Cargando…
Pro/con clinical debate: Is high-volume hemofiltration beneficial in the treatment of septic shock?
Although there have been exciting advances in the management of sepsis and septic shock, mortality still remains high. Recent data suggest that high-volume hemofiltration (HVHF) may play a role in these patients. In contrast to the usual rate of hemofiltration, HVHF is felt to be better able to remo...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2002
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC137392/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11940261 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cc1448 |
_version_ | 1782120441112952832 |
---|---|
author | Reiter, Karl Bellomo, Rinaldo Ronco, Claudio Kellum, John A |
author_facet | Reiter, Karl Bellomo, Rinaldo Ronco, Claudio Kellum, John A |
author_sort | Reiter, Karl |
collection | PubMed |
description | Although there have been exciting advances in the management of sepsis and septic shock, mortality still remains high. Recent data suggest that high-volume hemofiltration (HVHF) may play a role in these patients. In contrast to the usual rate of hemofiltration, HVHF is felt to be better able to remove the inflammatory mediators associated with sepsis and septic shock. Such an approach is currently incapable of selectively removing specific mediators. This may be a problem when one considers that several mediators may in fact be beneficial. When determining whether HVHF should be instituted in a patient with septic shock, one need remember that its role is far from clear and its usefulness remains the subject of much debate. Although early data is encouraging, it is clear that additional data is required before HVHF becomes standard management. The authors of this pro/con debate, which is based on a clinical scenario, first describe their own position and then respond to their opponent's position. |
format | Text |
id | pubmed-137392 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2002 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-1373922003-02-27 Pro/con clinical debate: Is high-volume hemofiltration beneficial in the treatment of septic shock? Reiter, Karl Bellomo, Rinaldo Ronco, Claudio Kellum, John A Crit Care Commentary Although there have been exciting advances in the management of sepsis and septic shock, mortality still remains high. Recent data suggest that high-volume hemofiltration (HVHF) may play a role in these patients. In contrast to the usual rate of hemofiltration, HVHF is felt to be better able to remove the inflammatory mediators associated with sepsis and septic shock. Such an approach is currently incapable of selectively removing specific mediators. This may be a problem when one considers that several mediators may in fact be beneficial. When determining whether HVHF should be instituted in a patient with septic shock, one need remember that its role is far from clear and its usefulness remains the subject of much debate. Although early data is encouraging, it is clear that additional data is required before HVHF becomes standard management. The authors of this pro/con debate, which is based on a clinical scenario, first describe their own position and then respond to their opponent's position. BioMed Central 2002 2002-01-11 /pmc/articles/PMC137392/ /pubmed/11940261 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cc1448 Text en Copyright © 2002 BioMed Central Ltd |
spellingShingle | Commentary Reiter, Karl Bellomo, Rinaldo Ronco, Claudio Kellum, John A Pro/con clinical debate: Is high-volume hemofiltration beneficial in the treatment of septic shock? |
title | Pro/con clinical debate: Is high-volume hemofiltration beneficial in the treatment of septic shock? |
title_full | Pro/con clinical debate: Is high-volume hemofiltration beneficial in the treatment of septic shock? |
title_fullStr | Pro/con clinical debate: Is high-volume hemofiltration beneficial in the treatment of septic shock? |
title_full_unstemmed | Pro/con clinical debate: Is high-volume hemofiltration beneficial in the treatment of septic shock? |
title_short | Pro/con clinical debate: Is high-volume hemofiltration beneficial in the treatment of septic shock? |
title_sort | pro/con clinical debate: is high-volume hemofiltration beneficial in the treatment of septic shock? |
topic | Commentary |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC137392/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11940261 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cc1448 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT reiterkarl proconclinicaldebateishighvolumehemofiltrationbeneficialinthetreatmentofsepticshock AT bellomorinaldo proconclinicaldebateishighvolumehemofiltrationbeneficialinthetreatmentofsepticshock AT roncoclaudio proconclinicaldebateishighvolumehemofiltrationbeneficialinthetreatmentofsepticshock AT kellumjohna proconclinicaldebateishighvolumehemofiltrationbeneficialinthetreatmentofsepticshock |