Intensity of renal support in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury

Paul M. Palevsky, Jane Hongyuan Zhang, Theresa Z. O'Connor, Glenn M. Chertow, Susan T. Crowley, Devasmita Choudhury, Kevin Finkel, John A. Kellum, Emil Paganini, Roland M H Schein, Mark W. Smith, Kathleen M. Swanson, B. Taylor Thompson, Anitha Vijayan, Suzanne Watnick, Robert A. Star, Peter Peduzzi

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1053 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The optimal intensity of renal-replacement therapy in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury is controversial. METHODS: We randomly assigned critically ill patients with acute kidney injury and failure of at least one nonrenal organ or sepsis to receive intensive or less intensive renal-replacement therapy. The primary end point was death from any cause by day 60. In both study groups, hemodynamically stable patients underwent intermittent hemodialysis, and hemodynamically unstable patients underwent continuous venovenous hemodiafiltration or sustained low-efficiency dialysis. Patients receiving the intensive treatment strategy underwent intermittent hemodialysis and sustained low-efficiency dialysis six times per week and continuous venovenous hemodiafiltration at 35 ml per kilogram of body weight per hour; for patients receiving the less-intensive treatment strategy, the corresponding treatments were provided thrice weekly and at 20 ml per kilogram per hour. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics of the 1124 patients in the two groups were similar. The rate of death from any cause by day 60 was 53.6% with intensive therapy and 51.5% with less-intensive therapy (odds ratio, 1.09; 95% confidence interval, 0.86 to 1.40; P = 0.47). There was no significant difference between the two groups in the duration of renal-replacement therapy or the rate of recovery of kidney function or nonrenal organ failure. Hypotension during intermittent dialysis occurred in more patients randomly assigned to receive intensive therapy, although the frequency of hemodialysis sessions complicated by hypotension was similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Intensive renal support in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury did not decrease mortality, improve recovery of kidney function, or reduce the rate of nonrenal organ failure as compared with less-intensive therapy involving a defined dose of intermittent hemodialysis three times per week and continuous renal-replacement therapy at 20 ml per kilogram per hour. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00076219.)

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)7-20
Number of pages14
JournalNew England Journal of Medicine
Volume359
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 3 2008

Fingerprint

Acute Kidney Injury
Critical Illness
Kidney
Renal Replacement Therapy
Renal Dialysis
Hemodiafiltration
Dialysis
Recovery of Function
Hypotension
Therapeutics
Cause of Death
Mortality
Sepsis
Odds Ratio
Body Weight
Confidence Intervals

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Palevsky, P. M., Zhang, J. H., O'Connor, T. Z., Chertow, G. M., Crowley, S. T., Choudhury, D., ... Peduzzi, P. (2008). Intensity of renal support in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury. New England Journal of Medicine, 359(1), 7-20. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa0802639

Intensity of renal support in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury. / Palevsky, Paul M.; Zhang, Jane Hongyuan; O'Connor, Theresa Z.; Chertow, Glenn M.; Crowley, Susan T.; Choudhury, Devasmita; Finkel, Kevin; Kellum, John A.; Paganini, Emil; Schein, Roland M H; Smith, Mark W.; Swanson, Kathleen M.; Thompson, B. Taylor; Vijayan, Anitha; Watnick, Suzanne; Star, Robert A.; Peduzzi, Peter.

In: New England Journal of Medicine, Vol. 359, No. 1, 03.07.2008, p. 7-20.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Palevsky, PM, Zhang, JH, O'Connor, TZ, Chertow, GM, Crowley, ST, Choudhury, D, Finkel, K, Kellum, JA, Paganini, E, Schein, RMH, Smith, MW, Swanson, KM, Thompson, BT, Vijayan, A, Watnick, S, Star, RA & Peduzzi, P 2008, 'Intensity of renal support in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury', New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 359, no. 1, pp. 7-20. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa0802639
Palevsky PM, Zhang JH, O'Connor TZ, Chertow GM, Crowley ST, Choudhury D et al. Intensity of renal support in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury. New England Journal of Medicine. 2008 Jul 3;359(1):7-20. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa0802639
Palevsky, Paul M. ; Zhang, Jane Hongyuan ; O'Connor, Theresa Z. ; Chertow, Glenn M. ; Crowley, Susan T. ; Choudhury, Devasmita ; Finkel, Kevin ; Kellum, John A. ; Paganini, Emil ; Schein, Roland M H ; Smith, Mark W. ; Swanson, Kathleen M. ; Thompson, B. Taylor ; Vijayan, Anitha ; Watnick, Suzanne ; Star, Robert A. ; Peduzzi, Peter. / Intensity of renal support in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury. In: New England Journal of Medicine. 2008 ; Vol. 359, No. 1. pp. 7-20.
@article{432d20589ca945d993a9c56b8bf08a59,
title = "Intensity of renal support in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury",
abstract = "BACKGROUND: The optimal intensity of renal-replacement therapy in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury is controversial. METHODS: We randomly assigned critically ill patients with acute kidney injury and failure of at least one nonrenal organ or sepsis to receive intensive or less intensive renal-replacement therapy. The primary end point was death from any cause by day 60. In both study groups, hemodynamically stable patients underwent intermittent hemodialysis, and hemodynamically unstable patients underwent continuous venovenous hemodiafiltration or sustained low-efficiency dialysis. Patients receiving the intensive treatment strategy underwent intermittent hemodialysis and sustained low-efficiency dialysis six times per week and continuous venovenous hemodiafiltration at 35 ml per kilogram of body weight per hour; for patients receiving the less-intensive treatment strategy, the corresponding treatments were provided thrice weekly and at 20 ml per kilogram per hour. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics of the 1124 patients in the two groups were similar. The rate of death from any cause by day 60 was 53.6{\%} with intensive therapy and 51.5{\%} with less-intensive therapy (odds ratio, 1.09; 95{\%} confidence interval, 0.86 to 1.40; P = 0.47). There was no significant difference between the two groups in the duration of renal-replacement therapy or the rate of recovery of kidney function or nonrenal organ failure. Hypotension during intermittent dialysis occurred in more patients randomly assigned to receive intensive therapy, although the frequency of hemodialysis sessions complicated by hypotension was similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Intensive renal support in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury did not decrease mortality, improve recovery of kidney function, or reduce the rate of nonrenal organ failure as compared with less-intensive therapy involving a defined dose of intermittent hemodialysis three times per week and continuous renal-replacement therapy at 20 ml per kilogram per hour. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00076219.)",
author = "Palevsky, {Paul M.} and Zhang, {Jane Hongyuan} and O'Connor, {Theresa Z.} and Chertow, {Glenn M.} and Crowley, {Susan T.} and Devasmita Choudhury and Kevin Finkel and Kellum, {John A.} and Emil Paganini and Schein, {Roland M H} and Smith, {Mark W.} and Swanson, {Kathleen M.} and Thompson, {B. Taylor} and Anitha Vijayan and Suzanne Watnick and Star, {Robert A.} and Peter Peduzzi",
year = "2008",
month = "7",
day = "3",
doi = "10.1056/NEJMoa0802639",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "359",
pages = "7--20",
journal = "New England Journal of Medicine",
issn = "0028-4793",
publisher = "Massachussetts Medical Society",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Intensity of renal support in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury

AU - Palevsky, Paul M.

AU - Zhang, Jane Hongyuan

AU - O'Connor, Theresa Z.

AU - Chertow, Glenn M.

AU - Crowley, Susan T.

AU - Choudhury, Devasmita

AU - Finkel, Kevin

AU - Kellum, John A.

AU - Paganini, Emil

AU - Schein, Roland M H

AU - Smith, Mark W.

AU - Swanson, Kathleen M.

AU - Thompson, B. Taylor

AU - Vijayan, Anitha

AU - Watnick, Suzanne

AU - Star, Robert A.

AU - Peduzzi, Peter

PY - 2008/7/3

Y1 - 2008/7/3

N2 - BACKGROUND: The optimal intensity of renal-replacement therapy in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury is controversial. METHODS: We randomly assigned critically ill patients with acute kidney injury and failure of at least one nonrenal organ or sepsis to receive intensive or less intensive renal-replacement therapy. The primary end point was death from any cause by day 60. In both study groups, hemodynamically stable patients underwent intermittent hemodialysis, and hemodynamically unstable patients underwent continuous venovenous hemodiafiltration or sustained low-efficiency dialysis. Patients receiving the intensive treatment strategy underwent intermittent hemodialysis and sustained low-efficiency dialysis six times per week and continuous venovenous hemodiafiltration at 35 ml per kilogram of body weight per hour; for patients receiving the less-intensive treatment strategy, the corresponding treatments were provided thrice weekly and at 20 ml per kilogram per hour. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics of the 1124 patients in the two groups were similar. The rate of death from any cause by day 60 was 53.6% with intensive therapy and 51.5% with less-intensive therapy (odds ratio, 1.09; 95% confidence interval, 0.86 to 1.40; P = 0.47). There was no significant difference between the two groups in the duration of renal-replacement therapy or the rate of recovery of kidney function or nonrenal organ failure. Hypotension during intermittent dialysis occurred in more patients randomly assigned to receive intensive therapy, although the frequency of hemodialysis sessions complicated by hypotension was similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Intensive renal support in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury did not decrease mortality, improve recovery of kidney function, or reduce the rate of nonrenal organ failure as compared with less-intensive therapy involving a defined dose of intermittent hemodialysis three times per week and continuous renal-replacement therapy at 20 ml per kilogram per hour. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00076219.)

AB - BACKGROUND: The optimal intensity of renal-replacement therapy in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury is controversial. METHODS: We randomly assigned critically ill patients with acute kidney injury and failure of at least one nonrenal organ or sepsis to receive intensive or less intensive renal-replacement therapy. The primary end point was death from any cause by day 60. In both study groups, hemodynamically stable patients underwent intermittent hemodialysis, and hemodynamically unstable patients underwent continuous venovenous hemodiafiltration or sustained low-efficiency dialysis. Patients receiving the intensive treatment strategy underwent intermittent hemodialysis and sustained low-efficiency dialysis six times per week and continuous venovenous hemodiafiltration at 35 ml per kilogram of body weight per hour; for patients receiving the less-intensive treatment strategy, the corresponding treatments were provided thrice weekly and at 20 ml per kilogram per hour. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics of the 1124 patients in the two groups were similar. The rate of death from any cause by day 60 was 53.6% with intensive therapy and 51.5% with less-intensive therapy (odds ratio, 1.09; 95% confidence interval, 0.86 to 1.40; P = 0.47). There was no significant difference between the two groups in the duration of renal-replacement therapy or the rate of recovery of kidney function or nonrenal organ failure. Hypotension during intermittent dialysis occurred in more patients randomly assigned to receive intensive therapy, although the frequency of hemodialysis sessions complicated by hypotension was similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Intensive renal support in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury did not decrease mortality, improve recovery of kidney function, or reduce the rate of nonrenal organ failure as compared with less-intensive therapy involving a defined dose of intermittent hemodialysis three times per week and continuous renal-replacement therapy at 20 ml per kilogram per hour. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00076219.)

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=46449107330&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=46449107330&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1056/NEJMoa0802639

DO - 10.1056/NEJMoa0802639

M3 - Article

VL - 359

SP - 7

EP - 20

JO - New England Journal of Medicine

JF - New England Journal of Medicine

SN - 0028-4793

IS - 1

ER -