High-Volume Hemodiafiltration with Step-Down Approach versus Standard-of-Care Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy Approach in Critically Ill Burn Patients.

INTRODUCTION: Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a common complication of severe burn injuries and contributes to morbidity and mortality. It is exacerbated in burn patients by elevated serum creatinine and pro-inflammatory cytokines, leading to immune dysregulation. Chronic renal replacement therapy is standard of care and removes cytokines to return the body to homeostasis. Continuous veno-venous hemodiafiltration (CVVHDF) is a high-filtration method to enhance cytokine clearance; we analyze a step-down approach for improved outcomes in burn patients.

METHODS: This study reviewed 15 burn patients at Akron Children's Hospital stratified into 2 groups: high-flow CVVHDF with step-down approach versus standard CVVHDF. A normocarbia bicarbonate-based dialysate solution and citrate anticoagulation was applied, and blood flow rate was maintained greater than 200 mL/min.

RESULTS: Fifteen burn patients at Akron Children's Hospital were separated into groups managed with high-flow CVVHDF (n = 9) and standard-flow CVVHDF (n = 6). All 15 developed AKI symptoms and diuretic-resistant fluid overload, with 4/15 displaying fluid overload greater than 40%. The most common indication for hemofiltration was acute tubular necrosis (11/15). Average time on CVVHDF was 20.2 days and length of admission was 58.6 days. Vasodepressor dependency index was significantly reduced in the high-flow group at 48 h, but no significant difference in mortality was identified. No significant difference was identified in adverse reactions, notably electrolyte imbalances.

CONCLUSION: The literature on the efficacy of high-flow CVVHDF is limited. This study suggests improved mortality rates and length of stay with high flow compared to the literature. Further studies with multicenter involvement are necessary.