Leblanc M, Tapolyai M, Paganini E P
Cleveland Clinic Foundation, OH 44195, USA.
Adv Ren Replace Ther. 1995 Jul;2(3):255-64. doi: 10.1016/s1073-4449(12)80059-8.
Increased dialysis dose has been shown to improve morbidity and survival in chronic hemodialysis patients. Despite improvement in care and technological aspects of renal replacement therapy, mortality rates of acute renal failure (ARF) have remained essentially unchanged for over two decades, exceeding 50% in most studies. The occurrence of ARF in older patients with more complicated medical and surgical conditions has contributed to this lack of outcome amelioration, and death of ARF patients is now more frequently caused by underlying disease than ARF itself. A recent prospective survey at this institution found a mortality rate of 79.1% among a total of 363 ARF medical and surgical intensive care unit patients, with a mean age near 60 years and a mean admission APACHE II score of over 20, who were treated by intermittent hemodialysis and continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT). Nonsurvivors had a mean of over four failed systems, in addition to the renal failure, compared with survivors who had less than four. The standards for dialysis adequacy in ARF are not currently defined. Increased catabolism seen in ARF patients in the intensive care unit may justify large dialysis dose delivery. An apparent influence of delivered dialysis dose on the outcome of ARF intensive care unit patients has been recently observed at our institution. Compared with nonsurvivors, survivors had received significantly higher dialysis dose, as assessed by Kt/V and urea reduction ratio. In ARF patients, the discrepancy between delivered versus prescribed dialysis dose may be particularly important and contributed to by the following: reduced blood flow rate and dialysis time consequent to patient intolerance; lower dialyzer in vivo clearances, particularly in heparin-free dialysis; blood recirculation when using temporary vascular access; and postdialysis urea rebound. Prolonging the course of renal failure is one of the risks attributed to frequent dialysis; hypotension and ultrafiltration combined with a deficient renal autoregulation can result in further renal damage. The detrimental effects of bioincompatible membranes have been demonstrated with an induced-delay of renal function recovery. A recent study has reported benefits of biocompatible membranes in terms of potential for renal recovery and maintenance of urine output during dialytic support when compared with bioincompatible membranes. CRRT offers many advantages over intermittent hemodialysis for ARF intensive care unit patients: better hemodynamic tolerance, avoidance of solute rebound, and removal of serum sepsis mediators. However, CRRT have not yet been firmly shown to improve survival rates. Recently, urea kinetics have been used to estimate dialysis dose provided by CRRT.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)
已证明增加透析剂量可改善慢性血液透析患者的发病率并提高生存率。尽管肾脏替代治疗在护理和技术方面有所改善,但急性肾衰竭(ARF)的死亡率在二十多年来基本保持不变,大多数研究中超过50%。患有更复杂内科和外科疾病的老年患者中ARF的发生导致了这种预后改善的缺乏,现在ARF患者的死亡更多是由基础疾病而非ARF本身引起。该机构最近的一项前瞻性调查发现,在363例ARF内科和外科重症监护病房患者中,死亡率为79.1%,这些患者平均年龄近60岁,平均入院急性生理与慢性健康状况评分系统(APACHE II)超过20分,接受间歇性血液透析和连续性肾脏替代治疗(CRRT)。与少于四个衰竭系统的幸存者相比,非幸存者除肾衰竭外平均有超过四个衰竭系统。目前ARF中透析充分性的标准尚未确定。重症监护病房中ARF患者出现的分解代谢增加可能说明给予大剂量透析是合理的。最近在我们机构观察到给予的透析剂量对ARF重症监护病房患者的预后有明显影响。与非幸存者相比,幸存者接受的透析剂量明显更高,这通过尿素清除率(Kt/V)和尿素降低率评估。在ARF患者中,给予的透析剂量与处方透析剂量之间的差异可能特别重要,原因如下:患者不耐受导致血流量和透析时间减少;透析器体内清除率较低,尤其是在无肝素透析中;使用临时血管通路时的血液再循环;以及透析后尿素反弹。肾衰竭病程延长是频繁透析带来的风险之一;低血压和超滤加上肾脏自身调节不足可导致进一步的肾损伤。生物不相容膜的有害影响已通过肾功能恢复延迟得到证实。最近一项研究报告称,与生物不相容膜相比,生物相容膜在透析支持期间肾功能恢复潜力和维持尿量方面具有优势。对于ARF重症监护病房患者,CRRT比间歇性血液透析有许多优势:更好的血流动力学耐受性、避免溶质反弹以及清除血清炎症介质。然而,尚未确凿证明CRRT能提高生存率。最近,尿素动力学已用于估计CRRT提供的透析剂量。(摘要截断于400字)