Vascular Access Site for Renal Replacement Therapy in Acute Kidney Injury: A Post hoc Analysis of the ATN Study

Effect of insertion site on tunnelled haemodialysis catheter outcomes: an observational study of 967 catheters

BACKGROUND

The right internal jugular vein is the preferred approach to tunnelled haemodialysis catheter placement. However, the effect of the insertion site on long-term catheter outcomes remains uncertain.

AIMS

We aimed to analyse a large cohort of tunnelled haemodialysis catheter placements to compare short-term and long-term results according to central venous catheter location.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was performed on consecutive tunnelled catheter insertions at two centres over 7 years. The primary outcome was catheter survival, compared according to the central vein site. We used the Kaplan-Meier curve method and Cox proportional hazards modelling to determine the effect of the catheterisation route on primary patency, adjusted for clinical risk factors for catheter failure.

RESULTS

There were 967 tunnelled dialysis catheter placements in 620 patients. The median survival for right internal jugular vein catheters was 569 days. There were no differences in rates of catheter failure between right internal jugular, left internal jugular (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.80; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.52-1.21), external jugular (HR, 0.79; CI, 0.33-3.13), subclavian (HR, 0.67; CI, 0.58-2.44) and femoral vein (HR, 1.20; CI, 0.36-1.33) catheters following multivariable analysis. There were no major differences in functionality or complications between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

This study identified no statistically significant relationship between tunnelled haemodialysis catheter insertion site and catheter survival. The contemporary approach to dialysis vascular access should be tailored to specific patient circumstances.

Timing of kidney replacement therapy initiation for acute kidney injury

BACKGROUND

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a common condition among patients in intensive care units (ICUs) and is associated with high numbers of deaths. Kidney replacement therapy (KRT) is a blood purification technique used to treat the most severe forms of AKI. The optimal time to initiate KRT so as to improve clinical outcomes remains uncertain. This is an update of a review first published in 2018. This review complements another Cochrane review by the same authors: Intensity of continuous renal replacement therapy for acute kidney injury.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of different timing (early and standard) of KRT initiation on death and recovery of kidney function in critically ill patients with AKI.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant's Specialised Register to 4 August 2022 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register, ClinicalTrials and LILACS to 1 August 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We included all patients with AKI in the ICU regardless of age, comparing early versus standard KRT initiation. For safety and cost outcomes, we planned to include cohort studies and non-RCTs.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted independently by two authors. The random-effects model was used, and results were reported as risk ratios(RR) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference(MD) for continuous outcomes, with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 12 studies enrolling 4880 participants. Overall, most domains were assessed as being at low or unclear risk of bias. Compared to standard treatment, early KRT initiation may have little to no difference on the risk of death at day 30 (12 studies, 4826 participants: RR 0.97,95% CI 0.87 to 1.09; I²= 29%; low certainty evidence), and death after 30 days (7 studies, 4534 participants: RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.07; I² = 6%; moderate certainty evidence). Early KRT initiation may make little or no difference to the risk of death or non-recovery of kidney function at 90 days (6 studies, 4011 participants: RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.11; I² = 66%; low certainty evidence); CIs included both benefits and harms. Low certainty evidence showed early KRT initiation may make little or no difference to the number of patients who were free from KRT (10 studies, 4717 participants: RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.94 to1.22; I² = 55%) and recovery of kidney function among survivors who were free from KRT after day 30 (10 studies, 2510 participants: RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.07; I² = 69%) compared to standard treatment. High certainty evidence showed early KRT initiation increased the risk of hypophosphataemia (1 study, 2927 participants: RR 1.80, 95% CI 1.33 to 2.44), hypotension (5 studies, 3864 participants: RR 1.54, 95% CI 1.29 to 1.85; I² = 0%), cardiac-rhythm disorder (6 studies, 4483 participants: RR 1.35, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.75; I² = 16%), and infection (5 studies, 4252 participants: RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.77; I² = 0%); however, it is uncertain whether early KRT initiation increases or reduces the number of patients who experienced any adverse events (5 studies, 3983 participants: RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.68; I² = 91%; very low certainty evidence). Moderate certainty evidence showed early KRT initiation probably reduces the number of days in hospital (7 studies, 4589 participants: MD-2.45 days, 95% CI -4.75 to -0.14; I² = 10%) and length of stay in ICU (5 studies, 4240 participants: MD -1.01 days, 95% CI -1.60 to -0.42; I² = 0%).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on mainly low to moderate certainty of the evidence, early KRT has no beneficial effect on death and may increase the recovery of kidney function. Earlier KRT probably reduces the length of ICU and hospital stay but increases the risk of adverse events. Further adequate-powered RCTs using robust and validated tools that complement clinical judgement are needed to define the optimal time of KRT in critical patients with AKI in order to improve their outcomes. The surgical AKI population should be considered in future research.

Renal replacement therapy for acute kidney injury in burn patients, an international survey and a qualitative review of current controversies

BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a common complication in critically ill burn patients and is associated with a number of serious adverse outcomes. The clinical decision-making process related to the management of AKI in burn patients is complex and has not been sufficiently standardized. The main aim of this study was to explore the diagnostic approach and clinician's attitudes toward the management of AKI and RRT in burn patients around the world.

METHODS

The questionnaire was widely distributed among the members of International Society for Burn Injury (ISBI), who were invited to complete the survey. Data collection and report was compliant with the the Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES) Web-survey guidelines. The survey form with multiple-choice questions was divided into 3 parts: a. physician and institutional demographics, b. AKI diagnostic information, c. technical aspects of RRT.

RESULTS

A total of 44 respondents worldwide submitted valuable data in the 2-month period. Of all respondents, 43.2% were from Europe, 30% from North America, 7% from South-East Asia 2.3% from Africa and 18.2% from other regions. 93.1% of participants declare that they use specific definitions to detect AKI, while 11.4% declare the use of renal ultrasonography for AKI diagnosis. CRRT appeared to be the most preferred option by 43.2% of participants, followed by intermittent hemodialysis (25%), and prolonged intermittent RRT (6.8%). The expertise to deliver a modality and the availability of resources were considered important factors when selecting the optimal RRT modality by 20.5% and 29.6% of respondents. The use of specific serum biomarkers for AKI diagnosis are stated by 16% of respondents; 25% of specialists refer to the use of biomarkers of AKI as a criterium for discontinuing the RRT. Femoral vena and right jugular vena were the most frequently used location for RRT temporary catheter placement, 54.6% of respondents declared using ultrasound guidance for catheter placement.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of burn specialists use specific consensus classifications to detect acute kidney injury. Continuous renal replacement therapy appeared to be the most preferred option, while the expertise to deliver a particular modality and resources availability play a significant role in modality selection. The use of ultrasound and specific biomarkers for AKI evaluation is infrequent in routine clinical practice.

Association of intermittent versus continuous hemodialysis modalities with mortality in the setting of acute stroke among patients with end-stage renal disease

Patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) are 8-10 times more likely to suffer from a stroke compared with the general public. Despite this risk, there are minimal data elucidating which hemodialysis modality is best for patients with ESRD following a stroke, and guidelines for their management are lacking. We retrospectively queried the US Renal Data System administrative database for all-cause mortality in ESRD stroke patients who received either intermittent hemodialysis (IHD) or continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT). Acute ischemic stroke and hemorrhagic stroke were identified using the International Classification of Diseases 9th Revision (ICD-9)/ICD-10 codes, and hemodialysis modality was determined using Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System (HCPCS) codes. Time to death from the first stroke diagnosis was the outcome of interest. Cox proportional hazards modeling was used, and associations were expressed as adjusted HRs. From the inclusion cohort of 87,910 patients, 92.9% of patients received IHD while 7.1% of patients received CRRT. After controlling for age, race, sex, ethnicity, and common stroke risk factors such as hypertension, diabetes, tobacco use, atrial fibrillation, and hyperlipidemia, those who were placed on CRRT within 7 days of a stroke had an increased risk of death compared with those placed on IHD (HR=1.28, 95% CI 1.25 to 1.32). It is possible that ESRD stroke patients who received CRRT are more critically ill. However, even when the cohort was limited to only those patients in the intensive care unit and additional risk factors for mortality were controlled for, CRRT was still associated with an increased risk of death (HR=1.32, 95% CI 1.27 to 1.37). Therefore, further prospective clinical trials are warranted to address these findings.

Non-pharmacological interventions for preventing clotting of extracorporeal circuits during continuous renal replacement therapy

BACKGROUND

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a common complication amongst people who are critically ill, and it is associated with an increased risk of death. For people with severe AKI, continuous kidney replacement therapy (CKRT), which is delivered over 24 hours, is needed when they become haemodynamically unstable. When CKRT is interrupted due to clotting of the extracorporeal circuit, the delivered dose is decreased and thus leading to undertreatment.

OBJECTIVES

This review assessed the efficacy of non-pharmacological measures to maintain circuit patency in CKRT.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 25 January 2021 which includes records identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal, and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) (parallel-group and cross-over studies), cluster RCTs and quasi-RCTs that examined non-pharmacological interventions to prevent clotting of extracorporeal circuits during CKRT.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three pairs of review authors independently extracted information including participants, interventions/comparators, outcomes, study methods, and risk of bias. The primary outcomes were circuit lifespan and death due to any cause at day 28. We used a random-effects model to perform quantitative synthesis (meta-analysis). We assessed risk of bias in included studies using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias. Summary estimates of effect were obtained using a random-effects model, and results were expressed as risk ratios (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous outcomes, and mean difference (MD) and 95% CI for continuous outcomes. Confidence in the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 20 studies involving 1143 randomised participants were included in the review. The methodological quality of the included studies was low, mainly due to the unclear randomisation process and blinding of the intervention. We found evidence on the following 11 comparisons: (i) continuous venovenous haemodialysis (CVVHD) versus continuous venovenous haemofiltration (CVVH) or continuous venovenous haemodiafiltration (CVVHDF); (ii) CVVHDF versus CVVH; (iii) higher blood flow (≥ 250 mL/minute) versus standard blood flow (< 250 mL/minute); (iv) AN69 membrane (AN69ST) versus other membranes; (v) pre-dilution versus post-dilution; (vi) a longer catheter (> 20 cm) placing the tip targeting the right atrium versus a shorter catheter (≤ 20 cm) placing the tip in the superior vena cava; (vii) surface-modified double-lumen catheter versus standard double-lumen catheter with identical geometry and flow design; (viii) single-site infusion anticoagulation versus double-site infusion anticoagulation; (ix) flat plate filter versus hollow fibre filter of the same membrane type; (x) a filter with a larger membrane surface area versus a smaller one; and (xi) a filter with more and shorter hollow fibre versus a standard filter of the same membrane type. Circuit lifespan was reported in 9 comparisons. Low certainty evidence indicated that CVVHDF (versus CVVH: MD 10.15 hours, 95% CI 5.15 to 15.15; 1 study, 62 circuits), pre-dilution haemofiltration (versus post-dilution haemofiltration: MD 9.34 hours, 95% CI -2.60 to 21.29; 2 studies, 47 circuits; I² = 13%), placing the tip of a longer catheter targeting the right atrium (versus placing a shorter catheter targeting the tip in the superior vena cava: MD 6.50 hours, 95% CI 1.48 to 11.52; 1 study, 420 circuits), and surface-modified double-lumen catheter (versus standard double-lumen catheter: MD 16.00 hours, 95% CI 13.49 to 18.51; 1 study, 262 circuits) may prolong circuit lifespan. However, higher blood flow may not increase circuit lifespan (versus standard blood flow: MD 0.64, 95% CI -3.37 to 4.64; 2 studies, 499 circuits; I² = 70%). More and shorter hollow fibre filters (versus standard filters: MD -5.87 hours, 95% CI -10.18 to -1.56; 1 study, 6 circuits) may reduce circuit lifespan. Death from any cause was reported in four comparisons We are uncertain whether CVVHDF versus CVVH, CVVHD versus CVVH or CVVHDF, longer versus a shorter catheter, or surface-modified double-lumen catheters versus standard double-lumen catheters reduced death due to any cause, in very low certainty evidence. Recovery of kidney function was reported in three comparisons. We are uncertain whether CVVHDF versus CVVH, CVVHDF versus CVVH, or surface-modified double-lumen catheters versus standard double-lumen catheters increased recovery of kidney function. Vascular access complications were reported in two comparisons. Low certainty evidence indicated using a longer catheter (versus a shorter catheter: RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.74) may reduce vascular access complications, however the use of surface-modified double lumen catheters versus standard double-lumen catheters may make little or no difference to vascular access complications.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The use of CVVHDF as compared with CVVH, pre-dilution haemofiltration, a longer catheter, and surface-modified double-lumen catheter may be useful in prolonging the circuit lifespan, while higher blood flow and more and shorter hollow fibre filter may reduce circuit life. The Overall, the certainty of evidence was assessed to be low to very low due to the small sample size of the included studies. Data from future rigorous and transparent research are much needed in order to fully understand the effects of non-pharmacological interventions in preventing circuit coagulation amongst people with AKI receiving CKRT.

Vascular access for renal replacement therapy among 459 critically ill patients: a pragmatic analysis of the randomized AKIKI trial

BACKGROUND

Vascular access for renal replacement therapy (RRT) is routine question in the intensive care unit. Randomized trials comparing jugular and femoral sites have shown similar rate of nosocomial events and catheter dysfunction. However, recent prospective observational data on RRT catheters use are scarce. We aimed to assess the site of RRT catheter, the reasons for catheter replacement, and the complications according to site in a large population of critically ill patients with acute kidney injury.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We performed an ancillary study of the AKIKI study, a pragmatic randomized controlled trial, in which patients with severe acute kidney injury (KDIGO 3 classification) with invasive mechanical ventilation, catecholamine infusion or both were randomly assigned to either an early or a delayed RRT initiation strategy. The present study involved all patients who underwent at least one RRT session. Number of RRT catheters, insertion sites, factors potentially associated with the choice of insertion site, duration of catheter use, reason for catheter replacement, and complications were prospectively collected.

RESULTS

Among the 619 patients included in AKIKI, 462 received RRT and 459 were finally included, with 598 RRT catheters. Femoral site was chosen preferentially (n = 319, 53%), followed by jugular (n = 256, 43%) and subclavian (n = 23, 4%). In multivariate analysis, continuous RRT modality was significantly associated with femoral site (OR = 2.33 (95% CI (1.34-4.07), p = 0.003) and higher weight with jugular site [88.9 vs 83.2 kg, OR = 0.99 (95% CI 0.98-1.00), p = 0.03]. Investigator site was also significantly associated with the choice of insertion site (p = 0.03). Cumulative incidence of catheter replacement did not differ between jugular and femoral site [sHR 0.90 (95% CI 0.64-1.25), p = 0.67]. Catheter dysfunction was the main reason for replacement (n = 47), followed by suspected infection (n = 29) which was actually seldom proven (n = 4). No mechanical complication (pneumothorax or hemothorax) occurred.

CONCLUSION

Femoral site was preferentially used in this prospective study of RRT catheters in 31 French intensive care units. The choice of insertion site depended on investigating center habits, weight, RRT modality. A high incidence of catheter infection suspicion led to undue replacement.

Timing of renal replacement therapy initiation for acute kidney injury

BACKGROUND

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a common condition among patients in intensive care units (ICUs), and is associated with high death. Renal replacement therapy (RRT) is a blood purification technique used to treat the most severe forms of AKI. The optimal time to initiate RRT so as to improve clinical outcomes remains uncertain.This review complements another Cochrane review by the same authors: Intensity of continuous renal replacement therapy for acute kidney injury.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of different timing (early and standard) of RRT initiation on death and recovery of kidney function in critically ill patients with AKI.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant's Specialised Register to 23 August 2018 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov. We also searched LILACS to 11 September 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We included all patients with AKI in ICU regardless of age, comparing early versus standard RRT initiation. For safety and cost outcomes we planned to include cohort studies and non-RCTs.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted independently by two authors. The random-effects model was used and results were reported as risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences (MD) for continuous outcomes, with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

We included five studies enrolling 1084 participants. Overall, most domains were assessed as being at low or unclear risk of bias. Compared to standard treatment, early initiation may reduce the risk of death at day 30, although the 95% CI does not rule out an increased risk (5 studies, 1084 participants: RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.13; I2 = 52%; low certainty evidence); and probably reduces the death after 30 days post randomisation (4 studies, 1056 participants: RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.10; I2= 29%; moderate certainty evidence); however in both results the CIs included a reduction and an increase of death. Earlier start may reduce the risk of death or non-recovery kidney function (5 studies, 1076 participants: RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.05; I2= 54%; low certainty evidence). Early strategy may increase the number of patients who were free of RRT after RRT discontinuation (5 studies, 1084 participants: RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.40; I2= 58%; low certainty evidence) and probably slightly increases the recovery of kidney function among survivors who discontinued RRT after day 30 (5 studies, 572 participants: RR 1.03, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.06; I2= 0%; moderate certainty evidence) compared to standard; however the lower limit of CI includes the null effect. Early RRT initiation increased the number of patients who experienced adverse events (4 studies, 899 participants: RR 1.10, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.16; I2 = 0%; high certainty evidence). Compared to standard, earlier RRT start may reduce the number of days in ICU (4 studies, 1056 participants: MD -1.78 days, 95% CI -3.70 to 0.13; I2 = 90%; low certainty evidence), but the CI included benefit and harm.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based mainly on low quality of evidence identified, early RRT may reduce the risk of death and may improve the recovery of kidney function in critically patients with AKI, however the 95% CI indicates that early RRT might worsen these outcomes. There was an increased risk of adverse events with early RRT. Further adequate-powered RCTs using appropriate criteria to define the optimal time of RRT are needed to reduce the imprecision of the results.