PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
April 15, 2010Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology83 citationsOpen Access

Intensities of Renal Replacement Therapy in Acute Kidney Injury

View Full Paper
MJMin JunHHHiddo J. Lambers HeerspinkTNToshiharu Ninomiya

Key Points

Key points are not available for this paper at this time.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Clinical trials of the intensity of renal replacement therapy (RRT) for people with acute kidney injury (AKI) have produced conflicting results. A systematic review and meta-analysis was undertaken to assess the effect of different intensities of RRT on all-cause mortality and renal recovery in AKI patients. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library database were systematically searched for trials published between 1950 and 2009. Inclusion criteria were completed, prospective, adult-population, randomized controlled studies. Relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Summary estimates of RR were obtained using a random effects model. Heterogeneity, metaregression, publication bias, and subgroup analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Eight trials were identified that provided data on 3841 patients and 1808 deaths. More intense RRT (35 to 48 ml/kg per h or equivalent) had no overall effect on the risk of death (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.04, P = 0.143) or recovery of renal function (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.31, P = 0.181) compared with less-intensive regimens (20 to 25 ml/kg per h or equivalent). Significant heterogeneity was identified with contributing factors including publication year (P = 0.004) and Jadad score (P = 0.048). CONCLUSIONS: Within the intensity ranges studied, higher intensity RRT does not reduce mortality rates or improve renal recovery among patients with AKI. The results do not negate the importance of RRT intensity in the treatment of AKI patients but rather reinforce the need to better understand the effects of treatment modalities, doses, and timing in this varied, high-risk population.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Jun et al. (2010) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a7f85bd0041822c3ea6f74chttps://doi.org/10.2215/cjn.09111209
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Intensity of Continuous Renal-Replacement Therapy in Critically Ill Patients2009 · 1,479 citations
  2. 2Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement2009 · 83,657 citations
  3. 3Acute Kidney Injury Increases Risk of ESRD among Elderly2008 · 1,198 citations
  4. 4Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials1995 · 5,594 citations
  5. 5Empirical Evidence of Bias1995 · 5,537 citations