Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://repository.monashhealth.org/monashhealthjspui/handle/1/34366
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorBellomo R.en
dc.contributor.authorBoyce N.en
dc.date.accessioned2021-05-14T11:37:09Zen
dc.date.available2021-05-14T11:37:09Zen
dc.date.copyright1993en
dc.date.created19930616en
dc.date.issued2012-10-25en
dc.identifier.citationAmerican Journal of Kidney Diseases. 21 (5) (pp 508-518), 1993. Date of Publication: 1993.en
dc.identifier.issn0272-6386en
dc.identifier.urihttps://repository.monashhealth.org/monashhealthjspui/handle/1/34366en
dc.description.abstractOne hundred ten critically ill patients with acute renal failure receiving acute continuous hemodiafiltration (ACHD) in our intensive care unit were studied prospectively. Acute continuous hemodiafiltration consisted either of continuous arteriovenous hemodiafiltration or of continuous veno-venous hemodiafiltration, and was used for 17,817 hours (mean duration of patient treatment, 161.9 hours), resulting in a fall from a mean pre-ACHD urea of 35.7 mmol/L to a plateau value of 16.8 mmol/L at 72 hours of treatment. The mean urea clearance achieved was 24.9 mL/min. Eighty of these patients (72.7%) were receiving artificial ventilation at the time of ACHD and 45 (40.9%) had more than four failing organs. The mean APACHE II score was 27.7. Despite the degree of illness severity, 42 patients (32.2%) survived to discharge from hospital. The use of ACHD was associated with hemodynamic stability, rapid normalization of electrolytes, and the ability to freely administer drugs, blood, and/or blood products. It also allowed for maintenance of an aggressive, nitrogen-rich, nutritional regimen. Support of these critically ill patients with acute renal failure using ACHD was achieved safely and without the employment of additional dialysis-trained nursing staff. Our own experience and a review of the available literature strongly suggest that the advantages associated with the use of ACHD therapies are clinically significant and support the view that ACHD is a modality of renal replacement most suited to critically ill patients with acute renal failure.en
dc.languageEnglishen
dc.languageenen
dc.publisherW.B. Saunders (Independence Square West, Philadelphia PA 19106-3399, United States)en
dc.titleAcute continuous hemodiafiltration: A prospective study of 110 patients and a review of the literature.en
dc.typeArticleen
dc.identifier.doihttp://monash.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0272-6386(12)80397-0en
dc.publisher.placeUnited Statesen
dc.identifier.pubmedid8488819 [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=8488819]en
dc.identifier.source23160512en
dc.identifier.institution(Bellomo, Boyce) Monash Medical Centre, Locked Bag No 29, Clayton, Vic. 3168, Australiaen
dc.description.addressN. Boyce, Monash Medical Centre, Locked Bag No 29, Clayton, Vic. 3168, Australiaen
dc.description.publicationstatusEmbaseen
dc.rights.statementCopyright 2012 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.en
dc.subect.keywordsAcute renal failure Critical illness Hemodialysis Hemofiltration Multiorgan failure Peritoneal dialysis Sepsis Uremiaen
item.fulltextNo Fulltext-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_18cf-
item.grantfulltextnone-
item.openairetypeArticle-
Appears in Collections:Articles
Show simple item record

Page view(s)

20
checked on Feb 7, 2025

Google ScholarTM

Check


Items in Monash Health Research Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.