Low-Flux Versus High-Flux Synthetic Dialysis Membrane in Acute Renal Failure: Prospective Randomized Study
Article first published online: 11 JAN 2002
Volume 25, Issue 12, pages 946–950, December 2001
How to Cite
Ponikvar, J. B., Rus, R. R., Kenda, R. B., Bren, A. F. and Ponikvar, R. R. (2001), Low-Flux Versus High-Flux Synthetic Dialysis Membrane in Acute Renal Failure: Prospective Randomized Study. Artificial Organs, 25: 946–950. doi: 10.1046/j.1525-1594.2001.06753.x
- Issue published online: 11 JAN 2002
- Article first published online: 11 JAN 2002
- Received December 2000; revised April 2001.
- Acute renal failure;
Abstract: The influence of dialyzer membrane on the morbidity and mortality of patients with acute renal failure remains a matter of debate. The aim of the prospective randomized clinical study was to assess the influence of the flux of a synthetic dialyzer membrane on patients' survival rate, restitution of renal function, and duration of hemodialysis treatment of patients with acute renal failure as a part of multiorgan failure. Seventy-two patients treated in intensive care units of the University Medical Center Ljubljana were randomized according to the dialyzer used throughout the duration of hemodialysis treatment. There were 38 patients in the low-flux group (dialyzer F6, low-flux polysuphone, Fresenius, Bad Homburg, Germany) and 34 patients in the high-flux group (dialyzer Filtral 12, sulphonated high-flux polyacrylonitrile, Hospal, Industrie Meyzieu, France). Both groups were balanced in terms of sex, age, APACHE II score, oliguria before dialysis, cause of acute renal failure, innotropic support, mechanical ventilation, and the number of failing organs. The patients' survival rate was 18.7% in the low-flux group and 20.6% in the high-flux group. Ten patients (26.3%) recovered their renal function in the low-flux group and 8 (23.5%) in the high-flux group. Hemodialysis treatment lasted 11.2 days in the low-flux and 10.7 days in the high-flux group. An analysis of subgroups with a lower mortality rate (subgroup of patients without oliguria and subgroup of patients with less than 4 failed organ systems) did not show significant differences between the low-flux and high-flux groups in terms of survival rate, recovery of renal function, and duration of hemodialysis treatment. In conclusion, no significant differences were found in the results of low-flux versus high-flux synthetic membrane dialyzer treatment in patients with acute renal failure as a part of multiorgan failure in terms of survival rate, recovery of renal function, incidence of oliguria during hemodialysis, and duration of hemodialysis treatment. The number of failing organs seems to be the most important single factor determining the survival of patients with acute renal failure as a part of multiorgan failure.