Critical care : the official journal of the Critical Care Forum
-
Review Comparative Study
Pro/con debate: continuous versus intermittent dialysis for acute kidney injury: a never-ending story yet approaching the finish?
The question of whether renal replacement therapy should be applied in an intermittent or continuous mode to the patient with acute kidney injury has been the topic of several controlled studies and meta-analyses. Although continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) has a theoretical advantage due to offering the opportunity to remove excess fluid more gradually, none of the several outcome studies that have been undertaken in the meanwhile was able to demonstrate its superiority over intermittent renal replacement therapy (IRRT). In the present article, therefore, questions are raised regarding which are the specific advantages of each strategy, and which are the specific populations that might benefit from their application. ⋯ CRRT is claimed to be better tolerated in combined acute liver and kidney failure and in acute brain injury. IRRT is more practical, flexible and cost-effective, allows the clinician to discontinue or to minimize anticoagulation with bleeding risks, and removes small solutes such as potassium more efficiently in acute life-threatening conditions. Sustained low-efficiency daily dialysis is a hybrid therapy combining most of the advantages of both options.
-
Organ donation offers opportunities for people in critical care units to help save the lives of other patients. It is not always easy, however, to handle the transition from treating a patient to preserving a potential donor, and organ donation consistently provokes ethical questions in critical care units. What do we expect ethics to deliver? In light of a recent ethics conference in Denmark, we suggest that by acknowledging that decisions made in the clinic rarely abide to rational decision trees with clear ethical priorities, we can better learn from each other's experiences. We suggest embracing an 'ethics of muddling through' to enhance relevant reflections and stimulate a productive dialogue among health professionals.
-
Review Meta Analysis
Granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) and granulocyte-macrophage colony stimulating factor (GM-CSF) for sepsis: a meta-analysis.
To investigate the effects of G-CSF or GM-CSF therapy in non-neutropenic patients with sepsis. ⋯ There is no current evidence supporting the routine use of G-CSF or GM-CSF in patients with sepsis. Large prospective multicenter clinical trials investigating monocytic HLA-DR (mHLA-DR)-guided G-CSF or GM-CSF therapy in patients with sepsis-associated immunosuppression are warranted.
-
Review Meta Analysis Comparative Study
A comparison of early versus late initiation of renal replacement therapy in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Our aim was to investigate the impact of early versus late initiation of renal replacement therapy (RRT) on clinical outcomes in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury (AKI). ⋯ Earlier institution of RRT in critically ill patients with AKI may have a beneficial impact on survival. However, this conclusion is based on heterogeneous studies of variable quality and only two randomised trials. In the absence of new evidence from suitably-designed randomised trials, a definitive treatment recommendation cannot be made.