-
Avicenna Journal of Medicine Oct 2011Hemodialysis catheters are commonly used when renal replacement therapy is initiated. These catheters have significant complications. Among "locking" solutions used in...
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES
Hemodialysis catheters are commonly used when renal replacement therapy is initiated. These catheters have significant complications. Among "locking" solutions used in an attempt to decrease these complications is recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (rt-PA). This systematic review is to determine the efficacy of rt-PA versus heparin, the standard of care.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A systematic review of randomized controlled trials studying rt-PA alone or rt-PA plus heparin versus heparin alone as locking agents for hemodialysis catheters, which included patients needed a temporary hemodialysis catheter for hemodialysis. We identified relevant trials through electronic databases and correspondence with experts. Two investigators independently reviewed potentially eligible trials and extracted data.
RESULTS
Three trials met the inclusion criteria. One trial reported an improved catheter malfunctioning in patients using rt-PA plus heparin to lock catheters (20.0%) versus heparin alone (34.8%). Another trial reported higher blood flow rate in hemodialysis catheters in patients who received rt-PA (231.6 ± 12.4 mL/min) compared with those who received heparin (206.9 mL/min). The third trial reported formation and weight of clots which were decreased by half in rt-PA group versus heparin group.
CONCLUSIONS
In the few randomized trials that met our inclusion criteria, the use of rt-PA as a locking solution for hemodialysis catheters seems to be associated with fewer adverse events and catheter malfunctioning as compared with heparin. Our systematic review is limited by the few randomized trials addressing our question and the wide variety of outcome measures. Further prospective randomized trials are needed to confirm this conclusion.
PubMed: 23210006
DOI: 10.4103/2231-0770.90913 -
Health Technology Assessment... Aug 2009To review the evidence for the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of storing kidneys from deceased donors prior to transplantation, using cold static storage solutions... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To review the evidence for the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of storing kidneys from deceased donors prior to transplantation, using cold static storage solutions or pulsatile hypothermic machine perfusion.
DATA SOURCES
Electronic databases were searched in January 2008 and updated in May 2008 for systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses, randomised controlled trials (RCTs), other study designs and ongoing research. Sources included: Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, ISI Web of Knowledge, DARE, NRR, ReFeR, Current Controlled Trials, and (NHS) HTA. Bibliographies of articles were searched for further relevant studies, and the Food and Drugs Administration (FDA) and European Regulatory Agency Medical Device Safety Service websites were searched. Only English language papers were sought.
REVIEW METHODS
The perfusion machines identified were the LifePort Kidney Transporter (Organ Recovery Systems) and the RM3 Renal Preservation System (Waters Medical Systems). The cold storage solutions reviewed were: University of Wisconsin, ViaSpan; Marshall's hypertonic citrate, Soltran; and Genzyme, Celsior. Each intervention was compared with the others as data permitted. The population was recipients of kidneys from deceased donors. The main outcomes were measures of graft survival, patient survival, delayed graft function (DGF), primary non-function (PNF), discard rates of non-viable kidneys, health-related quality of life and cost-effectiveness. Where data permitted the results of studies were pooled using meta-analysis. A Markov (state transition) model was developed to simulate the main post-transplantation outcomes of kidney graft recipients.
RESULTS
Eleven studies were included: three full journal published RCTs, two ongoing RCTs [European Machine Preservation Trial (MPT) and UK Pulsatile Perfusion in Asystolic donor Renal Transplantation (PPART) study], one cohort study, three full journal published retrospective record reviews and two retrospective record reviews published as posters or abstracts only. For LifePort versus ViaSpan, no significant differences were found for DGF, PNF, acute rejection, duration of DGF, creatinine clearance or toxicity, patient survival or graft survival at 6 months, but graft survival was better at 12 months post transplant with machine perfusion (LifePort = 98%, ViaSpan = 94%, p < 0.03). For LifePort versus RM3, all outcomes favoured RM3, although the results may be unreliable. For ViaSpan versus Soltran, there were no significant differences in graft survival for cold ischaemic times up to 36 hours. For ViaSpan versus Celsior, no significant differences were found on any outcome measure. In terms of cost-effectiveness, data from the MPT suggested that machine preservation was cheaper and generated more quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), while the PPART study data suggested that cold storage was preferable on both counts. The less reliable deterministic outputs of the cohort study suggested that LifePort would be cheaper and would generate more QALYs than Soltran. Sensitivity analyses found that changes to the differential kidney storage costs between comparators have a very low impact on overall net benefit estimates; where differences in effectiveness exist, dialysis costs are important in determining overall net benefit; DGF levels become important only when differences in graft survival are apparent between patients experiencing immediate graft function (IGF) versus DGF; relative impact of differential changes to graft survival for patients experiencing IGF as opposed to DGF depends on the relative proportion of patients experiencing each of these two outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS
The conclusions drawn for the comparison of machine perfusion with cold storage depend on which trial data are used in the model. Owing to the lack of good research evidence that either ViaSpan or Soltran is better than the other, the cheaper, Soltran, may be preferable. In the absence of a cost-utility analysis, the results of our meta-analysis of the RCTs comparing ViaSpan with Celsior indicate that these cold storage solutions are equivalent. Further RCTs of comparators of interest to allow for appropriate analysis of subgroups and to determine whether either of the two machines under consideration produces better outcomes may be useful. In addition, research is required to: establish the strength and reliability of the presumed causal association between DGF and graft, and patient survival; investigate the utility impacts of renal replacement therapy; determine what the additional cost, survival and QALY impacts are of decreased or increased non-viable kidneys when discarded pre transplantation; and identify a reliable measure for predicting kidney viability from machine perfusion.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Female; Humans; Kidney; Male; Middle Aged; Models, Economic; Tissue and Organ Procurement; Young Adult
PubMed: 19674537
DOI: 10.3310/hta13380 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2007Metabolic acidosis is a feature of chronic kidney disease (CKD) due to the reduced capacity of the kidney to synthesise ammonia and excrete hydrogen ions. It has adverse... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Metabolic acidosis is a feature of chronic kidney disease (CKD) due to the reduced capacity of the kidney to synthesise ammonia and excrete hydrogen ions. It has adverse consequences on protein and muscle metabolism, bone turnover and the development of renal osteodystrophy. Metabolic acidosis may be corrected by oral bicarbonate supplementation or in dialysis patients by increasing the bicarbonate concentration in dialysate fluid.
OBJECTIVES
To examine the benefits and harms of treating metabolic acidosis in patients with CKD, both prior to reaching end-stage renal disease (ESRD) or whilst on renal replacement therapy (RRT), with sodium bicarbonate or increasing the bicarbonate concentration of dialysate.
SEARCH STRATEGY
We searched CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library, issue 4 2005), Cochrane Renal Group's specialised register (October 2005), MEDLINE (1966 - October 2005) and EMBASE (1980 - October 2005).
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), crossover RCTs and quasi-RCTs investigating the correction of chronic metabolic acidosis in adults or children with CKD.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Outcomes were analysed using relative risk (RR) and weighted mean difference (MD) for continuous measures.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified three trials in adult dialysis patients (n = 117). There were insufficient data for most outcomes for meta-analysis. In all three trials acidosis improved in the intervention group though there was variation in achieved bicarbonate level. There was no evidence of effect on blood pressure or sodium levels. Some measures of nutritional status/protein metabolism (e.g. SGA, NP NA) were significantly improved by correction in the one trial that looked in these in detail. There was heterogeneity of the effect on serum albumin in two trials. Serum PTH fell significantly in the two trials that estimated this, there was no significant effect on calcium or phosphate though both fell after correction. Complex bone markers were assessed in one study, with some evidence for a reduction in bone turnover in those with initial high bone turnover and an increase in low turnover patients. The studies were underpowered to assess clinical outcomes, in the one study that did there was some evidence for a reduction in hospitalisation after correction.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The evidence for the benefits and risks of correcting metabolic acidosis is very limited with no RCTs in pre-ESRD patients, none in children, and only three small trials in dialysis patients. These trials suggest there may be some beneficial effects on both protein and bone metabolism but the trials were underpowered to provide robust evidence.
Topics: Acidosis; Chronic Disease; Hemodialysis Solutions; Humans; Kidney Diseases; Renal Dialysis; Sodium Bicarbonate
PubMed: 17253467
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001890.pub3 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Oct 2007End stage renal disease (ESRD) affects over 1500 people per million population in countries with a high prevalence, such as the USA and Japan. Approximately two thirds... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
End stage renal disease (ESRD) affects over 1500 people per million population in countries with a high prevalence, such as the USA and Japan. Approximately two thirds of people with ESRD receive haemodialysis, a quarter have kidney transplants, and a tenth receive peritoneal dialysis.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of different doses and osmotic agents for peritoneal dialysis? What are the effects of different doses and membrane fluxes for haemodialysis? What are the effects of interventions aimed at preventing secondary complications? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library and other important databases up to April 2007 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically, please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found 20 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: cinacalcet, darbepoetin, dextrose solutions, erythropoietin, haemodialysis (standard-dose, increased-dose), high-membrane-flux haemodialysis, icodextrin, increased-dose peritoneal dialysis, low-membrane-flux haemodialysis, mupirocin, sevelamer, and standard-dose dialysis.
Topics: Erythropoietin; Humans; Kidney Failure, Chronic; Kidney Transplantation; Renal Dialysis; Renal Insufficiency, Chronic
PubMed: 19450356
DOI: No ID Found