Cargando…

Hemofiltration or hemodialysis for acute kidney injury?

The optimal choice of modality for acute renal replacement therapy is unclear at present. Diffusive therapy (hemodialysis) removes small solutes mainly, whereas convective therapies (hemofiltration and hemodiafiltration) may also eliminate larger molecules such as myoglobin or cytokines. Conversely,...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Jörres, Achim
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3580729/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22883968
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cc11450
_version_ 1782260317656449024
author Jörres, Achim
author_facet Jörres, Achim
author_sort Jörres, Achim
collection PubMed
description The optimal choice of modality for acute renal replacement therapy is unclear at present. Diffusive therapy (hemodialysis) removes small solutes mainly, whereas convective therapies (hemofiltration and hemodiafiltration) may also eliminate larger molecules such as myoglobin or cytokines. Conversely, convective therapies might predispose patients to filter clotting and thus increased costs. A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials could not find evidence for clinical benefits of either modality. Thus, the decision on renal replacement therapy modality still is based on the clinical status of the individual patient, the expertise of the medical and nursing staff, and local circumstances and availability.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3580729
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-35807292013-08-10 Hemofiltration or hemodialysis for acute kidney injury? Jörres, Achim Crit Care Commentary The optimal choice of modality for acute renal replacement therapy is unclear at present. Diffusive therapy (hemodialysis) removes small solutes mainly, whereas convective therapies (hemofiltration and hemodiafiltration) may also eliminate larger molecules such as myoglobin or cytokines. Conversely, convective therapies might predispose patients to filter clotting and thus increased costs. A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials could not find evidence for clinical benefits of either modality. Thus, the decision on renal replacement therapy modality still is based on the clinical status of the individual patient, the expertise of the medical and nursing staff, and local circumstances and availability. BioMed Central 2012 2012-08-10 /pmc/articles/PMC3580729/ /pubmed/22883968 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cc11450 Text en Copyright ©2012 BioMed Central Ltd
spellingShingle Commentary
Jörres, Achim
Hemofiltration or hemodialysis for acute kidney injury?
title Hemofiltration or hemodialysis for acute kidney injury?
title_full Hemofiltration or hemodialysis for acute kidney injury?
title_fullStr Hemofiltration or hemodialysis for acute kidney injury?
title_full_unstemmed Hemofiltration or hemodialysis for acute kidney injury?
title_short Hemofiltration or hemodialysis for acute kidney injury?
title_sort hemofiltration or hemodialysis for acute kidney injury?
topic Commentary
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3580729/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22883968
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cc11450
work_keys_str_mv AT jorresachim hemofiltrationorhemodialysisforacutekidneyinjury