Citrate confers less filter-induced complement activation and neutrophil degranulation than heparin when used for anticoagulation during continuous venovenous haemofiltration in critically ill patients

Background: During continuous venovenous haemofiltration (CVVH), regional anticoagulation with citrate may be superior to heparin in terms of biocompatibility, since heparin as opposed to citrate may activate complement (reflected by circulating C5a) and induce neutrophil degranulation in the filter and myeloperoxidase (MPO) release from endothelium. Methods. No anticoagulation (n = 13), unfractionated heparin (n = 8) and trisodium citrate (n = 17) regimens during CVVH were compared. Blood samples were collected pre- and postfilter; C5a, elastase and MPO were determined by ELISA. Additionally, C5a was also measured in the ultrafiltrate. Results: In the heparin group, there was C5a production across the filter which most decreased over time as compared to other groups (P = 0.007). There was also net production of elastase and MPO across the filter during heparin anticoagulation (P = 0.049 or lower), while production was minimal and absent in the no anticoagulation and citrate group, respectively. During heparin anticoagulation, plasma concentrations of MPO at the inlet increased in the first 10 minutes of CVVH (P = 0.024). Conclusion: Citrate confers less filter-induced, potentially harmful complement activation and neutrophil degranulation and less endothelial activation than heparin when used for anticoagulation during continuous venovenous haemofiltration in critically ill patients

The plasma level and biomarker value of neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury are not affected by continuous venovenous hemofiltration and anticoagulation applied

Introduction: Neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL) is a biomarker of acute kidney injury (AKI), and levels reflect severity of disease in critically ill patients. However, continuous venovenous hemofiltration (CVVH) may affect plasma levels by clearance or release of NGAL by activated neutrophils in the filter, dependent on the anticoagulation regimen applied. We therefore studied handling of NGAL by CVVH in patients with AKI.Methods: Immediately before initiation of CVVH, prefilter blood was drawn. After 10, 60, 180, and 720 minutes of CVVH, samples were collected from pre- and postfilter (in- and outlet) blood and ultrafiltrate. CVVH with the following anticoagulation regimens was studied: no anticoagulation in case of a high bleeding tendency (n = 13), unfractionated heparin (n = 8), or trisodium citrate (n = 21). NGAL levels were determined with enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA).Results: Concentrations of NGAL at inlet and outlet were similar, and concentrations did not change over time in any of the anticoagulation groups; thus no net removal or production of NGAL occurred. Concentrations of NGAL at inlet correlated with disease severity at initiation of CVVH and at the end of a CVVH run. Concentrations of NGAL in the ultrafiltrate were lower with citrate-based CVVH (P = 0.03) and decreased over time, irrespective of anticoagulation administered (P < 0.001). The sieving coefficient and clearance of NGAL were low and decreased over time (P < 0.001).Conclusions: The plasma level and biomarker value of NGAL in critically ill patients with AKI are not affected by CVVH, because clearance by the filter was low. Furthermore, no evidence exists for intrafilter release of NGAL by neutrophils, irrespective of the anticoagulation method applied

Citrate anticoagulation versus systemic heparinisation in continuous venovenous hemofiltration in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury: A multi-center randomized clinical trial

Introduction: Because of ongoing controversy, renal and vital outcomes are compared between systemically administered unfractionated heparin and regional anticoagulation with citrate-buffered replacement solution in predilution mode, during continuous venovenous hemofiltration (CVVH) in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury (AKI).Methods: In this multi-center randomized controlled trial, patients admitted to the intensive care unit requiring CVVH and meeting inclusion criteria, were randomly assigned to citrate or heparin. Primary endpoints were mortality and renal outcome in intention-to-treat analysis. Secondary endpoints were safety and efficacy. Safety was defined as absence of any adverse event necessitating discontinuation of the assigned anticoagulant. For efficacy, among other parameters, survival times of the first hemofilter were studied.Results: Of the 139 patients enrolled, 66 were randomized to citrate and 73 to heparin. Mortality rates at 28 and 90 days did not differ between groups: 22/66 (33%) of citrate-treated patients died versus 25/72 (35%) of heparin-treated patients at 28 days, and 27/65 (42%) of citrate-treated patients died versus 29/69 (42%) of heparin-treated patients at 90 days (P = 1.00 for both). Renal outcome, i.e. independency of renal replacement therapy 28 days after initiation of CVVH in surviving patients, did not differ between groups: 29/43 (67%) in the citrate-treated patients versus 33/47 (70%) in heparin-treated patients (P = 0.82). Heparin was discontinued in 24/73 (33%) of patients whereas citrate was discontinued in 5/66 (8%) of patients (P &#60; 0.001). Filter survival times were superior for citrate (median 46 versus 32 hour

Towards a standardised informed consent procedure for live donor nephrectomy: The PRINCE (Process of Informed Consent Evaluation) project-study protocol for a nationwide prospective cohort study

Introduction: Informed consent is mandatory for all (surgical) procedures, but it is even more important when it comes to living kidney donors undergoing surgery for the benefit of others. Donor education, leading to informed consent, needs to be carried out according to certain standards. Informed consent procedures for live donor nephrectomy vary per centre, and even per individual healthcare professional. The basis for a standardised, uniform surgical informed consent procedure for live donor nephrectomy can be created by assessing what information donors need to hear to prepare them for the operation and convalescence. Methods and analysis: The PRINCE (Process of In formed Consent Evaluation) project is a prospective, multicentre cohort study, to be carried out in all eight Dutch kidney transplant centres. Donor knowledge of the procedure and postoperative course will be evaluated by means of pop quizzes. A baseline cohort (prior to receiving any information from a member of the transplant team in one of the transplant centres) will be compared with a control group, the members of which receive the pop quiz on the day of admission for donor nephrectomy. Donor satisfaction will be evaluated for all donors who completed the admission pop-quiz. The primary end point is donor knowledge. In addition, those elements that have to be included in the standardized format informed consent procedure will be identified. Secondary end points are donor satisfaction, current informed consent practices in the different centres (eg, how many visits, which personnel, what kind of information is di

Antibodies against ARHGDIB are associated with long-term kidney graft loss

The clinical significance of non‐HLA antibodies on renal allograft survival is a matter of debate, due to differences in reported results and lack of large‐scale studies incorporating analysis of multiple non‐HLA antibodies simultaneously. We developed a multiplex non‐HLA antibody assay against 14 proteins highly expressed in the kidney. In this study, the presence of pretransplant non‐HLA antibodies was corre

Allocation to highly sensitized patients based on acceptable mismatches results in low rejection rates comparable to nonsensitized patients

Whereas regular allocation avoids unacceptable mismatches on the donor organ, allocation to highly sensitized patients within the Eurotransplant Acceptable Mismatch (AM) program is based on the patient's HLA phenotype plus acceptable antigens. These are HLA antigens to which the patient never made antibodies, as determined by extensive laboratory testing. AM patients have superior long-term graft survival compared with highly sensitized patients in regular allocation. Here, we questioned whether the AM program also results in lower rejection rates. From the PROCARE cohort, consisting of all Dutch kidney transplants in 1995-2005, we selected deceased donor single transplants with a minimum of 1 HLA mismatch and determined the cumulative 6-month rejection incidence for patients in AM or regular allocation. Additionally, we determined the effect of minimal matching criteria of 1 HLA-B plus 1 HLA-DR, or 2 HLA-DR antigens on rejection incidence. AM patients showed significantly lower rejection rates than highly immunized patients in regular allocation, comparable to nonsensitized patients, independent of other risk factors for rejection. In contrast to highly sensitized patients in regular allocation, minimal matching criteria did not affect rejection rates in AM patients. Allocation based on acceptable antigens leads to relatively low-risk transplants for highly sensitized patients with rejection rates similar to those of nonimmunized individuals