首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>GMS Health Technology Assessment >Effects of continuous and intermittent renal replacement therapies among adult patients with acute kidney injury
【2h】

Effects of continuous and intermittent renal replacement therapies among adult patients with acute kidney injury

机译:连续和间歇性肾脏替代治疗对成年急性肾损伤患者的影响

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

>Background: Dialysis-dependent acute kidney injury (AKI) can be treated using continuous (CRRT) or intermittent renal replacement therapies (IRRT). Although some studies suggest that CRRT may have advantages over IRRT, study findings are inconsistent. This study assessed differences between CRRT and IRRT regarding important clinical outcomes (such as mortality and renal recovery) and cost-effectiveness. Additionally, ethical aspects that are linked to renal replacement therapies in the intensive care setting are considered.>Methods: Systematic searches in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library including RCTs, observational studies, and cost-effectiveness studies were performed. Results were pooled using a random effects-model.>Results: Forty-nine studies were included. Findings show a higher rate of renal recovery among survivors who initially received CRRT as compared with IRRT. This advantage applies to the analysis of all studies with different observation periods (Relative Risk (RR) 1.10; 95% Confidence Interval (CI) [1.05, 1.16]) and to a selection of studies with observation periods of 90 days (RR 1.07; 95% CI [1.04, 1.09]). Regarding observation periods beyond there are no differences when only two identified studies were analyzed. Patients initially receiving CRRT have higher mortality as compared to IRRT (RR 1.17; 95% CI [1.06, 1.28]). This difference is attributable to observational studies and may have been caused by allocation bias since seriously ill patients more often initially receive CRRT instead of IRRT. CRRT do not significantly differ from IRRT with respect to change of mean arterial pressure, hypotensive episodes, hemodynamic instability, and length of stay. Data on cost-effectiveness is inconsistent. Recent analyzes indicate that initial CRRT is cost-effective compared to initial IRRT due to a reduction of the rate of long-term dialysis dependence. As regards a short time horizon, this cost benefit has not been shown.>Conclusion: Findings of the conducted assessment show that initial CRRT is associated with higher rates of renal recovery. Potential long-term effects on clinical outcomes for more than three months could not be analyzed and should be investigated in further studies. Economical analyzes indicate that initial CRRT is cost-effective when costs of long-term dialysis dependence are considered. However, transferability of the economic analyzes to the German health care system is limited and the conduction of economical analyzes using national cost data should be considered.
机译:>背景:可以采用连续(CRRT)或间歇性肾脏替代疗法(IRRT)治疗依赖于透析的急性肾损伤(AKI)。尽管一些研究表明CRRT可能比IRRT有优势,但研究结果并不一致。这项研究评估了CRRT和IRRT在重要的临床结局(例如死亡率和肾脏恢复)和成本效益方面的差异。此外,还考虑了与重症监护环境中的肾脏替代疗法相关的道德方面。>方法:对MEDLINE,EMBASE和Cochrane库中的系统搜索,包括RCT,观察性研究和成本效益研究进行了研究。执行。使用随机效应模型汇总结果。>结果:包括49项研究。研究结果显示,与IRRT相比,最初接受CRRT的幸存者的肾脏恢复率更高。这一优势适用于对所有具有不同观察期的研究进行分析(相对危险度(RR)1.10; 95%置信区间(CI)[1.05,1.16])以及选择具有90天观察期的研究(RR 1.07;相对危险度)。 95%CI [1.04,1.09]。当仅分析两个已确定的研究时,关于超出观察期没有差异。与IRRT相比,最初接受CRRT的患者死亡率更高(RR 1.17; 95%CI [1.06,1.28])。这种差异可归因于观察性研究,可能是由于分配偏倚引起的,因为重病患者最初更常接受CRRT代替IRRT。就平均动脉压,血压发作,血流动力学不稳定和住院时间的变化而言,CRRT与IRRT并无显着差异。有关成本效益的数据不一致。最近的分析表明,由于降低了长期透析依赖性,初始CRRT与初始IRRT相比具有成本效益。就短期而言,尚未显示出这种成本优势。>结论:进行评估的结果表明,初始CRRT与较高的肾脏恢复率相关。无法分析三个月以上对临床结果的潜在长期影响,应在进一步研究中进行调查。经济分析表明,考虑长期透析依赖的费用时,初始CRRT具有成本效益。但是,经济分析向德国医疗体系的可移植性受到限制,应考虑使用国家成本数据进行经济分析。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号