Clinical and economic impact of a switch from high- to low-volume renal replacement therapy in patients with acute kidney injury.

Abstract

High-intensity renal replacement therapy protocols in intensive care patients with acute kidney injury have failed to translate to improved patient outcomes when compared with lower-intensity protocols. This retrospective study explored the clinical and economic impacts of switching from a 30-35 ml.kg(-1) .h(-1) (high-volume) to a 20 ml.kg(-1) .h(-1) (low-volume) protocol. Patients (n = 366) admitted 12 months before (n = 187) and after (n = 179) the switch were included in the study. There was no difference in in-hospital mortality (77/187 (41%) vs 75/179 (42%), respectively, p = 0.92), intensive care unit mortality (55/187 (29%) vs 61/179 (34%), respectively, p = 0.40), duration of organ support or extent of renal recovery between the high- and low-volume cohorts. A 25% reduction in daily replacement fluid usage was observed, equating to a cost saving of over £27 000 per annum. In conclusion, a switch from high- to low-volume continuous haemodiafiltration had minimal effects on clinical outcomes and resulted in marked cost savings.