These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: [Continuous renal replacement therapy for severe acute renal failure].
    Author: Shao YH, Huang YW, Kong YZ, Zhou LX, Lin MW, Xiao GQ.
    Journal: Di Yi Jun Yi Da Xue Xue Bao; 2004 Dec; 24(12):1388-90. PubMed ID: 15604065.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: To estimate the clinical value of continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) in the treatment of severe acute renal failure (ARF) and identify the factors influencing the patients' prognosis. METHODS: The clinical characteristics, disease severity and prognosis were retrospectively studied in 116 patients with severe ARF undergoing CRRT from January, 1998 to May, 2004, in comparison with those in 102 such patients treated with intermittent hemodialysis (IHD). RESULTS: The mean score of Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) was 27.0+/-7.5 in patients receiving CRRT, of whom 56 (48%) had a score no less than 29, 36 (31%) between 24 to 29 and 24 (21%) less than 24. The mean APACHE II score was 21.9+/-5.2 in patients with IHD, and none of them had a score over 29, 44 (43%) had a score between 24 to 29 and 58 (57%) less than 24. The mean APACHE II score of CRRT group was significantly higher than that of IHD group (t=4.769, P=0.000), suggesting that most of the patients treated with CRRT were in critical condition. The patients' survival rate, however, did not differ significantly between the two groups, being 37% (43/116) in CRRT group and 48/ (49/102) in IHD group (X2=2.678, P=0.101 8). When only the patients with a score no less than 24 were compared, the survival rate of CRRT group was significantly higher than that of IHD group (24% vs 9%, X2=4.229, P=0.039 7), demonstrating better effect of CRRT than IHD in the management of critical ARF cases. In patients treated with CRRT, the patients in fatal cases had significantly older age, more critical condition (indicated by APACHE II score) and greater dependence on mechanical ventilation or vasoactive support than those who survived (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: CRRT is one of the effective methods for management of severe ARF patients, especially in those with critical conditions, with better effect than that of IHD. The prognosis of severe ARF patients treated with CRRT can be influenced by the patients' age and disease severity, and the need of vasoactive drugs or mechanical ventilation may help predict the patients' prognosis.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]