Key result
Regional citrate anticoagulation provides effective anticoagulation for CRRT without a confirmed survival benefit, despite a previous single-center trial showing lower 3-month mortality compared to nadroparin (48% vs 63%, P<0.03).
Why the study?
Does regional citrate anticoagulation improve acid-base status compared to bicarbonate-based replacement fluid in critically ill, ventilated patients on CVVH?
Population
174 critically ill, ventilated patients on continuous venovenous haemofiltration (CVVH)
Comparison
Regional citrate anticoagulation vs Bicarbonate-based replacement fluid
Design
Editorial, Randomized
Authors
Loading...
This editorial highlights that while regional citrate anticoagulation in CRRT improves filter patency and reduces bleeding compared to heparin, it does not provide a survival benefit.
Does regional citrate anticoagulation improve acid-base status compared to bicarbonate-based replacement fluid in critically ill, ventilated patients on CVVH?
This editorial highlights that while regional citrate anticoagulation in CRRT improves filter patency and reduces bleeding compared to heparin, it does not provide a survival benefit.
Stanislao Morgera (2010) conducted an editorial in Critically ill patients requiring continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT). Regional citrate anticoagulation vs. Systemic anticoagulation (unfractionated heparin or nadroparin) was evaluated on Acid-base status and mortality. Regional citrate anticoagulation provides effective anticoagulation for CRRT without a confirmed survival benefit, despite a previous single-center trial showing lower 3-month mortality compared to nadroparin (48% vs 63%, P<0.03).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: