Circuit Lifetime With Citrate Versus Heparin in Pediatric Continuous Venovenous Hemodialysis. (Duke)

Zaoral T, et al. Circuit Lifetime With Citrate Versus Heparin in Pediatric Continuous Venovenous Hemodialysis. Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2016 Sep;17(9):e399-405.

OBJECTIVES: To determine if there is a difference between regional citrate and global heparinized anticoagulation on circuit lifetimes during continuous venovenous hemodialysis in children.

DESIGN: Prospective “cross-over” trial.

SETTING: PICU, Department of Pediatrics, University Hospital Ostrava.

PATIENTS: Children 0-18 years old.

INTERVENTIONS: From 2009 to 2014, 63 eligible children (age, 89.24 ± 62.9 mo; weight, 30.37 ± 20.62 kg) received at least 24 hours of continuous venovenous hemodialysis. Each child received four continuous venovenous hemodialysis circuits with anticoagulants in the following order: heparin, citrate, heparin, citrate. Circuit life ended when transmembrane pressure was greater than or equal to 250 mm Hg for more than 60 minutes.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The total mean circuit lifetime was 39.75 ± 10.73 hours. Citrate had a significantly longer median circuit lifetime (41.0 hr; CI, 37.6-44.4) than heparin (36.0 hr; CI, 35.4-36.6; p = 0.0001). Mortality was 33.33%. Circuit lifetime was significantly correlated to patient age (r = 0.606), weight (r = 0.763), and blood flow rate (r = 0.697). Transfusion rates (units of red cells per circuit of continuous venovenous hemodialysis) were 0.17 (0.0-1.0) with citrate and 0.36 (0.0-2.0) with heparin (p = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS: We showed in our study that citrate provided significantly longer circuit lifetimes than heparin for continuous venovenous hemodialysis in children. Citrate was superior to heparin for the transfusion requirements. Citrate was feasible and safe in children and infants.

Failure of anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis: risk factors in medical-surgical critically ill patients. (Teppa)

Lim W, Meade M, Lauzier F, et al. Failure of anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis: risk factors in medical-surgical critically ill patients*. Crit Care Med. 2015 Feb;43(2):401-10.

Full-text for Children’s and Emory users.

OBJECTIVES: To identify risk factors for failure of anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis in critically ill patients in the ICU.

DESIGN: Multivariable regression analysis of thrombosis predictors from a randomized thromboprophylaxis trial.

SETTING: Sixty-seven medical-surgical ICUs in six countries.

PATIENTS: Three thousand seven hundred forty-six medical-surgical critically ill patients.

INTERVENTIONS: All patients received anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin or unfractionated heparin at standard doses.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Independent predictors for venous thromboembolism, proximal leg deep vein thrombosis, and pulmonary embolism developing during critical illness were assessed. A total of 289 patients (7.7%) developed venous thromboembolism. Predictors of thromboprophylaxis failure as measured by development of venous thromboembolism included a personal or family history of venous thromboembolism (hazard ratio, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.03-2.59; p = 0.04) and body mass index (hazard ratio, 1.18 per 10-point increase; 95% CI, 1.04-1.35; p = 0.01). Increasing body mass index was also a predictor for developing proximal leg deep vein thrombosis (hazard ratio, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.06-1.46; p = 0.007), which occurred in 182 patients (4.9%). Pulmonary embolism occurred in 47 patients (1.3%) and was associated with body mass index (hazard ratio, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.02-1.83; p = 0.035) and vasopressor use (hazard ratio, 1.84; 95% CI, 1.01-3.35; p = 0.046). Low-molecular-weight heparin (in comparison to unfractionated heparin) thromboprophylaxis lowered pulmonary embolism risk (hazard ratio, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.27-0.95; p = 0.034) while statin use in the preceding week lowered the risk of proximal leg deep vein thrombosis (hazard ratio, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.27-0.77; p = 0.004).

CONCLUSIONS: Failure of standard thromboprophylaxis using low-molecular-weight heparin or unfractionated heparin is more likely in ICU patients with elevated body mass index, those with a personal or family history of venous thromboembolism, and those receiving vasopressors. Alternate management or incremental risk reduction strategies may be needed in such patients.