14
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Citrate anticoagulation for continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) in patients with acute kidney injury admitted to the intensive care unit

      editorial
      1 , 2
      NDT Plus
      Oxford University Press
      anticoagulation, citrate, CRRT, haemofiltration, haemodialysis

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Continuous forms of renal replacement therapy (CRRT) have become established as the treatment of choice for supporting critically ill patients with acute kidney injury. Typically, these patients have activation of the coagulation cascades, peripheral mononuclear cells and platelets, but also a reduction in natural anticoagulants, and are therefore prothrombotic. For continuous modes of renal replacement therapy to be effective, in terms of both effective solute clearance and also fluid removal, the extracorporeal circuits must operate continuously. Thus, preventing clotting in the CRRT circuit is a key goal to effective patient management. As these patients may also be at increased risk of bleeding, regional anticoagulation with citrate is increasing in popularity, particularly following the introduction of commercially available CRRT machines and fluids specifically designed for citrate anticoagulation. Although regional anticoagulation with citrate provides many advantages over other systemic anticoagulants, excess citrate may lead to both metabolic complications, ranging from acidosis to alkalosis and may also potentially expose patients to electrolyte disturbances due to hyper- and hyponatraemia and hyper- and hypocalcaemia.

          Related collections

          Most cited references42

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Citrate anticoagulation for continuous venovenous hemofiltration.

          Continuous venovenous hemofiltration (CVVH) is applied in critically ill patients with acute renal failure for renal replacement. Heparins used to prevent circuit clotting may cause bleeding. Regional anticoagulation with citrate reduces bleeding, but has metabolic risks. The aim was to compare the safety and efficacy of the two. Randomized, nonblinded, controlled single-center trial. General intensive care unit of a teaching hospital. Adult critically ill patients needing CVVH for acute renal failure and without an increased bleeding risk. Regional anticoagulation with citrate or systemic anticoagulation with the low-molecular weight heparin nadroparin. End points were adverse events necessitating discontinuation of study anticoagulant, transfusion, metabolic and clinical outcomes, and circuit survival. Of the 215 randomized patients, 200 received CVVH per protocol (97 citrate and 103 nadroparin). Adverse events required discontinuation of citrate in two patients (accumulation and clotting) of nadroparin in 20 (bleeding and thrombocytopenia) (p < 0.001). Bleeding occurred in 6 vs. 16 patients (p = 0.08). The median number of red blood cell units transfused per CVVH day was 0.27 (interquartile range, 0.0-0.63) for citrate, 0.36 (interquartile range, 0-0.83) for nadroparin (p = 0.31). Citrate conferred less metabolic alkalosis (p = 0.001) and lower plasma calcium (p < 0.001). Circuit survival was similar. Three-month mortality on intention-to-treat was 48% (citrate) and 63% (nadroparin) (p = 0.03), per protocol 45% and 62% (p = 0.02). Citrate reduced mortality in surgical patients (p = 0.007), sepsis (p = 0.01), higher Sepsis-Related Organ Failure Assessment score (p = 0.006), and lower age (p = 0.009). The efficacy of citrate and nadroparin anticoagulation for CVVH was similar, however, citrate was safer. Unexpectedly, citrate reduced mortality. Less bleeding could only partly explain this benefit, less clotting could not. Post hoc citrate appeared particularly beneficial after surgery, in sepsis and severe multiple organ failure, suggesting interference with inflammation.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Citrate vs. heparin for anticoagulation in continuous venovenous hemofiltration: a prospective randomized study.

            To compare the efficacy and safety of adjusted-dose unfractionated heparin with that of regional citrate anticoagulation in intensive care patients treated by continuous venovenous hemofiltration (CVVH). Prospective, randomized, clinical trial in a 32-bed medical and surgical ICU in a university teaching hospital. ICU patients with acute renal failure requiring continuous renal replacement therapy, without cirrhosis, severe coagulopathy, or known sensitivity to heparin. Before the first CVVH run patients were randomized to receive anticoagulation with heparin or trisodium citrate. Patients eligible for another CVVH run received the other study medication in a cross-over fashion until the fourth circuit. Forty-nine circuits (hemofilters) were analyzed: 23 with heparin and 26 with citrate. The median lifetime of hemofilters was 70 h (interquartile range 44-140) with citrate anticoagulation and 40 h (17-48) with heparin (p=0.0007). One major bleeding occurred during heparin anticoagulation and one metabolic alkalosis (pH=7.60) was noted with citrate after a protocol violation. Transfusion rates (units of red cells per day of CVVH) were, respectively, 0.2 (0.0-0.4) with citrate and 1.0 (0.0-2.0) with heparin (p=0.0008). Regional citrate anticoagulation seems superior to heparin for the filter lifetime and transfusion requirements in ICU patients treated by continuous renal replacement therapy.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Regional citrate versus systemic heparin anticoagulation for continuous renal replacement in critically ill patients.

              We determined the effect of regional citrate versus systemic heparin anticoagulation for continuous renal replacement therapy in critically ill subjects suffering from acute renal failure who were not at high risk for hemorrhagic complications. Between April 1999 and June 2002, 30 critically ill subjects requiring continuous renal replacement therapy and using 79 hemofilters were randomly assigned to receive regional citrate or systemic heparin anticoagulation. The median hemofilter survival time was 124.5 hours (95% CI 95.3 to 157.4) in the citrate group, which was significantly longer than the 38.3 hours (95% CI 24.8 to 61.9) in the heparin group (P < 0.001). Increasing illness severity score, male gender, and decreasing antithrombin-III levels were independent predictors of an increased relative hazard of hemofilter failure. After adjustment for illness severity, antithrombin-III levels increased significantly more over the period of study in the citrate as compared to the heparin group (P= 0.038). Moreover, after adjustment for antithrombin-III levels and illness severity score, the relative risk of hemorrhage with citrate anticoagulation was significantly lower than that with heparin (relative risk of 0.14; 95% CI 0.02 to 0.96, P= 0.05). Compared with systemic heparin anticoagulation, regional citrate anticoagulation significantly increases hemofilter survival time, and significantly decreases bleeding risk in critically ill patients suffering from acute renal failure and requiring continuous renal replacement therapy.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                NDT Plus
                NDT Plus
                ckj
                ndtplus
                NDT Plus
                Oxford University Press
                1753-0784
                1753-0792
                December 2009
                25 September 2009
                25 September 2009
                : 2
                : 6
                : 439-447
                Affiliations
                [1 ]UCL Center for Nephrology, Royal Free Campus, University College London Medical School , London, UK
                [2 ]Division of Nephrology, University of Alabama at Birmingham , Birmingham, AL, USA
                Author notes
                Correspondence and offprint requests to: Andrew Davenport; E-mail: Andrew.davenport@ 123456royalfree.nhs.uk
                Article
                sfp136
                10.1093/ndtplus/sfp136
                4421325
                25949376
                fe0d306c-af6f-4a64-8067-9f4829f31c41
                © The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press [on behalf of ERA-EDTA]. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com

                History
                : 5 March 2009
                : 28 August 2009
                Categories
                In-Depth Clinical Review

                Nephrology
                anticoagulation,citrate,crrt,haemofiltration,haemodialysis
                Nephrology
                anticoagulation, citrate, crrt, haemofiltration, haemodialysis

                Comments

                Comment on this article