Key result
Regional citrate anticoagulation for CRRT in AKI patients reduced ICU mortality (52.7% vs 63.4%, P=0.02) and prolonged filter lifespan (56 vs 36 hours, P<0.001) compared to unfractionated heparin.
Why the study?
Regional citrate anticoagulation prolongs filter life and reduces bleeding risks versus unfractionated heparin, but can cause acid-base disturbances and citrate accumulation, warranting safety and efficacy comparisons.
Does regional citrate anticoagulation improve filter lifespan and clinical outcomes compared to unfractionated heparin or no anticoagulation in adult ICU patients with AKI on CRRT?
Cohort (n=829)
Does regional citrate anticoagulation improve filter lifespan and clinical outcomes compared to unfractionated heparin or no anticoagulation in adult ICU patients with AKI on CRRT?
Absolute Event Rate: 52.7% vs 63.4%
p-value: p=0.02
Regional citrate anticoagulation for CRRT in critically ill AKI patients is associated with prolonged filter lifespan, fewer bleeding complications, and lower ICU mortality compared to heparin or no anticoagulation, though it increases the risk of metabolic alkalosis.
Citrate CRRT may be feasible in AKI; leaves open need for RCTs to confirm safety versus UFH or NA.
(1) Background: Citrate is preferred in continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) for critically ill patients because it prolongs filter life and reduces bleeding risks compared to unfractionated heparin (UFH). However, regional citrate anticoagulation (RCA) can lead to acid–base disturbances, citrate accumulation, and overload. This study compares the safety and efficacy of citrate-based CRRT with UFH and no anticoagulation (NA) in acute kidney injury (AKI) patients. (2) Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on adult patients (≥18 years) who underwent CRRT from July 2010 to June 2021 in an intensive care unit. (3) Results: Among 829 AKI patients on CRRT: 552 received RCA, 232 UFH, and 45 NA. The RCA group had a longer filter lifespan compared to UFH and NA (56 h [IQR, 24–110] vs. 36.0 h [IQR, 17–63.5] vs. 22 h [IQR, 12–48]; all Padj < 0.001). Bleeding complications were fewer in the RCA group than in the UFH group (median 3 units [IQR, 2–7 units] vs. median 5 units [IQR, 2–12 units]; Padj < 0.001) and fewer in the NA group than in the UFH group (median 3 units [IQR, 1–5 units] vs. 5 units [IQR, 2–12 units]; Padj = 0.03). Metabolic alkalosis was more common in the RCA group (32.5%) compared to the UFH (16.2%) and NA (13.5%) groups, while metabolic acidosis persisted more in the UFH group and NA group (29.1% and 34.6%) by the end of therapy vs. the citrate group (16.8%). ICU mortality was lower in the RCA group (52.7%) compared to the UFH group (63.4%; Padj = 0.02) and NA group (77.8%; Padj = 0.003). (4) Conclusions: Citrate anticoagulation outperforms heparin-based and no anticoagulation in filter patency, potentially leading to better outcomes through improved therapy effectiveness and reduced transfusion needs. However, careful monitoring is crucial to limit potential complications attributable to its use.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jacobs et al. (2024) conducted a cohort in Acute kidney injury (AKI) requiring continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) (n=829). Regional citrate anticoagulation (RCA) vs. Unfractionated heparin (UFH) and no anticoagulation (NA) was evaluated on ICU mortality (p=0.02). Regional citrate anticoagulation for CRRT in AKI patients reduced ICU mortality (52.7% vs 63.4%, P=0.02) and prolonged filter lifespan (56 vs 36 hours, P<0.001) compared to unfractionated heparin.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: