Objective To investigate the safety and efficacy of two different anticoagulation regimens of fondaparinux and low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) in continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT). Methods The clinical data of patients undergoing CRRT in West China Hospital of Sichuan University between October 2021 and April 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. The patients were divided into fondaparinux sodium group and LMWH group according to anticoagulation with fondaparinux or LMWH during CRRT. The general condition, life expectancy of cardiopulmonary bypass, coagulation events, bleeding events, hemoglobin, and coagulation function-related indicators were compared between the two groups. Results A total of 78 patients were finally included, including 38 in the LMWH group and 40 in the fondaparinux group. The age of the patients in the LMWH group was older than that in the fondaparinux group [76.0 (57.0, 85.0) vs. 63.0 (52.3, 76.0) years, P=0.016]. There was no significant difference in other clinical baseline conditions (including gender, vascular access site, and treatment indications) between the two groups (P≥0.05). The cardiopulmonary bypass life of patients in the fondaparinux group was better than that in the LMWH group [67.1 (35.0, 72.0) vs. 42.0 (20.0, 55.3) h, P=0.003]. The survival rate of cardiopulmonary bypass in the fondaparinux group at 24, 48, and 72 h were higher than that in the LMWH group (87.5% vs. 65.8%, P=0.023; 67.5% vs. 36.8%, P=0.007; 42.5% vs. 13.2%, P=0.004). The incidence of blood filter coagulation events in the fondaparinux group was lower than that in the LMWH group (50.0% vs. 84.2%, P=0.001). There was no significant difference in the incidence of coagulation events and mild bleeding events between the two groups (P>0.05). There was no significant difference in hemoglobin and coagulation function-related indicators between the two groups before and after CRRT (P>0.05). Conclusion The continuity of maintenance therapy with fondaparinux is better than that of LMWH, and the safety of both in the course of CRRT treatment is comparable.
Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of in vitro anticoagulation with nafamostat mesilate in continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) in patients with sepsis complicated with acute kidney injury (AKI). Methods The study subjects were sepsis patients with AKI who underwent CRRT in West China Hospital of Sichuan University and were at high risk of bleeding. CRRT patients who received in vitro anticoagulation with nafamostat mesilate between July 2021 and January 2022 were included in the nafamostat group. The medical records of CRRT patients who did not use anticoagulants between January 2020 and December 2020 were retrospectively collected as a control group. The general situation, the lifespan of the first CRRT filter, the number of filters used within 72 hours of treatment, laboratory tests before and after treatment, and the occurrence of adverse reactions during treatment of the two groups of patients were analyzed. Results There were 42 patients in the control group and 21 patients in the nafamostat group. There was no statistically significant difference in age, gender, body mass index, mean arterial pressure, primary disease, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation Ⅱ score, or pre-treatment laboratory test results between the two groups of patients (P>0.05). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed that the lifespan of the first filter was longer in the nafamostat group than in the control group (hazard ratio=0.408, P<0.05). The number of filters used by the control group patients after 72 hours of treatment was greater than that of the nafamostat group patients (2.1±0.6 vs. 1.3±0.5, P<0.05). After 72 hours of treatment, serum creatinine levels [(99.4±15.7) vs. (127.6±20.5)] μmol/L], urea nitrogen [(4.5±1.9) vs. (6.8±2.3) mmol/L], cystatin C [(1.0±0.2) vs. (1.2±0.2) mg/L], uric acid [(86.5±15.3) vs. (105.3±20.3) μmol/L] in the nafamostat group were lower than those of the control group (P<0.05), and there was no statistically significant difference in the results of other laboratory tests (P>0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in adverse reactions between the two groups of patients (P>0.05). Conclusion For patients with sepsis complicated with AKI who undergo CRRT and are at high risk of bleeding, nafamostat mesilate may be a safe and effective anticoagulant for in vitro anticoagulation.