RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Sepsis remains the leading cause of death in the intensive care unit (ICU), despite the treatment of sepsis has progressed. As a mode in continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT), continuous veno-venous hemofiltration (CVVH) has been widely used in the treatment of sepsis. Whether high ultrafiltrate volume in CVVH is beneficial for sepsis survival remains controversial. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the treatment effect of high-volume hemofiltration (HVHF) on sepsis. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted on the Medline, Embase, and Cochrane library to June 21, 2019, the keywords included "sepsis" "continuous blood purification" "continuous renal replacement therapy" "continuous veno-venous hemofiltration" and "continuous veno-venous hemodiafiltration". Summery statistic in this review was risk ratio (RR) and was performed by RevMan 5.2. RESULTS: Five randomized controlled trials (RCT) were included which contained 241 participants. Mortality related endpoints and other observations (length of stay, organ function evaluation, effect on hemodynamics, cytokine clearance and respiratory function) were used to assess the treatment effect of HVHF in sepsis. Three trials reported 28-day mortality, one of three trails also reported 60- and 90-day mortality; one trail did not specify the type of mortality; the fifth article reported hospital mortality. The pooled risk ratio for three trails of 28-day mortality was 0.96 (0.67, 1.38). Three trails reported length of stay related data. Four trails reported organ failure related scores. All trails reported the effect of HVHF on hemodynamics. Three trails reported cytokine clearance. Only two trails reported respiratory function related indicators. After analysis, the risk of bias in all trails was low. CONCLUSIONS: The meta-analysis results suggested that treatment programs contained HVHF did not change the outcomes of patients with sepsis. So far, related studies on the use of HVHF in critically ill patients with sepsis or septic shock is rare. Researchers should consider additional large multicenter randomized controlled trials.
RESUMO
Objective To evaluate the effects of fluid resuscitation and large-volume hemofiltration (HVHF) on the Alveolar-arterial oxygen exchange in patients with refractory septic shock. Method A total of 89 intensive care patients with refractory septic shock treated with fluid resuscitation and/or HVHF were enrolled between August 2006 and December 2009. All the patients were randomly divided into two groups. In group A, patients were treated with fluid resuscitation, n = 41 cases) and in group B, patients were treated with large-volume hemofiltration and fluid resuscitation, n =48). The O2 content of central venous blood(CcvO2), arterial oxygen content (CaO2), Alveolar-arterial oxygen pressure difference (P(A-a)DO2), the ratio of arterial oxygen pressure/alveolar oxygen pressure (PaO2/PAO2), respiratory index (RI) and oxygenation index (OI) were checked. The levels of oxygen exchange in two groups were detected by arterial blood gas analysis before treatnent, 24 hour, 72 hour and 7 days after treatment. The APACHE Ⅱ scores in patients with refractory septic shock were measured before and the 7th day after treatment with HVHF and/or fluid resuscitation respectively. Data were analyzed by using t -test and chi-square test to compare the differences and ratio between two groups and were expressed in mean ± standard deviation, and the analysis of variance was done with SPSS version 12.0 software. Results ① The differences in CcvO2 and CaO2 between two groups were[(0.60±0.24) vs. (0.72±-0.28), P ＜0.05 and (0.84±0.43) vs. (0.94±0.46), P ＜0.05]; and the oxygen extraction rates (O2ER) were significantly different between two groups [(28.7±2.4) vs. (21.7±3.4), P<0.01];② The levels of P(A-a)DO2、ratio of PaO2/PAO2、RI and OI in group B were reduced more significantly than in group A (P<0.05 or P<0.01);③The APACHE Ⅱ scores in both groups were gradually reduced after treatment for 7 days, and the APACHE Ⅱscore in group B on the 7th day of treatment were lower than that in group A[(17.2 ± 6.8) vs. (8.2 ± 3.8), P ＜ 0.01]. Conclusions Fluid resuscitation and HVHF could improve alveolar-arterial-oxygen exchange in patients with refractory septic shock, and at the same time decreased the APACHE Ⅱ scores, improving the survival rate of patients.
