Wynckel Alain, Cornillet Josiane, Béné Bernard, Stolz Arnaud, Lepousé Claire, Paris Bruno, Chanard Jacques
Nephrology Department, University Hospital, Reims, France.
ASAIO J. 2004 Jan-Feb;50(1):81-4. doi: 10.1097/01.mat.0000104823.48673.bd.
Continuous venovenous hemodialysis (CVVHD) or hemofiltration conducted with pre- (CVVHpre) or post- (CVVHpost) dilution modes are recommended to treat patients with acute renal failure (ARF) and cardiovascular instability. The efficiency of the three techniques was compared in a study including 18 critically ill patients with ARF. Their mean age was 62.1 +/- 16.7 years, and their mean SAPS II score was 59.5 +/- 14.3. They were treated sequentially with the three techniques for periods of 24 hours each (randomized assignment to one technique the first 24 hours followed by the two others). The PRISMA device and M 100 (AN69S) membrane were used in all instances. Blood and replacement (or dialysis) flow rates were kept at 150 and 25 ml/min, respectively. Urea, creatinine, uric acid, inorganic phosphorus, beta2 microglobulin (beta2m), and retinol binding protein (RBP) were measured every 12 hours in plasma and in 12 hours filtrate collection for 3 days. The results are expressed as filtrate/mean plasma (F/P) ratio for the 12 hour period. Removal of small molecules was 16% higher using CVVHD and CVVHpost than CVVHpre. For beta2m and RBP, CVVHpre was, respectively, 43% and 26% more efficient than CVVHD. CVVHpost gave higher but statistically different removal than CVVHpre only for beta2m. CVVHpost was the most efficient technique for removal of small proteins, but this advantage could be easily counterbalanced using higher volume substitution.
对于急性肾衰竭(ARF)合并心血管功能不稳定的患者,推荐采用持续静静脉血液透析(CVVHD)或采用前稀释(CVVHpre)或后稀释(CVVHpost)模式进行血液滤过治疗。在一项纳入18例ARF危重症患者的研究中,比较了这三种技术的效率。他们的平均年龄为62.1±16.7岁,平均简化急性生理学评分系统II(SAPS II)评分为59.5±14.3。患者依次接受这三种技术治疗,每种技术治疗24小时(随机分配,前24小时采用一种技术,随后采用另外两种技术)。所有病例均使用PRISMA设备和M 100(AN69S)膜。血液流速和置换(或透析)流速分别保持在150和25 ml/分钟。在3天内,每12小时测定血浆及12小时滤液收集液中的尿素、肌酐、尿酸、无机磷、β2微球蛋白(β2m)和视黄醇结合蛋白(RBP)。结果以12小时期间的滤液/平均血浆(F/P)比值表示。与CVVHpre相比,CVVHD和CVVHpost对小分子物质的清除率高16%。对于β2m和RBP,CVVHpre的清除效率分别比CVVHD高43%和26%。仅对于β2m,CVVHpost的清除率高于CVVHpre,但差异无统计学意义。CVVHpost是清除小蛋白最有效的技术,但使用更高的置换量可轻松抵消这一优势。