ObjectiveTo evaluate the efficacy of the continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) for acute kidney injury (AKI) after the surgery of type A aortic dissection. MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed 58 hemodialysis patients with AKI after type A aortic dissection surgery in our hospital between January 2003 and January 2014.The 58 patients were divided into two groups including a bedside intermittent hemodialysis (IHD) group and a CRRT group based on the methods of hemodialysis. There were 38 patients with 29 males and 9 females at average age of 49.8± 13.7 years in the CRRT group. There were 20 patients in the IHD group with 14 males and 6 females at average age of 52.6± 11.0 years. ResultsCompared with IHD, CRRT had significantly greater effect on reducing the simplified acute physiology scoring system (SAPS)Ⅱscore (Ftime=60.964, P=0.000; Ftime * group=3.178, P=0.041). However, there was no significant difference in reducing the acute tubular necrosis individual illness severity index (ATN-ISI) score between the two groups (Ftime=13.803, P=0.000; Ftime * group=0.222, P=0.951). Lower incidences of dialysis-related complications including hypotension (P=0.027) and acute congestive heart failure (P=0.011) were found in the CRRT group. There was no statistical difference in operation time (P=0.367) between the two groups. While statistical differences in duration of hospitalization in intensive care unit (P=0.006), in hospital time (P=0.047), frequency of dialysis (P=0.001), and dialysis time (P=0.039) were found between the two groups. However there were no significant differences in mortality during hospital (P=0.544)and incidences of recovery (P=0.056) between the two groups. ConclusionCompared with IHD, CRRT had significantly positive effect on patients who suffered from AKI after type A aortic dissection surgery, which can help reduce incidences of dialysis-related complications, duration and cost of hospitalization in ICU.
Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of intermittent hemodialysis (IHD) and continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) on patients with acute kidney injury (AKI) after bee sting. Methods A prospective observational analysis was made on patients with AKI after bee sting treated in Jianyang People’s Hospital or West China Hospital of Sichuan University between July 2015 and December 2020. According to different initial renal replacement therapy modes, the patients were divided into IHD group and CRRT group. The IHD group received hemodialysis for 4 hours each time, once a day or 3-5 times a week; the CRRT group used Prismaflex machine for continuous veno-venous hemofiltration or continuous veno-venous hemodiafiltration within 72 hours after admission, for at least 12 hours a day, followed by CRRT or IHD, depending on the patient’s condition. Both groups could be treated with hemoperfusion (HP) and symptomatic support such as glucocorticoid, blood transfusion and fluid rehydration. The IHD group was divided into IHD subgroup and IHD+HP subgroup, and the CRRT group was divided into CRRT subgroup and CRRT+HP subgroup according to whether renal replacement therapy was combined with HP. The basic information of patients and clinical laboratory examination results were collected, and the renal function recovery and mortality rates of patients in the two groups were compared, as well as the changes of laboratory indicators. Results A total of 106 patients were enrolled, 50 in the IHD group and 56 in the CRRT group. There was no statistical difference in the rate of complete renal function recovery 30, 60, or 90 days after treatment between the two groups (28.2% vs. 31.2%, P=0.758; 46.2% vs. 50.0%, P=0.721; 82.1% vs. 81.2%, P=0.924). But in the CRRT subgroup analysis, there was a statistical difference in the 30-day renal function recovery rate of CRRT+HP patients compared with CRRT alone (47.6% vs. 18.5%, P=0.031), while no statistical difference was found in the IHD subgroup analysis. After 3 days of treatment, the levels of creatine kinase of the IHD+HP subgroup and the CRRT+HP subgroup were lower than those in the IHD and CRRT subgroups, and the differences were statistically significant [(7875±6871) vs. (15157±8546) U/L, P=0.026; (10002±8256) vs. (14498±10362) U/L, P=0.032]. There was no statistical difference in 30-day mortality or incidence of serious adverse reactions between the two groups (P>0.05). Conclusions There is no obvious difference in improving renal prognosis or reducing mortality between CRRT and IHD for patients with AKI after bee sting. However, CRRT combined with HP therapy could shorten the recovery time of renal function and increase the 30-day kidney recovery rate. HP may contribute to early renal function recovery in patients with AKI after bee sting, but more high-quality randomized controlled trials are needed to further confirm this.
Severe acute kidney injury usually requires renal replacement therapy. Intermittent hemodialysis, peritoneal dialysis, continuous renal replacement therapy, and prolonged intermittent renal replacement therapy are the four common modalities of renal replacement therapy. Whether one modality of renal replacement therapy is superior to another in clinical practice remains controversial. The impact of the choice of renal replacement therapy modality on the short-term and long-term prognosis of patients needs to be further explored in large-scale randomized controlled studies and a longer follow-up time. This article will discuss the development history of renal replacement therapy for acute kidney injury, the current status of its application, and the comparison of the four treatment modalities, in order to help clinicians have a deeper understanding of how to design individualized renal replacement therapy programs for patients with acute kidney injury under the guidance of the concept of precision medicine.