Épuration extrarénale et insuffisance rénale aiguë en soins intensifs

Abstract

Renal replacement therapy for acute kidney injury has been used for more than 60 years. Except when life-threatening metabolic complications such as severe hyperkalaemia are present, renal replacement therapy initiation criteria are the subject of intense debate. Significant progress has been made with the publication of the AKIKI multicenter trial, which showed that a delayed renal replacement therapy initiation strategy (in the absence of life-threatening metabolic complications) was not associated with a difference in mortality compared to an early renal replacement therapy initiation strategy. In addition, this delayed strategy obviated the need for renal replacement therapy in almost 50% of cases was associated with a more rapid renal function recovery and with a lower incidence of catheter-bloodstream related infections. Research on renal replacement therapy modalities (continuous vs. intermittent renal replacement therapy, citrate vs. heparin anticoagulation, jugular vs. femoral catheterization) did not show any obvious superiority of one modality over another. Thus, the choice depends mainly on local considerations (patient recruitment, availability of modalities, staff experience). The criteria for renal replacement therapy discontinuation are still unclear due to difficulties in assessing renal function recovery. Urine output remains the main criteria in the decision to wean from renal replacement therapy. Pending the confirmation of AKIKI trial by similar studies in progress, it seems reasonable to choose a delayed renal replacement therapy initiation strategy under watchful surveillance in case of severe acute kidney injury in the absence of life-threatening metabolic complications.