Céline Monard , Arnaud Marel , Michael Joannidis , Marlies Ostermann , Zhiyong Peng , Kent Doi , Silvia De Rosa , Ilona Bobek , Dmitry Sokolov , Vin-Cent Wu , Vedran Premuzic , Ravindra Mehta , Rinaldo Bellomo , Xaime Garcia , Camilo Pizarro , Alexander Zarbock , Igor Milet , Thiago Reis , Marc Romain , Bairbre Mc Nicholas , Thomas Rimmelé
{"title":"Renal replacement therapy modalities and techniques in intensive care units: An international survey","authors":"Céline Monard , Arnaud Marel , Michael Joannidis , Marlies Ostermann , Zhiyong Peng , Kent Doi , Silvia De Rosa , Ilona Bobek , Dmitry Sokolov , Vin-Cent Wu , Vedran Premuzic , Ravindra Mehta , Rinaldo Bellomo , Xaime Garcia , Camilo Pizarro , Alexander Zarbock , Igor Milet , Thiago Reis , Marc Romain , Bairbre Mc Nicholas , Thomas Rimmelé","doi":"10.1016/j.jcrc.2025.155076","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background and hypothesis</h3><div>Up to 14 % of critically ill patients receive renal replacement therapy (RRT) during their ICU stay and are treated with intermittent hemodialysis (IHD) or one of the continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) techniques. The choice of a modality (IHD or CRRT) and technique (continuuous veno-venous -hemodialysis (CVVHD), −hemofiltration (CVVH), or - hemodiafiltration (CVVHDF)), and the way it is delivered, may have an impact on outcomes but only few studies addressed this question. We aimed to survey the availability, settings, and clinicians' preferences regarding RRT modalities and techniques in critically ill patients.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Between July 2021 and March 2022, we conducted an open online worldwide survey targeting ICU clinicians and consisting of 31 questions.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Among the 1174 participants from 73 countries, 94 % indicated their ability to initiate RRT at any time. CRRT was more widely available than IHD (97 % vs 85 %). CVVHDF was the most frequently used CRRT technique (59 %), followed by CVVHD (26 %) and CVVH (16 %). Most participants (70 %) reported having access to at least two CRRT techniques in their unit. Preference for IHD or CRRT varied greatly, depending on the clinical situation. Among CRRT techniques, CVVHD was preferred for removal of small-sized molecules, better hemofilter lifespan and reduced nursing workload. The preferential indications for CVVH included septic shock, removal of middle-sized molecules and fluid overload. The technical settings for CVVH and CVVHDF were very heterogeneous.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>This international survey underscores the large diversity in RRT practices wordlwide, as well as heterogeneity in beliefs and preferences among intensivists. These data highlight the need for robust comparative trials to identify the optimal RRT modality and technique to improve outcomes in specific clinical situations.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":15451,"journal":{"name":"Journal of critical care","volume":"88 ","pages":"Article 155076"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of critical care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0883944125000632","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background and hypothesis
Up to 14 % of critically ill patients receive renal replacement therapy (RRT) during their ICU stay and are treated with intermittent hemodialysis (IHD) or one of the continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) techniques. The choice of a modality (IHD or CRRT) and technique (continuuous veno-venous -hemodialysis (CVVHD), −hemofiltration (CVVH), or - hemodiafiltration (CVVHDF)), and the way it is delivered, may have an impact on outcomes but only few studies addressed this question. We aimed to survey the availability, settings, and clinicians' preferences regarding RRT modalities and techniques in critically ill patients.
Methods
Between July 2021 and March 2022, we conducted an open online worldwide survey targeting ICU clinicians and consisting of 31 questions.
Results
Among the 1174 participants from 73 countries, 94 % indicated their ability to initiate RRT at any time. CRRT was more widely available than IHD (97 % vs 85 %). CVVHDF was the most frequently used CRRT technique (59 %), followed by CVVHD (26 %) and CVVH (16 %). Most participants (70 %) reported having access to at least two CRRT techniques in their unit. Preference for IHD or CRRT varied greatly, depending on the clinical situation. Among CRRT techniques, CVVHD was preferred for removal of small-sized molecules, better hemofilter lifespan and reduced nursing workload. The preferential indications for CVVH included septic shock, removal of middle-sized molecules and fluid overload. The technical settings for CVVH and CVVHDF were very heterogeneous.
Conclusion
This international survey underscores the large diversity in RRT practices wordlwide, as well as heterogeneity in beliefs and preferences among intensivists. These data highlight the need for robust comparative trials to identify the optimal RRT modality and technique to improve outcomes in specific clinical situations.
背景和假设高达14%的危重患者在ICU住院期间接受肾脏替代治疗(RRT),并接受间歇性血液透析(IHD)或一种持续肾脏替代治疗(CRRT)技术。模式(IHD或CRRT)和技术(连续静脉-静脉血液透析(CVVHD), -血液滤过(CVVH)或-血液滤过(CVVHDF))的选择,以及它的传递方式可能对结果有影响,但只有少数研究解决了这个问题。我们的目的是调查危重患者RRT方式和技术的可用性、设置和临床医生的偏好。方法在2021年7月至2022年3月期间,我们针对ICU临床医生进行了一项开放的全球在线调查,包括31个问题。结果在来自73个国家的1174名参与者中,94%的人表示他们有能力在任何时候启动RRT。CRRT比IHD更广泛(97% vs 85%)。CVVHDF是最常用的CRRT技术(59%),其次是CVVHD(26%)和CVVH(16%)。大多数参与者(70%)报告在他们的单位至少使用了两种CRRT技术。根据临床情况,对IHD或CRRT的偏好差异很大。在CRRT技术中,CVVHD在去除小分子、延长血液滤过器寿命和减少护理工作量方面是首选。CVVH的优先适应症包括感染性休克、去除中等大小分子和液体超载。CVVH和CVVHDF的技术设置非常不同。这项国际调查强调了世界范围内RRT实践的巨大多样性,以及强化者的信仰和偏好的异质性。这些数据强调需要进行强有力的比较试验,以确定最佳的RRT模式和技术,以改善特定临床情况下的结果。
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Critical Care, the official publication of the World Federation of Societies of Intensive and Critical Care Medicine (WFSICCM), is a leading international, peer-reviewed journal providing original research, review articles, tutorials, and invited articles for physicians and allied health professionals involved in treating the critically ill. The Journal aims to improve patient care by furthering understanding of health systems research and its integration into clinical practice.
The Journal will include articles which discuss:
All aspects of health services research in critical care
System based practice in anesthesiology, perioperative and critical care medicine
The interface between anesthesiology, critical care medicine and pain
Integrating intraoperative management in preparation for postoperative critical care management and recovery
Optimizing patient management, i.e., exploring the interface between evidence-based principles or clinical insight into management and care of complex patients
The team approach in the OR and ICU
System-based research
Medical ethics
Technology in medicine
Seminars discussing current, state of the art, and sometimes controversial topics in anesthesiology, critical care medicine, and professional education
Residency Education.