Kellum J A, Johnson J P, Kramer D, Palevsky P, Brady J J, Pinsky M R
Department of Anesthesiology/Critical Care Medicine, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, PA, USA.
Crit Care Med. 1998 Dec;26(12):1995-2000. doi: 10.1097/00003246-199812000-00027.
To compare two forms of continuous renal replacement therapy, continuous venovenous hemofiltration (CVVH) vs. continuous venovenous hemodialysis (CVVHD), in terms of the removal of inflammatory mediators from the blood of patients with systemic inflammatory response syndrome and acute renal failure.
Randomized crossover, clinical study.
University teaching hospital.
Thirteen patients with systemic inflammatory response syndrome and acute renal failure receiving continuous renal replacement therapy.
Patients were randomized to receive either convective clearance using CVVH or diffusive clearance using CVVHD for the first 24 hrs, followed by the other modality for 24 hrs. All treatments utilized AN69 hemofilters. CVVH was performed with an ultrafiltration rate of 2 L/hr and CVVHD with a dialysis outflow rate of 2 L/hr.
Plasma and ultrafiltrate concentrations of tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-alpha, interleukin (IL)-6, IL-10, and sL-selectin were measured at 0, 1, 3, 6, 12, and 24 hrs by radioimmunoassay. Plasma endotoxin concentrations were also measured at 0, 12, and 24 hrs by chromogenic assay. CVVH was associated with a 13% decrease in plasma TNF-alpha concentrations compared with a 23% increase while on CVVHD (p < .05). Mean plasma concentrations of IL-6, IL-10, and sL-selectin were unchanged over time and between therapies. Only minimal amounts of mediators were recovered in the effluents with either therapy except for IL-6. The clearances for IL-6 were different between therapies, 1.9+/-0.8 (SD) mL/min for CVVHD and 3.3+/-1.5 mL/min for CVVH, (p< .01). Plasma endotoxin concentrations were not different between therapies.
CVVH resulted in a decrease in plasma TNF-alpha concentrations as compared with CVVHD, while the type of transport mechanism used did not influence plasma concentrations of IL-6, IL-10, soluble L-selectin, or endotoxin. Differences in clearance for IL-6 between CVVH and CVVHD did not translate into significant changes in circulating IL-6 concentrations.
比较两种连续性肾脏替代治疗方式,即连续性静脉-静脉血液滤过(CVVH)与连续性静脉-静脉血液透析(CVVHD),在清除全身炎症反应综合征和急性肾衰竭患者血液中炎症介质方面的效果。
随机交叉临床研究。
大学教学医院。
13例接受连续性肾脏替代治疗的全身炎症反应综合征和急性肾衰竭患者。
患者被随机分为两组,第一组24小时接受采用CVVH的对流清除治疗,随后24小时接受另一种治疗方式即采用CVVHD的扩散清除治疗。第二组则相反。所有治疗均使用AN69血液滤过器。CVVH以每小时2升的超滤速率进行,CVVHD以每小时2升的透析液流出速率进行。
在0、1、3、6、12和24小时通过放射免疫分析法测量血浆和超滤液中肿瘤坏死因子(TNF)-α、白细胞介素(IL)-6、IL-10和sL-选择素的浓度。在0、12和24小时通过显色法测量血浆内毒素浓度。与接受CVVHD时血浆TNF-α浓度升高23%相比,接受CVVH时血浆TNF-α浓度下降了13%(p<0.05)。IL-6、IL-10和sL-选择素的平均血浆浓度在不同时间和不同治疗方式之间没有变化。除IL-6外,两种治疗方式的流出液中仅回收了极少量的介质。两种治疗方式对IL-6的清除率不同,CVVHD为1.9±0.8(标准差)毫升/分钟,CVVH为3.3±1.5毫升/分钟(p<0.01)。不同治疗方式之间血浆内毒素浓度没有差异。
与CVVHD相比,CVVH可使血浆TNF-α浓度降低,而所采用运输机制的类型并未影响IL-6、IL-10、可溶性L-选择素或内毒素的血浆浓度。CVVH和CVVHD对IL-6清除率的差异并未转化为循环中IL-6浓度的显著变化。