Dataset Information

Heparin-free regional anticoagulation of haemodialysis filters with calcium-free dialysate: is citrate mandatory?

ABSTRACT:

Background

There is an unmet need to develop safe and successful heparin-free regional anticoagulation modalities in haemodialysed patients at risk of bleeding. Whether the addition of citrate as a prefilter injection or in the dialysate itself is required to reach anticoagulation objectives when calcium-free dialysate is used as regional anticoagulation remains unclear.

Methods

In this monocentric retrospective study, we report our experience of 908 dialysis sessions performed with a calcium-free citrate-containing dialysate and calcium reinjection according to the ionic dialysance, without additional heparin.

Results

Premature termination for filter clotting occurred in 20 sessions (2.2%) and duration of session was >4.5 h in 135 (15%; maximum duration 6 h). In addition, we could investigate the citrate, calcium and acid-basis status during haemodialysis sessions performed with (citrate group, n = 20 sessions) or without (citrate-free group, n = 19 sessions) citrate in the dialysate. In 20 sessions performed in patients with underlying liver disorders and using calcium-free citrate-containing dialysate, patients' ionized calcium (iCa) and serum citrate levels were stable and remained within the normal range, respectively. Post-filter iCa was below 0.4 mmol/L in 19/20 sessions and citrate was 0.304 mmol/L (range: 0.011; 0.548). In 19 sessions that used calcium and citrate-free dialysate, post-filter iCa was 0.41 mmol/L (0.34; 0.5) and all sessions extended to 4 h or beyond.

Conclusions

Regional anticoagulation of haemodialysis with a calcium-free dialysate and calcium reinjection according to the ionic dialysance is safe. Adding citrate to the dialysate is not mandatory to prevent dialysis circuit clotting in most patients.

SUBMITTER: Medrano C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8690133 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundRegional citrate anticoagulation (RCA) is the gold standard of anticoagulation for continuous renal replacement therapy but is rarely used for intermittent hemodialysis (IHD) in ICU. Few studies assessed the safety and efficacy of RCA during IHD in ICU; however, no data are available comparing RCA to heparin anticoagulation, which are commonly used for IHD. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of RCA compared to heparin anticoagulation during IHD.MethodsThis retrospective single-center cohort study included consecutive ICU patients treated with either heparin anticoagulation (unfractionated or low-molecular-weight heparin) or RCA for IHD from July to September in 2015 and 2017. RCA was performed with citrate infusion according to blood flow and calcium infusion by diffusive influx from dialysate. Using a propensity score analysis, as the primary endpoint we assessed whether RCA improved efficacy, quantified with Kt/V from the ionic dialysance, compared to heparin anticoagulation. The secondary endpoint was safety. Exploratory analyses were performed on the changes in efficacy and safety between the implementation period (2015) and at long term (2017).ResultsIn total, 208 IHD sessions were performed in 56 patients and were compared (124 RCA and 84 heparin coagulation). There was no difference in Kt/V between RCA and heparin (0.95 ± 0.38 vs. 0.89 ± 0.32; p = 0.98). A higher number of circuit clotting (12.9% vs. 2.4%; p = 0.02) and premature interruption resulting from acute high transmembrane pressure (21% vs. 7%; p = 0.02) occurred in the RCA sessions compared to the heparin sessions. In the propensity score-matching analysis, RCA was associated with an increased risk of circuit clotting (absolute differences = 0.10, 95% CI [0.03-0.18]; p = 0.008). There was no difference in efficacy and safety between the two time periods (2015 and 2017).ConclusionRCA with calcium infusion by diffusive influx from dialysate for IHD was easy to implement with stable long-term efficacy and safety but did not improve efficacy and could be associated with an increased risk of circuit clotting compared to heparin anticoagulation in non-selected ICU patients. Randomized trials to determine the best anticoagulation for IHD in ICU patients should be conducted in a variety of settings.

Project description:IntroductionThe Molecular Adsorbent Recycling System (MARS) is used to treat patients with liver failure. Observational data suggest that citrate anticoagulation during MARS is feasible. Comparative studies on the optimal anticoagulation regimen during MARS are lacking. The aim of the current study was to evaluate two heparin-free anticoagulation regimens.MethodsWe performed a prospective randomized open-label crossover study of regional citrate anticoagulation against no anticoagulation. Ten patients (age 55±11 years) with liver failure undergoing MARS treatment were included. The primary endpoint was completion of MARS sessions. Secondary endpoints included treatment efficacy and safety. Longevity of MARS treatment was plotted as a Kaplan-Meier estimate. Fisher's exact test was used for contingency table analysis.ResultsOf a total of 27 6-hour sessions, four sessions had to be terminated prematurely, three due to occlusive clotting of the extracorporeal circuit and one due to uncontrollable bleeding from the vascular access site. All four events occurred in the group without anticoagulation. Between group comparison demonstrated citrate anticoagulation to significantly increase the likelihood of completed MARS treatment (Fisher's exact test, P 0.04). This translates into higher bilirubin reduction ratios when citrate was applied (reduction ratio 0.25 vs. 0.15, P 0.02). Systemic ionized calcium concentrations were significantly reduced during citrate anticoagulation (P<0.001) but remained within a safe range. We observed no major adverse events.ConclusionsRegional citrate anticoagulation in patients with liver failure is feasible. Citrate anticoagulation provides superior patency of the extracorporeal circuit. Avoidance of anticoagulation during MARS results in significant loss of treatment efficacy, due to treatment downtime. Additional studies are required to identify the optimal anticoagulation regimen for extracorporeal circulation in patients with liver failure.

Project description:BackgroundCurrent guidelines recommend monitoring of post-filter ionized calcium (pfCa) when using regional citrate anticoagulation during continuous renal replacement therapy (RCA-CRRT) to determine citrate efficiency for the prevention of filter clotting. However, the reliability of pfCa raises the question of whether routine monitoring is required. Reducing the frequency of pfCa monitoring could potentially reduce costs and workload. Our objective was to test the efficacy and safety of no pfCa monitoring among critically ill patients receiving RCA-CRRT.MethodsThis study was a non-inferiority randomized controlled trial conducted between January 2021 and October 2021 at King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Thailand. Critically ill patients who were treated with RCA-CRRT were randomized to receive either standard pfCa monitoring (aiming pfCa level of 0.25-0.35 mmol/L), or no pfCa monitoring, in which a constant rate of citrate infusion was maintained at pre-determined citrate concentrations of 4 mmol/L with blinding of pfCa levels to treating clinicians. The primary outcome was the filter lifespan. Non-inferiority would be demonstrated if the upper limit of the 95% confidence interval (CI) for the difference in filter lifespan between the groups was less than 20 h.ResultsFifty patients were randomized to the standard pfCa monitoring group (n = 25) or no pfCa monitoring group (n = 25). The mean filter lifespan was 54 ± 20 h in the standard pfCa monitoring group and 47 ± 23 h in the no pfCa monitoring group (absolute difference 7.1 h; 95% CI -5.3, 19.5, P = .25). When restricting the analysis to circuits reaching the maximum duration of circuit lifespan at 72 h and clotted filters, the filter lifespan was 61 ± 17 h in the standard pfCa group vs 60 ± 19 h in the no pfCa monitoring group (absolute difference 0.9 h; 95% CI -11.5, 13.4, P = .88). Compared with the no pfCa monitoring group, the standard pfCa monitoring group had a significantly higher mean citrate concentrations (4.43 ± 0.32 vs 4 mmol/L, P < .001) and a higher rate of severe hypocalcemia (44% vs 20%, P = .13). No statistical differences were found in filter clotting, citrate accumulation, citrate overload and mortality between the two groups.ConclusionsAmong critically ill patients receiving RCA-CRRT, no pfCa monitoring by maintaining the citrate concentrations of 4 mmol/L is feasible. Larger randomized controlled trials should be conducted to ensure the efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness of this strategy.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04792424 (registered 11 March 2021).