JOURNAL ARTICLE
REVIEW
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Validity of low-efficacy continuous renal replacement therapy in critically ill patients.

The 1980s saw the use of continuous arteriovenous hemofiltration whose intensity hemofiltration rate was only 3 or 4 mL kg⁻¹ h⁻¹. With the installation of a blood pump, this dose went up to 8 or 10 mL kg⁻¹ h⁻1, and continued to increase, reaching about 20 mL kg⁻¹ h⁻¹ by the year 2000. Some studies found that a higher dose could be beneficial, and the world rapidly followed the trend, increasing the dose up to 35 mL kg⁻¹ h⁻¹. Then, two randomized control trials, namely the VA/NIH Acute Renal Failure Trial Network study and the RENAL study, came along in succession which changed the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) recommendation to 20 to 25 mL kg⁻¹ h⁻¹. However, no good evidence exists to support this. Our recent multicenter retrospective studies from the JSEPTIC CRRT database show that the Japanese continuous renal replacement therapy dose of (14.3 mL kg⁻¹ h⁻¹) does not seem to have worse outcomes when compared with a higher dose.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app