACP Journal Club. Higher-intensity continuous renal-replacement therapy did not reduce mortality in critically ill patients with kidney injury.Ann Intern Med. 2010 Feb 16;152(4):JC-25. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-152-4-201002160-02005. Ann Intern Med. 2010. PMID: 20157129 No abstract available.
-
Intensity of continuous renal-replacement therapy.N Engl J Med. 2010 Feb 4;362(5):466-7; author reply 467-8. N Engl J Med. 2010. PMID: 20162764 No abstract available.
-
Intensity of continuous renal-replacement therapy.N Engl J Med. 2010 Feb 4;362(5):467; author reply 467-8. N Engl J Med. 2010. PMID: 20162765 No abstract available.
-
Precision Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy and Solute Control.Blood Purif. 2016;42(3):238-47. doi: 10.1159/000448507. Epub 2016 Aug 26. Blood Purif. 2016. PMID: 27562079
Publication types
MeSH terms
Associated data
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical