Critically ill adults with acute kidney injury (AKI) experience considerable morbidity and mortality. Controversy remains regarding the optimal renal replacement intervention for these patients. Our systematic review aimed to determine the effect(s) of sustained low-efficiency dialysis (SLED) compared with continuous renal replacement (CRRT) therapy on relevant patient outcomes. A systematic search of Medline, Embase, CINAHL and the Cochrane Library was conducted. Identified citations were screened independently in duplicate for relevance, and the methodological quality of included studies was evaluated. Data were extracted on study, patient and intervention characteristics and relevant clinical outcomes. Results were pooled using inverse variance fixed and random effects meta-analysis. A total of 1564 patients from 18 studies were included. Meta-analysis results indicated no statistically significant difference in our primary outcome, overall proportion of renal recovery (risk ratio (RR) 0.87, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.63-1.20, I2 = 66%). No significant difference was observed for the secondary outcome of time to renal recovery (mean difference 1.33, 95% CI 0.23-2.88, I2 = 0%). Statistically, SLED was marginally favoured over CRRT for the secondary outcome of mortality (RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.02-1.43, I2 = 47%); however, this diminished when sensitivity analysis of only randomized controlled trials was conducted (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.00-1.57, I2 = 0%). There appears to be no clear for advantage continuous renal replacement in the hemodynamically unstable patient. Currently, both modalities are safe and effective means of treating AKI in the critically ill adult.
Keywords: acute renal failure (ARF); dialysis; meta-analysis.
© 2017 Asian Pacific Society of Nephrology.