Literature Review of the Efficacy of High-Volume Hemofiltration in Critically Ill Pediatric Patients.

BACKGROUND: Pediatric sepsis is a significant public health issue. This condition is exacerbated by rising serum creatinine and inflammatory cytokines that lead to deleterious effects upon the body. The current standard of care involves the use of continuous kidney replacement therapy to remove harmful cytokines until the body returns to homeostasis. In order to promote faster clearance and reduced stay in the ICU, high-volume hemofiltration (HVHF) has shown promise. However, there is a paucity of studies to fully elucidate its benefits. METHODS: A literature search was done using PubMed/ MEDLINE and Embase. The literature was reviewed by two independent reviewers, who independently assessed the quality of randomized controlled trials by using the Cochrane risk of bias tool for RCTs and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomized controlled trials. Data were combined from studies with a similar design. RESULTS: The primary endpoint of all-cause mortality was found to be reduced by 40% across all of the pooled studies. For secondary endpoints, significant reductions of serum creatinine were found. Additionally, duration of ICU stays and treatment course was found to be significantly shorter in HVHF patients than the current standard of care. The rate of adverse effects was analyzed, and there was no difference in the proportion of patients developing hypokalemia, hyperkalemia, hypernatremia, or hyponatremia. The proportion of patients developing hyperglycemia was higher in patients undergoing HVHF, whereas the proportions of patients developing bleeding were significantly less in patients undergoing HVHF. One study reported a total number of adverse events between the two groups which were significantly lesser in patients undergoing HVHF. CONCLUSION: HVHF shows promise as a modality to treat pediatric patients with sepsis. In order to confirm the benefits of this modality, future studies need significantly more patients for analysis.

Re-evaluating Renal Angina Index: An Authentic, Evidence-Based Instrument for Acute Kidney Injury Assessment: Critical Appraisal.

Background/Introduction: Renal angina index (RAI) used to calculate and accurately predict risk for the development of acute kidney injury (AKI) has been heavily explored. AKI is traditionally diagnosed by an increase in serum creatinine (SCr) concentration or oliguria, both of which are neither specific nor sensitive, especially among children. An RAI score may be calculated by combining objective signs of kidney dysfunction (such as SCr) and patient context, such as AKI risk factors, thus potentially serving as a more accurate indicator for AKI. Objective: Due to the propitious and novel nature of RAI, this editorial commentary aims to analyze the current literature on RAI and determine how well RAI serves as a predictor of AKI outcomes. Method: A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed/Medline and Google Scholar between January 2012 and July 2020. Literature included the prognostic aspect of early prediction of AKI in the pediatric and adult population via RAI. Results: The initial literature search included 149 studies, and a total of 10 studies reporting the outcomes of interest were included. The overall sample size across these studies was 11,026. The predictive ability of RAI had a pooled (95% CI) sensitivity of 79.21%, specificity of 73.22%, and negative predictive value of 94.83%. Conclusion: RAI shows benefit in the prediction of AKI among adult and pediatric populations. However, there is a lack of sufficient data, and further prospective studies are needed in pediatric populations to use RAI as a principal AKI indicator among clinicians.