• Matthew J Brain, Owen S Roodenburg, and John McNeil.
• Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Research Centre (ANZIC-RC), School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
• Plos One. 2017 Jan 1; 12 (12): e0189745.

BackgroundIt is widespread practice during citrate anticoagulated renal replacement therapy to monitor circuit ionised calcium (iCa2+) to evaluate the effectiveness of anticoagulation. Whether the optimal site to sample the blood path is before or after the haemofilter is a common question.MethodsUsing a prospectively collected observational dataset from intensive care patients receiving pre-dilution continuous veno-venous haemodiafiltration (CVVHD-F) with integrated citrate anticoagulation we compared paired samples of pre and post filter iCa2+ where the target range was 0.3-0.5 mmol.L-1 as well as concurrently collected arterial iCa2+. Two nested mixed methods linear models were fitted to the data describing post vs pre filter iCa2+, and the relationship of pre, post and arterial samples.SettingAn 11 bed general intensive care unit.Participants450 grouped samples from 152 time periods in seven patients on CRRT with citrate anticoagulation.ResultsThe relationship of post to pre-filter iCa2+ was not 1:1 with post = 0.082 + 0.751 x pre-filter iCa2+ (95% CI intercept: 0.015-0.152, slope 0.558-0.942). Variation was greatest between patients rather than between circuits within the same patient or citrate dose. Compared to arterial iCa2+ there was no significant difference between pre and post-filter sampling sites (F-value 0.047, p = 0.827).ConclusionThese results demonstrate that there is minimal difference between pre and post filter samples for iCa2+ monitoring of circuit anticoagulation in citrate patients relative to the arterial iCa2+ in CVVHD-F however compared to pre-filter sampling, post filter sampling has a flatter response and greater variation.

15 keywords...

hide…