Cole L, Bellomo R, Davenport P, Tipping P, Ronco C
Department of Intensive Care, Austin & Repatriation Medical Centre, Melbourne, Australia.
Int J Artif Organs. 2004 May;27(5):388-97. doi: 10.1177/039139880402700507.
It is unknown whether cytokine adsorption to the membrane during continuous renal replacement therapy is affected by the technique. Such knowledge might affect the choice of technique in vivo. Accordingly, we conducted an ex vivo study to test whether continuous veno-venous hemofiltration (CVVH) or continuous veno-venous hemodialysis (CVVHD) affect cytokine adsorption differently.
Laboratory attached to the Intensive Care Unit of a tertiary hospital.
Six healthy human volunteers donated blood, which was incubated with endotoxin. Control blood was left at room temperature, and treatment blood was recirculated for eight hours through closed circuits using polyacrylonitrile membranes (AN69). The effect of CVVH and CVVHD on cytokine removal from the circuits was compared.
The concentrations of interleukins (IL)-1beta, 6, 8, 10 and TNF were measured in the control samples, pre-and post-filter and in the effluent at baseline and hourly thereafter. The clearances by adsorption, and filtration were calculated.
Control cytokine concentrations remained the same or increased slightly. Adsorption was the major mechanism of removal for all cytokines with the exception of IL-1beta, but the effect was short-lived. Peak adsorption generally occurred at baseline before the start of CVVH and CVVHD, with clearances ranging from 43.7 ml/min (for IL-8) to 7.6 ml/min (for IL-10). The time-weighted average total clearances during CVVH were 23.3, 4.3, 3.8, -2.0, and 15 ml/min for IL-8, IL-1beta, TNF, IL-6, and IL-10 respectively. The corresponding clearances during CVVHD were 19.0, 10.7, 2.7, 2.4, and 0.3 ml/min. IL-10 clearances were greater during CVVH than CVVHD (p=0.03). Non adsorptive CVVH clearance of IL-1beta was greater than CVVHD clearance, but this advantage was outweighed by an increased tendency of the membrane to release IL-1beta into the circuit during HF.
The technique of solute removal had only a minor effect on the magnitude of cytokine adsorption, and neither technique had the advantage for all the measured cytokines.
在持续肾脏替代治疗期间,细胞因子吸附于膜上的过程是否受技术影响尚不清楚。此类知识可能会影响体内技术的选择。因此,我们进行了一项体外研究,以测试持续静静脉血液滤过(CVVH)或持续静静脉血液透析(CVVHD)对细胞因子吸附的影响是否不同。
一家三级医院重症监护病房附属实验室。
六名健康人类志愿者献血,血液与内毒素一同孵育。对照血液置于室温,处理后的血液通过聚丙烯腈膜(AN69)在封闭回路中循环八小时。比较了CVVH和CVVHD对回路中细胞因子清除的影响。
在对照样本、滤器前后以及基线时和之后每小时的流出液中测量白细胞介素(IL)-1β、6、8、10和肿瘤坏死因子(TNF)的浓度。计算吸附清除率和滤过清除率。
对照细胞因子浓度保持不变或略有增加。除IL-1β外,吸附是所有细胞因子清除的主要机制,但这种作用持续时间较短。峰值吸附通常发生在CVVH和CVVHD开始前的基线时,清除率范围为43.7 ml/分钟(IL-8)至7.6 ml/分钟(IL-10)。CVVH期间IL-8、IL-1β、TNF、IL-6和IL-10的时间加权平均总清除率分别为23.3、4.3、3.8、-2.0和15 ml/分钟。CVVHD期间相应的清除率分别为19.0、10.7、2.7、2.4和0.3 ml/分钟。CVVH期间IL-10的清除率高于CVVHD(p=0.03)。IL-1β的非吸附性CVVH清除率高于CVVHD清除率,但在血液滤过期间膜向回路中释放IL-1β的趋势增加,抵消了这一优势。
溶质清除技术对细胞因子吸附量的影响较小,两种技术对所有测量的细胞因子均无优势。