Cargando…

Comparison of different anticoagulation strategies for renal replacement therapy in critically ill patients with COVID-19: a cohort study

BACKGROUND: Critically ill coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients have a high risk of acute kidney injury (AKI) that requires renal replacement therapy (RRT). A state of hypercoagulability reduces circuit life spans. To maintain circuit patency and therapeutic efficiency, an optimized anticoag...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Arnold, Frederic, Westermann, Lukas, Rieg, Siegbert, Neumann-Haefelin, Elke, Biever, Paul Marc, Walz, Gerd, Kalbhenn, Johannes, Tanriver, Yakup
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7668013/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33198670
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12882-020-02150-8
_version_ 1783610416206708736
author Arnold, Frederic
Westermann, Lukas
Rieg, Siegbert
Neumann-Haefelin, Elke
Biever, Paul Marc
Walz, Gerd
Kalbhenn, Johannes
Tanriver, Yakup
author_facet Arnold, Frederic
Westermann, Lukas
Rieg, Siegbert
Neumann-Haefelin, Elke
Biever, Paul Marc
Walz, Gerd
Kalbhenn, Johannes
Tanriver, Yakup
author_sort Arnold, Frederic
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Critically ill coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients have a high risk of acute kidney injury (AKI) that requires renal replacement therapy (RRT). A state of hypercoagulability reduces circuit life spans. To maintain circuit patency and therapeutic efficiency, an optimized anticoagulation strategy is needed. This study investigates whether alternative anticoagulation strategies for RRT during COVID-19 are superior to administration of unfractionated heparin (UFH). METHODS: Retrospective cohort study on 71 critically ill COVID-19 patients (≥18 years), admitted to intensive care units at a tertiary health care facility in the southwestern part of Germany between February 26 and May 21, 2020. We collected data on the disease course, AKI, RRT, and thromboembolic events. Four different anticoagulatory regimens were administered. Anticoagulation during continuous veno-venous hemodialysis (CVVHD) was performed with UFH or citrate. Anticoagulation during sustained low-efficiency daily dialysis (SLEDD) was performed with UFH, argatroban, or low molecular weight heparin (LMWH). Primary outcome is the effect of the anticoagulation regimen on mean treatment times of RRT. RESULTS: In patients receiving CVVHD, mean treatment time in the UFH group was 21.3 h (SEM: ±5.6 h), in the citrate group 45.6 h (SEM: ±2.7 h). Citrate anticoagulation significantly prolonged treatment times by 24.4 h (P = .001). In patients receiving SLEDD, mean treatment time with UFH was 8.1 h (SEM: ±1.3 h), with argatroban 8.0 h (SEM: ±0.9 h), and with LMWH 11.8 h (SEM: ±0.5 h). LMWH significantly prolonged treatment times by 3.7 h (P = .008) and 3.8 h (P = .002), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: UFH fails to prevent early clotting events in the dialysis circuit during COVID-19. For patients, who do not require effective systemic anticoagulation, regional citrate dialysis is the most effective strategy. For patients, who require effective systemic anticoagulation, the usage of LMWH results in the longest circuit life spans. The proposed anticoagulatory strategies are safe, can easily be monitored, and allow an individualized treatment. GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT: [Image: see text] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12882-020-02150-8.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7668013
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-76680132020-11-16 Comparison of different anticoagulation strategies for renal replacement therapy in critically ill patients with COVID-19: a cohort study Arnold, Frederic Westermann, Lukas Rieg, Siegbert Neumann-Haefelin, Elke Biever, Paul Marc Walz, Gerd Kalbhenn, Johannes Tanriver, Yakup BMC Nephrol Research Article BACKGROUND: Critically ill coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients have a high risk of acute kidney injury (AKI) that requires renal replacement therapy (RRT). A state of hypercoagulability reduces circuit life spans. To maintain circuit patency and therapeutic efficiency, an optimized anticoagulation strategy is needed. This study investigates whether alternative anticoagulation strategies for RRT during COVID-19 are superior to administration of unfractionated heparin (UFH). METHODS: Retrospective cohort study on 71 critically ill COVID-19 patients (≥18 years), admitted to intensive care units at a tertiary health care facility in the southwestern part of Germany between February 26 and May 21, 2020. We collected data on the disease course, AKI, RRT, and thromboembolic events. Four different anticoagulatory regimens were administered. Anticoagulation during continuous veno-venous hemodialysis (CVVHD) was performed with UFH or citrate. Anticoagulation during sustained low-efficiency daily dialysis (SLEDD) was performed with UFH, argatroban, or low molecular weight heparin (LMWH). Primary outcome is the effect of the anticoagulation regimen on mean treatment times of RRT. RESULTS: In patients receiving CVVHD, mean treatment time in the UFH group was 21.3 h (SEM: ±5.6 h), in the citrate group 45.6 h (SEM: ±2.7 h). Citrate anticoagulation significantly prolonged treatment times by 24.4 h (P = .001). In patients receiving SLEDD, mean treatment time with UFH was 8.1 h (SEM: ±1.3 h), with argatroban 8.0 h (SEM: ±0.9 h), and with LMWH 11.8 h (SEM: ±0.5 h). LMWH significantly prolonged treatment times by 3.7 h (P = .008) and 3.8 h (P = .002), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: UFH fails to prevent early clotting events in the dialysis circuit during COVID-19. For patients, who do not require effective systemic anticoagulation, regional citrate dialysis is the most effective strategy. For patients, who require effective systemic anticoagulation, the usage of LMWH results in the longest circuit life spans. The proposed anticoagulatory strategies are safe, can easily be monitored, and allow an individualized treatment. GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT: [Image: see text] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12882-020-02150-8. BioMed Central 2020-11-16 /pmc/articles/PMC7668013/ /pubmed/33198670 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12882-020-02150-8 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research Article
Arnold, Frederic
Westermann, Lukas
Rieg, Siegbert
Neumann-Haefelin, Elke
Biever, Paul Marc
Walz, Gerd
Kalbhenn, Johannes
Tanriver, Yakup
Comparison of different anticoagulation strategies for renal replacement therapy in critically ill patients with COVID-19: a cohort study
title Comparison of different anticoagulation strategies for renal replacement therapy in critically ill patients with COVID-19: a cohort study
title_full Comparison of different anticoagulation strategies for renal replacement therapy in critically ill patients with COVID-19: a cohort study
title_fullStr Comparison of different anticoagulation strategies for renal replacement therapy in critically ill patients with COVID-19: a cohort study
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of different anticoagulation strategies for renal replacement therapy in critically ill patients with COVID-19: a cohort study
title_short Comparison of different anticoagulation strategies for renal replacement therapy in critically ill patients with COVID-19: a cohort study
title_sort comparison of different anticoagulation strategies for renal replacement therapy in critically ill patients with covid-19: a cohort study
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7668013/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33198670
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12882-020-02150-8
work_keys_str_mv AT arnoldfrederic comparisonofdifferentanticoagulationstrategiesforrenalreplacementtherapyincriticallyillpatientswithcovid19acohortstudy
AT westermannlukas comparisonofdifferentanticoagulationstrategiesforrenalreplacementtherapyincriticallyillpatientswithcovid19acohortstudy
AT riegsiegbert comparisonofdifferentanticoagulationstrategiesforrenalreplacementtherapyincriticallyillpatientswithcovid19acohortstudy
AT neumannhaefelinelke comparisonofdifferentanticoagulationstrategiesforrenalreplacementtherapyincriticallyillpatientswithcovid19acohortstudy
AT bieverpaulmarc comparisonofdifferentanticoagulationstrategiesforrenalreplacementtherapyincriticallyillpatientswithcovid19acohortstudy
AT walzgerd comparisonofdifferentanticoagulationstrategiesforrenalreplacementtherapyincriticallyillpatientswithcovid19acohortstudy
AT kalbhennjohannes comparisonofdifferentanticoagulationstrategiesforrenalreplacementtherapyincriticallyillpatientswithcovid19acohortstudy
AT tanriveryakup comparisonofdifferentanticoagulationstrategiesforrenalreplacementtherapyincriticallyillpatientswithcovid19acohortstudy