Open Access

Clinical review: Timing of renal replacement therapy

Critical Care201115:223

Published: 10 June 2011


Acute kidney injury is common in intensive care patients and continuous renal replacement therapy is the preferred treatment for this in most centres. Although these techniques have been adopted internationally, there remains significant variation with regard to their clinical application. This is particularly pertinent when one considers that the fundamental questions regarding any treatment, such as initiation, dose and length of treatment, remain a source of debate and have not as yet all been fully answered. In this narrative review we consider the timing of renal replacement therapy, highlighting the relative paucity of high quality data regarding this fundamental question. We examine the role of the usual biochemical criteria as well as conventional clinical indications for commencing renal replacement therapy together with the application of recent classification systems, namely RIFLE and AKIN. We discuss the potential role of biomarkers for acute kidney injury as predictors for the need for renal support and discuss commencing therapy for indications other than acute kidney injury.


The primary goal of renal replacement therapy (RRT) is to compensate for, in part, the loss of renal function and associated sequelae. These include the accumulation of nitrogenous waste products, uraemic toxins, electrolyte disturbances, metabolic acidosis and volume overload. Organ support is much beloved by intensivists and, to an extent, defines us, but despite the introduction of convective therapies, RRT has changed little in the past 50 years. Furthermore, the use of current extracorporeal circuits does not compensate for other endocrinological and metabolic functions of the kidney.

The cause of the acute kidney injury (AKI) necessitating RRT is also relevant. The unconditional acceptance of terms such as AKI must be considered together with the underlying aetiology in order to understand the basic pathological processes associated with kidney injury. Without an underlying cause, AKI tells us nothing save an observed disturbance in conventionally measured 'markers' of function coupled with reduced urine production. Clearly, the outcome from AKI in a young patient secondary to an interstitial nephritis is very different from that of an elderly diabetic developing AKI following systemic infection from a ruptured viscus. It may be that the aetiology of the underlying condition is also of great import with regard to timing of treatment. In many ways this highlights the differences between single organ 'AKI' and 'multiorgan AKI' in that timing of RRT on a renal unit may differ significantly from our patients on the ICU in terms of both dose delivered and duration of treatment.

In ICU patients AKI is often encountered at an early stage before traditional measures of renal function are deranged. Therefore, symptoms may not be as pronounced compared to a patient developing renal failure prior to ICU admission. Furthermore, AKI may be regarded as a systemic disease, rather than organ failure in isolation characterised by a systemic inflammatory response with concomitant distant organ injury [1]. Consequently the indication to start RRT in critically ill patients is frequently based on very early signs of AKI, such as prolonged oliguria, rather than conventional markers of chronic kidney disease.

Numerous articles focus on the topic of initiation of RRT in the critically ill and highlight the relative paucity of high quality data, as shown in a recent meta-analysis with only one published randomised controlled trial investigating this issue to-date [2]. This narrative review is intended as a critical reappraisal of the criteria usually applied for initiation of RRT. We wish to outline some of the problems associated with determining relative 'cutoff' points for commencing RRT due to the heterogenous nature of the 'triggers' used for determining need for renal replacement. We address both initiation and termination of RRT, concentrating on the use of RRT for renal support, although mention is made of other indications. A systematic search of the literature was performed using the search terms 'renal replacement therapy', 'haemofiltration', 'haemodialysis', 'timing', and 'initiation' and, where possible, the following endpoints were extracted: creatinine clearance, glomerular filtration rate, increase in serum creatinine, urine output, markers of tubular injury and mortality.

Initiation of renal replacement therapy

General considerations

Based on the principle that early goal-directed treatments may improve the outcome of critically ill patients, it may be argued that a similar approach could be applied to RRT. This concept is supported by a hypothesis-generating meta-analysis suggesting that early initiation of RRT in patients with AKI might be associated with improved survival [3]. However, this analysis is hampered by the usual problems, including predominantly retrospective studies and significantly varied endpoints. As recognised from a recent study in chronic kidney disease on the initiation of RRT, it appears that no single parameter, such as estimated glomerular filtration rate (GFR), fulfils an adequate criterion for commencing treatment [4]. Therefore, the composite effect of the accumulation of potentially removable toxins, where non-excreted fluid can also be regarded as a 'toxin', rather than any single parameter seems to define the trigger point for intervention.

The conventional parameters used as indicators of renal function (namely urea and creatinine) are relatively non-toxic, with their concentration dependent on volume of distribution, production rate and tubular reabsorption (urea). The volume of distribution for urea or creatinine increases significantly in the volume overloaded critically ill patient [5], leading to lower serum concentrations, although this may not be the same for other, non-routinely measured uraemic toxins. Furthermore, the 'real' urea volume of distribution may significantly surpass estimated total body water in patients with AKI [6]. Increased production rates of urea in catabolic patients or increased tubular reabsorption in prerenal azotemia may lead to high serum concentrations not paralleled by other toxic waste products. Consequently, serum levels of urea or creatinine may not necessarily reflect the concentrations of uremic toxins and an absolute level of either urea or creatinine cannot, therefore, be acceptable as a defining criterion for 'early' versus 'late' treatment (Figure 1).
Figure 1

Relation of blood urea nitrogen to uremic toxins. Blood urea nitrogen (BUN) is influenced by several factors, including catabolism, volume of distribution, production rate, and antidiuretic hormone release independent of concentration of uremic toxins.

Timing of treatment should not be considered in isolation but together with the treatment dose applied, which, in turn, will determine the time needed until control of uraemic waste products is achieved. None of the studies on dose of RRT published recently investigate tailoring delivered dose. It could be envisaged that application of an initial 'high dose' followed by a 'standard dose' may decrease the time period during which homeostasis is severely disturbed. Adopting the current recommendations regarding RRT, all patients are started with the same minimal dose of 25 ml/kg/h; hence, timing of treatment may be more relevant if the aim of early goal directed therapy in critically ill patients is to minimise exposure of the patient to accumulated toxins (Figure 2).
Figure 2

Influence of timing and dosing on exposure to uremic toxins. AUCtox is the area under the curve of the respective toxins, and early, low dose renal replacement therapy may result in lower AUCtox than late, high dose renal replacement therapy. BUN, blood urea nitrogen.

Approximately 20% of patients develop AKI with the need for RRT late in their admission and this is associated with inferior outcomes [7, 8]. However, this criterion (that is, time from admission to ICU until start of RRT) is determined retrospectively and cannot be applied prospectively. Conversely, starting RRT very early results in administration of RRT to patients who would recover spontaneously [9] and thus would never have required this intervention with its associated risks. These include the potential loss of trace elements (for example, selenium) [10], vitamin depletion (for example, thiamine, ascorbic acid), heat loss, nutritional loss (for example, amino acids) [11, 12] and infection [13]. Potential benefits of commencing early therapy must also be weighed against potential complications associated with intravenous catheter insertion and exposure to relatively high dose anticoagulation.

Appraisal of the usual criteria applied in initiating RRT in the critically ill

Studies examining timing of RRT in the critically ill have to address the criteria used for commencing therapy but this is hampered by the lack of any universally accepted criteria for initiation. Potential candidates include conventional markers of renal dysfunction - urea, creatinine and urine output - but other classical indicators for RRT, such as refractory volume overload, persistent metabolic acidosis and electrolyte abnormalities, cannot be ignored. Given this heterogeneity, it is of no surprise that consensus as to when to commence RRT has not been reached. In order to try and critically explore this further, we discuss each of these parameters independently.

Uraemia, blood urea nitrogen, and serum creatinine

The development of overt uraemic symptoms is an obvious indication for initiating RRT but treatment on the ICU is rarely, if ever, delayed until full blown uraemia develops. However, early signs such as anorexia, nausea, vomiting or confusion are non-specific and difficult to discriminate from the symptoms of other pathologies present in these patients. Consequently, progressive azotemia is frequently used as an indication to start RRT for critically ill patients developing AKI, although at present no generally accepted threshold based on a definitive urea concentration exists.

The concept of prophylactic haemodialysis for the treatment of acute renal failure (ARF) was introduced by Teschan and colleagues [14] more than 50 years ago, where replacement therapy was started before the development of overt symptoms. Subsequently, data from several retrospective case series as well as two further trials performed in the 1970s and 1980s led to the recommended threshold of blood urea nitrogen (BUN) for the initiation of haemodialysis decreasing to 80 to 100 mg/dl (a urea concentration of approximately 29 to 36 mmol/l) from the previously quoted 165 to 200 mg/dl (approximate to 60 to 73 mmol/l) [1520]. One of the earlier studies examining continuous therapies used a BUN value of 60 mg/dl (approximate to 22 mmol/l) for defining treatment as 'early' or 'late' [21]. A significant improvement in survival in the 'early' group (average BUN of 43 mg/dl at initiation (approximate to 15.7 mmol/l)) was observed when compared to the 'late' group (average BUN of 94 mg/dl (approximate to 34 mmol/l)). Another retrospective subgroup analysis on 243 ICU patients with ARF from the Program to Improve Care in Acute Renal Disease (PICARD) study defined early initiation of dialysis based on BUN values below the median value of 76 mg/dl (approximate to 27.7 mmol/l) [22]. The authors found that higher BUN levels on commencing treatment (>76 mg/dl, mean 114.8 mg/dl) were associated with an increased relative risk for death of 1.85 [22]. Interestingly, an increased BUN has been shown to be a 'biomarker' for increased mortality in several situations, including acute heart failure [23], coronary artery disease [24], stroke [25], pneumonia [26], bone marrow transplantation [27], acute pancreatitis [28] and following oesophagectomy [29].

Creatinine is considered a better indicator of GFR and was consequently adopted as a parameter for the definition of AKI in whatever guise. Indeed, serial measurements of creatinine demonstrating relatively small increases is an indicator for increased mortality [30, 31]. Like urea, creatinine itself is non-toxic and changes in serum concentration may occur independently of the GFR through changes in volume status, altered production, reduced muscle mass or by drug effects on the tubular excretion of creatinine. Consequently, although changes in serum creatinine have been suggested for classifying and staging AKI [32, 33], the rate or degree of increase in serum creatinine might not adequately reflect the level of decline of GFR in this setting [34]. Moreover, creatinine levels may be decreased in sepsis due to a reduction in production rate [35].

So what levels of these parameters are considered significant in our everyday practice? Examination of the larger published randomised controlled trials investigating RRT in critically ill patients with ARF with mortality as the end point reveals certain common threads. RRT is usually initiated at BUN levels between 50 mg/dl and 110 mg/dl (approximate to 18 to 40 mmol/l) or a serum creatinine between 3.5 and 5 mg/dl (approximate to 300 to 450 μmol/l), respectively [2, 3641] (Table 1).
Table 1

Average blood urea nitrogen and serum creatinine and characteristics of patients included in all large prospective randomized trials (n > 150) investigating dose of renal replacement therapy


Number of patients


BUN mg/dl (mmol/l)

Creatinine mg/dl (μmol/l)

Percentage with oliguria

Ronco et al. [37]



50 (18)

3.6 (318)


Mehta et al. [36]



85 (30)

4.5 (396)


Schiffl et al. [39]


87 (III)

90 (32)

5.0 (442)


Saudan et al. [38]



83 (30)

4.8 (428)


Tolwani et al. [94]



76 (27)

4.3 (376)


Palevsky et al. [40]



66 (24)

4.1 (362)


Bellomo et al. [41]


102 (III)

64 (23)

3.8 (334)


Faulhaber-Walter et al. [95]



63 (22)

3.1 (273)


APACHE, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation; BUN, blood urea nitrogen.

Therefore, despite the lack of robust trials supporting particular levels of these parameters in the initiation of RRT in the critically ill, it seems that, as a group, we have devised our own! These reflect current clinical practice but of course may not be the ideal.

Some studies have demonstrated a 'paradoxical' relationship between serum creatinine and outcome in patients with AKI and various arguments have centred around these findings, including time between admission and commencement of therapy [42]. These arguments are not new, having been discussed in the literature over a decade ago [4345]. This observation has been explained in various ways, including reduced muscle mass, reduced creatinine production due to sepsis, volume overload and malnutrition, although it probably reflects the length of time elapsed after onset of the condition. Therefore, patients with the lowest determined serum creatinine at the start of RRT have the highest disease burden in terms of need for multiorgan support and, as such, the highest mortality risk; those commencing RRT later with a higher serum creatinine do not. Therefore, the higher serum creatinine as well as any perceived 'delay' in commencing RRT reflects the fact that these patients are in a more favourable group.

Volume overload and oliguria

Volume overload due to salt and water retention frequently complicates AKI, occurring in 30 to 70% of ICU patients, and is associated with a greater risk of both morbidity and mortality [4652]. Indeed, patients who remain responsive to diuretic treatment demonstrate outcome benefits, as do patients exposed to restrictive fluid management in acute lung injury [53, 54]. Although diuretics are still frequently employed in order to prevent oliguria [55, 56], their use has not been translated into any perceived benefit in AKI [57]. But even if the kidney is still (slightly) responsive to furosemide, ultrafiltration by RRT removes fluid in an iso-isomolal way, that is, without inducing hypernatraemia and alkalosis. Consequently, in the presence of refractory severe volume overload, initiation of RRT appears indicated. Moreover, in the intensive care setting, initiation of RRT is more frequently triggered by oliguria expected to result in volume overload rather than increases in conventional markers such as creatinine or urea [58, 59].

A few retrospective studies have investigated early initiation of RRT using a more functional approach (comparing oliguria to conventional measured criteria). Two studies in cardiothoracic patients [60, 61] started CRRT when urine output was <100 ml over an 8 hour period whereas a third study [62] used oliguria for more than 12 hours as initiation criterion in patients with septic shock. All three studies showed significantly reduced hospital or 30-day mortality in patients where RRT was started in the presence of oliguria rather than waiting for increases in BUN or serum creatinine. However, the only prospective study to date investigating both delivered dose and early versus late initiation of treatment found no difference between 'early' and 'late' initiation [2]; a caveat is that although well designed, the sample size of this study was relatively small.

RIFLE and AKIN criteria

The RIFLE (risk, injury, failure, loss of kidney function, and end-stage renal failure) and Acute Kidney Injury Network (AKIN) criteria [32, 33] were introduced to attempt to standardise both the definition and staging of AKI. The obvious advantage of these is that they can combine increasing serum creatinine and decreasing urine output rather than considering just one 'trigger' in isolation. However, a few retrospective analyses, although utilising only creatinine for RIFLE class determination, have shown contradictory results [58, 63]. If one translates the urinary output criteria used in the studies mentioned above [6062] to RIFLE/AKIN classification, this would suggest commencing therapy at either RIFLE Injury or AKIN stage II in critically ill patients when both criteria (urine output and creatinine) are included. To date, however, no trials have investigated the suitability of using RIFLE/AKIN criteria for determining the timing of RRT.

Electrolyte disturbances

Potassium homeostasis mainly relies on renal excretion and hyperkalaemia is thus commonly encountered in AKI. Additional factors contributing to hyperkalaemia in critical illness include pH-dependant shifts from the intracellular space and relative insulin resistance. Furthermore, rhabdomyolysis, haemolysis and the adverse effects of certain drugs (for example, ACE inhibitors) may also contribute to hyperkalaemia. Untreated hyperkalaemia is fatal, although classical pharmacological 'manipulation' of potassium levels are just that, providing transitory improvement through potassium shifts. The only effective measures that decrease whole body potassium load are diuretic therapy, enteric potassium-binding resins and RRT. Haemodialysis is the most effective way to remove potassium due to the substantially higher potassium clearance (removing 50 to 80 mmol potassium in a 4 hour session [64]) compared to continuous forms of RRT, although continuous venovenous haemodiafiltration, where sufficient total solute effluent rates are achieved, can be used. A specific threshold for initiation of RRT in hyperkalaemia cannot be recommended because this depends on the acuity of serum potassium changes and the observed physiological effects on the patient. Usually, RRT is not commenced at serum potassium values below 6.5 mmol/l where this is the sole indication [65].

Both hyper- and hyponatraemia do occur in AKI, being dependent on volume status as well as any remaining effective free water clearance by the kidneys. If some residual renal function remains, it is rarely necessary to start RRT to correct dysnatraemias, although RRT may be used as an adjunct to therapy.

While less common, severe hypercalcaemia, hyper-phosphataemia, hypermagnesemia and hyperuricaemia may be indications for RRT. Severe hypercalcaemia may occur in the setting of hyperparathyroidism or malignancy and can lead to crystal nephropathy, tubular obstruction and subsequent renal failure. In addition to pharmacological treatments including bisphosphonates, RRT may be considered as a last resort treatment for acute hypercalcaemia [66]. In this case, the use of citrate anticoagulation with reduced calcium replacement or calcium free dialysis is highly effective.

Metabolic acidosis

The kidney plays a major role in acid-base regulation. Renal failure results in increasing levels of plasma organic acids and other unmeasured anions through continued fixed acid production of around 50 to 100 meq H+/day [6769]. RRT plays a major role in acid-base regulation in two ways, firstly by removing metabolic acids and secondly by the net addition of sodium bicarbonate. High anion gap acidoses secondary to poisoning, such as ethylene glycol intoxication, are an indication for acute haemodialysis with both haemodiafiltration as well as extended haemodialysis controlling acidosis in such scenarios [70].

Studies on the use of bicarbonate buffered haemofiltration in lactic acidosis, defined by a blood lactate of at least 5 mmol/l accompanied either by an arterial pH <7.2 or need for more than 60 mmol NaHCO3 per hour to maintain a stable arterial pH, did demonstrate control of acidosis [71]. These criteria were used in part to initiate RRT, although no clear studies exist that define the exact threshold whereby RRT can be started in metabolic acidosis with translation into clinical benefit or show that RRT alters the clinical outcome in the absence of reversal of the underlying cause of lactic acidosis. Practically, an intractable acidosis is usually considered as an indication to commence RRT.

Furthermore, metabolic acidosis increases ventilatory demands and high minute volumes to correct pH. By correcting metabolic acidosis, RRT may protect the lungs against ventilation-induced lung injury.


The recent literature has seen an expansion in studies examining potential 'biomarkers' for the early detection of AKI. Candidate molecules include Neutrophil gelatinaseassociated lipocalin (NGAL), Kidney injury molecule (KIM)-1 and Cystatin C, and the list continues to grow, although the quest for the renal 'troponin' has been hampered by a desire for one biomarker to be seen as superior over others. NGAL, a ubiquitous 25-kDa protein covalently bound to gelatinase from human neutrophils whose expression is increased in the presence of inflammation and epithelial damage, has received most attention in the literature [72, 73]. A recent review from the NGAL meta-analysis investigator group concludes that NGAL appears to be of diagnostic and prognostic value for AKI in critically ill patients, albeit in highly selected populations [74]. To date, demonstration of similarly robust sensitivity and specificity in a heterogeneous ICU population is lacking. The application of biomarkers as indicators for the need for RRT has also been examined, with NGAL shown to be a modest predictor of the need for RRT [75, 76]. An alternative approach may be the application of biomarkers to indicate which patients may not need RRT. Although this seems to fly in the face of current perceived wisdom, it may be that biomarkers such as NGAL could help delineate which patients have not had an appreciable renal insult. Therefore, where biomarker levels are low this may translate to lack of an appreciable renal insult. This would not be to the total exclusion of other clinical markers but may provide additional evidence for renal damage or the lack thereof.

The reported conflicting results do not add credence for support of one biomarker convincingly over another as yet, but given that the blanket term AKI does not specify cause of insult, perhaps the quest for one such indicator is naïve. One could propose that AKI is not one disease but several under an all encompassing umbrella and the idea that one 'biomarker' will fit all is thus doomed to failure, particularly when one considers that different biomarkers reflect different pathophysiological processes - for example, serum cystatin and glomerular filtration, NGAL and inflammation, urinary KIM-1 and proximal tubular injury - and that tubular damage does not always translate into a reduction in clearance.

More research will answer these questions and if suitable biomarkers are found, then this may prove to be an exciting time in critical care nephrology. One may envisage clinical trials aimed at early intervention in specific forms of AKI that may alter the course of the process: but will they provide a basis for early RRT? Only time will tell.

'Door-to-RRT time'

Prompt dialysis after admission has been shown to reduce mortality in certain conditions, such as leptospirosis, resulting in the concept of aiming at a short 'door-to-dialysis time' [77]. Some retrospective analyses [7] have employed the time after ICU admission as the definition of timing (that is, early versus late) of RRT, although this is susceptible to several errors. Firstly, it is retrospective, and secondly, AKI may occur on admission or later during the ICU stay. Several studies show that 'early AKI' has improved outcomes over 'late AKI' [8, 9]. It may be that early AKI includes those with 'transitory AKI', which has a significantly better prognosis [9]. Finally, starting RRT in early AKI may include patients who would recover spontaneously, and improved outcome will thus be expected. Indication that very early initiation of RRT may be harmful was demonstrated by a prospective randomised trial on patients with severe sepsis [78]. Delayed weaning from mechanical ventilation or vasopressors together with increased mortality was observed compared to standard medical treatment.

Non-'renal' indications for renal replacement therapy

Severe sepsis and septic shock are associated with AKI in up to 50% of patients, although classical indicators of AKI are often not elevated initially [79]. Consequently, other criteria such as prolonged oliguria or severe metabolic acidosis may be sufficient indication to commence RRT [62]. There remains a theoretical hypothesis that removing inflammatory mediators associated with sepsis could translate into patient benefit. Such 'prophylactic' RRT remains attractive but the only prospective randomised study investigating this failed to demonstrate any beneficial effect of RRT in severe sepsis without AKI [80]. As mentioned, early RRT in sepsis may even be harmful [78]. Thus, on the basis of current evidence, such a procedure cannot be recommended routinely [81].

The use of extracorporeal circuits is also associated with significant blood cooling, which is considered an unwanted side effect during routine RRT but may be beneficial in intractable hyperthermia, such as malignant neuroleptic syndrome, malignant hyperthermia and heat stroke. Case reports of cooling by extracorporeal circuit do exist for all forms of intractable hyperthermia [82]. Indeed, a randomised prospective study reports a favourable outcome in patients after cardiopulmonary resuscitation when applying high volume haemofiltration, either at 37°C or with cooling [83], but the advent of alternative means of cooling, either externally or by adapted central venous catheters incorporating a cooled water circuit, has superseded the use of extracorporeal circuits.

Dialysis following overdose of dialysable drugs or toxins is another indication for RRT. Drugs that can be effectively dialysed are characterised by their water solubility, low protein binding, low molecular weight (<500 Da) and small volume of distribution. Thus, RRT may be considered in cases of overdose or intoxication with certain alcohols (for example, methanol, ethylene glycol), salicylate, lithium, theophylline or methotrexate [84]. Extended dialysis has also been described as being successful in paraquat intoxication, although haemoperfusion appears more effective [85].

Rhabdomyolysis through whatever cause results in the release of myoglobin, leading to AKI through vasoconstriction, tubular cell damage by oxidant injury and tubular obstruction by myoglobin casts. Rhabdomyolysis and myoglobinuria are responsible for about 5% of ARF in the USA [86] and RRT is typically initiated after the failure of more established measures, including alkaline-fluid hydration, mannitol and diuretics. Early initiation of RRT for myoglobin removal in severe rhabdomyolysis accompanied by acidosis and volume depletion is recommended by some authors [87], although conventional membranes have sieving coefficients for myoglobin within the range 0.4 to 0.6. In order to increase efficiency of myoglobin clearance, the use of super 'high flux' membranes may be employed [88], although 'prophylactic' removal of myoglobin by dialysis has not been demonstrated to change the clinical course.

Radiocontrast nephropathy remains a prominent cause of hospital-acquired AKI and is still associated with significant mortality [89]. Contrast nephropathy is a complex disease, especially in the cardiac patient, where it comprises the acute cardiac events compromising cardiac function, the negative inotropic effects of the contrast medium, pulmonary congestion due to cardiac disease, hydration-related fluid overload and underlying renal insufficiency compromising fluid removal by the kidney. It seems more appropriate, therefore, to talk about contrast-associated nephropathy than contrast-induced nephropathy. RRT before and after contrast interventions may be considered in patients with more severe underlying renal insufficiency who may not tolerate hydration, may need high contrast volumes or are at risk for contrast-induced cardiac decompensation [90, 91].

Termination of renal replacement therapy

To date, no clearly defined criteria for the termination of RRT have been established. Usual practice is to introduce intervals without RRT and await signs of spontaneous recovery. Two retrospective trials investigating this found urinary output the best predictive parameter for cessation of RRT. The Beginning and Ending Supportive Therapy for the Kidney (BEST kidney) study defined a threshold of 450 ml/day as predictive for not requiring further RRT [92]. Similarly, an increased risk of recommencing dialysis was found for postoperative patients with a urinary output <100 ml/8 h [93].


RRT should undoubtedly be initiated in case of life-threatening conditions such as refractory hyperkalaemia, acidosis, fluid overload and uremic symptoms, including refractory uremic bleeding or pericarditis. However, there is a broad consensus that RRT should be initiated - if possible - before uremic symptoms develop. Initiation should consider the degree of other organ failure, the presence of harmful conditions that can be modified by RRT (acidosis, fluid overload), the change of serum creatinine or urea in relation to fluid balance reflecting renal recovery or not, and the clinical estimate whether renal function will recover soon or not (recovery or persistence of other organ failure, especially vasopressordependent circulation). Absolute concentrations of urea and creatinine are not decisive.


This article is part of the review series on Renal replacement therapy, edited by John Kellum and Lui Forni.

Other articles in the series can be found online at



Acute Kidney Injury Network


acute renal failure


acute kidney injury


blood urea nitrogen


glomerular filtration rate


Kidney injury molecule


Neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin


risk, injury, failure, loss of kidney function, and end-stage renal failure


renal replacement therapy.



This work was supported by the Oesterreichische Nationalbank Jubilaeumsfondsprojekt Nr. 13861 (MJ).

Authors’ Affiliations

Medical Intensive Care Unit, Department of General Internal Medicine, Medical University Innsbruck
Department of Critical Care, Western Sussex Hospitals Trust, Honorary Senior Lecturer, University of Sussex,Brighton and Sussex Medical Schools


  1. Druml W: Acute renal failure is not a "cute" renal failure! Intensive Care Med 2004, 30: 1886-1890. 10.1007/s00134-004-2344-zView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Bouman CS, Oudemans-van Straaten HM, Tijssen JG, Zandstra DF, Kesecioglu J: Effects of early high-volume continuous venovenous hemofiltration on survival and recovery of renal function in intensive care patients with acute renal failure: a prospective, randomized trial. Crit Care Med 2002, 30: 2205-2211. 10.1097/00003246-200210000-00005View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Seabra VF, Balk EM, Liangos O, Sosa MA, Cendoroglo M, Jaber BL: Timing of renal replacement therapy initiation in acute renal failure: a meta-analysis. Am J Kidney Dis 2008, 52: 272-284. 10.1053/j.ajkd.2008.02.371View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Cooper BA, Branley P, Bulfone L, Collins JF, Craig JC, Fraenkel MB, Harris A, Johnson DW, Kesselhut J, Li JJ, Luxton G, Pilmore A, Tiller DJ, Harris DC, Pollock CA: A randomized, controlled trial of early versus late initiation of dialysis. N Engl J Med 2010, 363: 609-619. 10.1056/NEJMoa1000552View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Macedo E, Bouchard J, Soroko SH, Chertow GM, Himmelfarb J, Ikizler TA, Paganini EP, Mehta RL: Fluid accumulation, recognition and staging of acute kidney injury in critically-ill patients. Crit Care 2010, 14: R82. 10.1186/cc9004PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Ikizler TA, Sezer MT, Flakoll PJ, Hariachar S, Kanagasundaram NS, Gritter N, Knights S, Shyr Y, Paganini E, Hakim RM, Himmelfarb J: Urea space and total body water measurements by stable isotopes in patients with acute renal failure. Kidney Int 2004, 65: 725-732. 10.1111/j.1523-1755.2004.00439.xView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Bagshaw SM, Uchino S, Bellomo R, Morimatsu H, Morgera S, Schetz M, Tan I, Bouman C, Macedo E, Gibney N, Tolwani A, Oudemans-van Straaten HM, Ronco C, Kellum JA: Timing of renal replacement therapy and clinical outcomes in critically ill patients with severe acute kidney injury. J Crit Care 2009, 24: 129-140. 10.1016/j.jcrc.2007.12.017View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Joannidis M, Metnitz PG: Epidemiology and natural history of acute renal failure in the ICU. Crit Care Clin 2005, 21: 239-249. 10.1016/j.ccc.2004.12.005View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Uchino S, Bellomo R, Bagshaw SM, Goldsmith D: Transient azotaemia is associated with a high risk of death in hospitalized patients. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2010, 25: 1833-1839. 10.1093/ndt/gfp624View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Berger MM, Shenkin A, Revelly JP, Roberts E, Cayeux MC, Baines M, Chiolero RL: Copper, selenium, zinc, and thiamine balances during continuous venovenous hemodiafiltration in critically ill patients. Am J Clin Nutr 2004, 80: 410-416.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Story DA, Ronco C, Bellomo R: Trace element and vitamin concentrations and losses in critically ill patients treated with continuous venovenous hemofiltration. Crit Care Med 1999, 27: 220-223. 10.1097/00003246-199901000-00057View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Druml W: Nutritional management of acute renal failure. J Ren Nutr 2005, 15: 63-70. 10.1053/j.jrn.2004.09.012View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Parienti JJ, Dugue AE, Daurel C, Mira JP, Megarbane B, Mermel LA, Daubin C, du Cheyron D, Members of the Cathedia Study Group: Continuous renal replacement therapy may increase the risk of catheter infection. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2010, 5: 1489-1496. 10.2215/CJN.02130310PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Teschan PE, Baxter CR, O'Brien TF, Freyhof JN, Hall WH: Prophylactic hemodialysis in the treatment of acute renal failure. Ann Intern Med 1960, 53: 992-1016.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Vinsonneau C, Camus C, Combes A, Costa de Beauregard MA, Klouche K, Boulain T, Pallot JL, Chiche JD, Taupin P, Landais P, Dhainaut JF: Continuous venovenous haemodiafiltration versus intermittent haemodialysis for acute renal failure in patients with multiple-organ dysfunction syndrome: a multicentre randomised trial. Lancet 2006, 368: 379-385. 10.1016/S0140-6736(06)69111-3View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Parsons FM, Hobson SM, Blagg CR, McCracken BH: Optimum time for dialysis in acute reversible renal failure. Description and value of an improved dialyser with large surface area. Lancet 1961, 1: 129-134.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Fischer RP, Griffen WO Jr, Reiser M, Clark DS: Early dialysis in the treatment of acute renal failure. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1966, 123: 1019-1023.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Kleinknecht D, Jungers P, Chanard J, Barbanel C, Ganeval D: Uremic and non-uremic complications in acute renal failure: Evaluation of early and frequent dialysis on prognosis. Kidney Int 1972, 1: 190-196. 10.1038/ki.1972.26View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Conger JD: A controlled evaluation of prophylactic dialysis in post-traumatic acute renal failure. J Trauma 1975, 15: 1056-1063. 10.1097/00005373-197512000-00003View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Gillum DM, Dixon BS, Yanover MJ, Kelleher SP, Shapiro MD, Benedetti RG, Dillingham MA, Paller MS, Goldberg JP, Tomford RC, et al.: The role of intensive dialysis in acute renal failure. Clin Nephrol 1986, 25: 249-255.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Gettings LG, Reynolds HN, Scalea T: Outcome in post-traumatic acute renal failure when continuous renal replacement therapy is applied early vs. late. Intensive Care Med 1999, 25: 805-813. 10.1007/s001340050956View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Liu KD, Himmelfarb J, Paganini E, Ikizler TA, Soroko SH, Mehta RL, Chertow GM: Timing of initiation of dialysis in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2006, 1: 915-919. 10.2215/CJN.01430406View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Kazory A: Emergence of blood urea nitrogen as a biomarker of neurohormonal activation in heart failure. Am J Cardiol 2010, 106: 694-700. 10.1016/j.amjcard.2010.04.024View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Kirtane AJ, Leder DM, Waikar SS, Chertow GM, Ray KK, Pinto DS, Karmpaliotis D, Burger AJ, Murphy SA, Cannon CP, Braunwald E, Gibson CM: Serum blood urea nitrogen as an independent marker of subsequent mortality among patients with acute coronary syndromes and normal to mildly reduced glomerular filtration rates. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005, 45: 1781-1786. 10.1016/j.jacc.2005.02.068View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Lin LC, Yang JT, Weng HH, Hsiao CT, Lai SL, Fann WC: Predictors of early clinical deterioration after acute ischemic stroke. Am J Emerg Med 2010. [Epub ahead of print]Google Scholar
  26. Barlow G, Nathwani D, Davey P: The CURB65 pneumonia severity score outperforms generic sepsis and early warning scores in predicting mortality in community-acquired pneumonia. Thorax 2007, 62: 253-259. 10.1136/thx.2006.067371PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Groeger JS, Lemeshow S, Price K, Nierman DM, White P Jr, Klar J, Granovsky S, Horak D, Kish SK: Multicenter outcome study of cancer patients admitted to the intensive care unit: a probability of mortality model. J Clin Oncol 1998, 16: 761-770.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Wu BU, Johannes RS, Sun X, Conwell DL, Banks PA: Early changes in blood urea nitrogen predict mortality in acute pancreatitis. Gastroenterology 2009, 137: 129-135. 10.1053/j.gastro.2009.03.056View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Bailey SH, Bull DA, Harpole DH, Rentz JJ, Neumayer LA, Pappas TN, Daley J, Henderson WG, Krasnicka B, Khuri SF: Outcomes after esophagectomy: a ten-year prospective cohort. Ann Thorac Surg 2003, 75: 217-222. 10.1016/S0003-4975(02)04368-0View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Chertow GM, Burdick E, Honour M, Bonventre JV, Bates DW: Acute kidney injury, mortality, length of stay, and costs in hospitalized patients. J Am Soc Nephrol 2005, 16: 3365-3370. 10.1681/ASN.2004090740View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Lassnigg A, Schmidlin D, Mouhieddine M, Bachmann LM, Druml W, Bauer P, Hiesmayr M: Minimal changes of serum creatinine predict prognosis in patients after cardiothoracic surgery: a prospective cohort study. J Am Soc Nephrol 2004, 15: 1597-1605. 10.1097/01.ASN.0000130340.93930.DDView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Bellomo R, Ronco C, Kellum JA, Mehta RL, Palevsky P: Acute renal failure - definition, outcome measures, animal models, fluid therapy and information technology needs: the Second International Consensus Conference of the Acute Dialysis Quality Initiative (ADQI) Group. Crit Care 2004, 8: R204-R212. 10.1186/cc2872PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Mehta RL, Kellum JA, Shah SV, Molitoris BA, Ronco C, Warnock DG, Levin A: Acute Kidney Injury Network (AKIN): report of an initiative to improve outcomes in acute kidney injury. Crit Care 2007, 11: R31. 10.1186/cc5713PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Pickering JW, Frampton CM, Endre ZH: Evaluation of trial outcomes in acute kidney injury by creatinine modeling. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2009, 4: 1705-1715. 10.2215/CJN.00820209PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Doi K, Yuen PS, Eisner C, Hu X, Leelahavanichkul A, Schnermann J, Star RA: Reduced production of creatinine limits its use as marker of kidney injury in sepsis. J Am Soc Nephrol 2009, 20: 1217-1221. 10.1681/ASN.2008060617PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Mehta RL, McDonald B, Gabbai FB, Pahl M, Pascual MT, Farkas A, Kaplan RM: A randomized clinical trial of continuous versus intermittent dialysis for acute renal failure. Kidney Int 2001, 60: 1154-1163. 10.1046/j.1523-1755.2001.0600031154.xView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Ronco C, Bellomo R, Homel P, Brendolan A, Dan M, Piccinni P, La GG: Effects of different doses in continuous veno-venous haemofiltration on outcomes of acute renal failure: a prospective randomised trial. Lancet 2000, 356: 26-30. 10.1016/S0140-6736(00)02430-2View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Saudan P, Niederberger M, De SS, Romand J, Pugin J, Perneger T, Martin PY: Adding a dialysis dose to continuous hemofiltration increases survival in patients with acute renal failure. Kidney Int 2006, 70: 1312-1317. 10.1038/ ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Schiffl H, Lang SM, Fischer R: Daily hemodialysis and the outcome of acute renal failure. N Engl J Med 2002, 346: 305-310. 10.1056/NEJMoa010877View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Palevsky PM, Zhang JH, O'Connor TZ, Chertow GM, Crowley ST, Choudhury D, Finkel K, Kellum JA, Paganini E, Schein RM, Smith MW, Swanson KM, Thompson BT, Vijayan A, Watnick S, Star RA, Peduzzi P: Intensity of renal support in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury. N Engl J Med 2008, 359: 7-20.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Bellomo R, Cass A, Cole L, Finfer S, Gallagher M, Lo S, McArthur C, McGuinness S, Myburgh J, Norton R, Scheinkestel C, Su S: Intensity of continuous renal-replacement therapy in critically ill patients. N Engl J Med 2009, 361: 1627-1638.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Cerda J, Cerda M, Kilcullen P, Prendergast J: In severe acute kidney injury, a higher serum creatinine is paradoxically associated with better patient survival. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2007, 22: 2781-2784. 10.1093/ndt/gfm395View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Chertow GM, Christiansen CL, Cleary PD, Munro C, Lazarus JM: Prognostic stratification in critically ill patients with acute renal failure requiring dialysis. Arch Intern Med 1995, 155: 1505-1511. 10.1001/archinte.155.14.1505View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Forni LG, Wright DA, Hilton PJ, Carr P, Taub HA, Warburton F: Prognostic stratification in acute renal failure. Arch Intern Med 1996, 156: 1023-1027. 10.1001/archinte.156.9.1023View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Barton IK, Hilton PJ, Taub NA, Warburton FG, Swan AV, Dwight J, Mason JC: Acute renal failure treated by haemofiltration: factors affecting outcome. QJM 1993, 86: 81-90.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Mehta RL, Pascual MT, Soroko S, Savage BR, Himmelfarb J, Ikizler TA, Paganini EP, Chertow GM: Spectrum of acute renal failure in the intensive care unit: the PICARD experience. Kidney Int 2004, 66: 1613-1621. 10.1111/j.1523-1755.2004.00927.xView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Bouchard J, Soroko SB, Chertow GM, Himmelfarb J, Ikizler TA, Paganini EP, Mehta RL: Fluid accumulation, survival and recovery of kidney function in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury. Kidney Int 2009, 76: 422-427. 10.1038/ki.2009.159View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Sutherland SM, Zappitelli M, Alexander SR, Chua AN, Brophy PD, Bunchman TE, Hackbarth R, Somers MJ, Baum M, Symons JM, Flores FX, Benfield M, Askenazi D, Chand D, Fortenberry JD, Mahan JD, McBryde K, Blowey D, Goldstein SL: Fluid overload and mortality in children receiving continuous renal replacement therapy: the prospective pediatric continuous renal replacement therapy registry. Am J Kidney Dis 2010, 55: 316-325. 10.1053/j.ajkd.2009.10.048View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Alsous F, Khamiees M, DeGirolamo A, moateng-Adjepong Y, Manthous CA: Negative fluid balance predicts survival in patients with septic shock: a retrospective pilot study. Chest 2000, 117: 1749-1754. 10.1378/chest.117.6.1749View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Payen D, de Pont AC, Sakr Y, Spies C, Reinhart K, Vincent JL: A positive fluid balance is associated with a worse outcome in patients with acute renal failure. Crit Care 2008, 12: R74. 10.1186/cc6916PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Sakr Y, Vincent JL, Reinhart K, Groeneveld J, Michalopoulos A, Sprung CL, Artigas A, Ranieri VM: High tidal volume and positive fluid balance are associated with worse outcome in acute lung injury. Chest 2005, 128: 3098-3108. 10.1378/chest.128.5.3098View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Upadya A, Tilluckdharry L, Muralidharan V, moateng-Adjepong Y, Manthous CA: Fluid balance and weaning outcomes. Intensive Care Med 2005, 31: 1643-1647. 10.1007/s00134-005-2801-3View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Brandstrup B, Tonnesen H, Beier-Holgersen R, Hjortso E, Ording H, Lindorff-Larsen K, Rasmussen MS, Lanng C, Wallin L, Iversen LH, Gramkow CS, Okholm M, Blemmer T, Svendsen PE, Rottensten HH, Thage B, Riis J, Jeppesen IS, Teilum D, Christensen AM, Graungaard B, Pott F: Effects of intravenous fluid restriction on postoperative complications: comparison of two perioperative fluid regimens: a randomized assessor-blinded multicenter trial. Ann Surg 2003, 238: 641-648. 10.1097/01.sla.0000094387.50865.23PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Wiedemann HP, Wheeler AP, Bernard GR, Thompson BT, Hayden D, deBoisblanc B, Connors AF Jr, Hite RD, Harabin AL: Comparison of two fluid-management strategies in acute lung injury. N Engl J Med 2006, 354: 2564-2575.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Mehta RL, Pascual MT, Soroko S, Chertow GM: Diuretics, mortality, and nonrecovery of renal function in acute renal failure. JAMA 2002, 288: 2547-2553. 10.1001/jama.288.20.2547View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Uchino S, Doig GS, Bellomo R, Morimatsu H, Morgera S, Schetz M, Tan I, Bouman C, Nacedo E, Gibney N, Tolwani A, Ronco C, Kellum JA: Diuretics and mortality in acute renal failure. Crit Care Med 2004, 32: 1669-1677. 10.1097/01.CCM.0000132892.51063.2FView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. Ho KM, Power BM: Benefits and risks of furosemide in acute kidney injury. Anaesthesia 2010, 65: 283-293. 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2009.06228.xView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. Maccariello E, Soares M, Valente C, Nogueira L, Valenca RV, Machado JE, Rocha E: RIFLE classification in patients with acute kidney injury in need of renal replacement therapy. Intensive Care Med 2007, 33: 597-605. 10.1007/s00134-007-0535-0View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. Uchino S, Bellomo R, Morgera S, Schetz M, Tan I, Bouman C, Macedo E, Gibney N, Tolwani A, Oudemans-van Straaten H, Ronco C, Kellum JA: Continuous renal replacement therapy: a worldwide practice survey. The beginning and ending supportive therapy for the kidney (B.E.S.T. kidney) investigators. Intensive Care Med 2007, 33: 1563-1570. 10.1007/s00134-007-0754-4View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. Demirkilic U, Kuralay E, Yenicesu M, Caglar K, Oz BS, Cingoz F, Gunay C, Yildirim V, Ceylan S, Arslan M, Vural A, Tatar H: Timing of replacement therapy for acute renal failure after cardiac surgery. J Card Surg 2004, 19: 17-20. 10.1111/j.0886-0440.2004.04004.xView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. Elahi MM, Lim MY, Joseph RN, Dhannapuneni RR, Spyt TJ: Early hemofiltration improves survival in post-cardiotomy patients with acute renal failure. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2004, 26: 1027-1031. 10.1016/j.ejcts.2004.07.039View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. Piccinni P, Dan M, Barbacini S, Carraro R, Lieta E, Marafon S, Zamperetti N, Brendolan A, D'Intini V, Tetta C, Ronco C: Early isovolemic haemofiltration in oliguric patients with septic shock. Intensive Care Med 2005, 32: 1097. author reply 1098Google Scholar
  63. Shiao CC, Wu VC, Li WY, Lin YF, Hu FC, Young GH, Kuo CC, Kao TW, Huang DM, Chen YM, Tsai PR, Lin SL, Chou NK, Lin TH, Yeh YC, Wang CH, Chou A, Ko WJ, Wu KD: Late initiation of renal replacement therapy is associated with worse outcomes in acute kidney injury after major abdominal surgery. Crit Care 2009, 13: R171. 10.1186/cc8147PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. Hou S, McElroy PA, Nootens J, Beach M: Safety and efficacy of lowpotassium dialysate. Am J Kidney Dis 1989, 13: 137-143.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. Greenberg A: Hyperkalemia: treatment options. Semin Nephrol 1998, 18: 46-57.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. Koo WS, Jeon DS, Ahn SJ, Kim YS, Yoon YS, Bang BK: Calcium-free hemodialysis for the management of hypercalcemia. Nephron 1996, 72: 424-428. 10.1159/000188907View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. Rocktaeschel J, Morimatsu H, Uchino S, Bellomo R: Unmeasured anions in critically ill patients: can they predict mortality? Crit Care Med 2003, 31: 2131-2136. 10.1097/01.CCM.0000079819.27515.8EView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. Forni LG, McKinnon W, Hilton PJ: Unmeasured anions in metabolic acidosis: unravelling the mystery. Crit Care 2006, 10: 220. 10.1186/cc4954PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. Hilton PJ, McKinnon W, Lord GA, Peron JM, Forni LG: Unexplained acidosis of malnutrition: a study by ion-exchange chromatography/mass spectrometry. Biomed Chromatogr 2006, 20: 1386-1389. 10.1002/bmc.712View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. Guo PY, Storsley LJ, Finkle SN: Severe lactic acidosis treated with prolonged hemodialysis: recovery after massive overdoses of metformin. Semin Dial 2006, 19: 80-83. 10.1111/j.1525-139X.2006.00123.xView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. Hilton PJ, Taylor J, Forni LG, Treacher DF: Bicarbonate-based haemofiltration in the management of acute renal failure with lactic acidosis. QJM 1998, 91: 279-283. 10.1093/qjmed/91.4.279View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. Coca SG, Yalavarthy R, Concato J, Parikh CR: Biomarkers for the diagnosis and risk stratification of acute kidney injury: a systematic review. Kidney Int 2008, 73: 1008-1016. 10.1038/ ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. Mishra J, Dent C, Tarabishi R, Mitsnefes MM, Ma Q, Kelly C, Ruff SM, Zahedi K, Shao M, Bean J, Mori K, Barasch J, Devarajan P: Neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL) as a biomarker for acute renal injury after cardiac surgery. Lancet 2005, 365: 1231-1238. 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)74811-XView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. Haase M, Bellomo R, Devarajan P, Schlattmann P, Haase-Fielitz A: Accuracy of neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL) in diagnosis and prognosis in acute kidney injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Kidney Dis 2009, 54: 1012-1024. 10.1053/j.ajkd.2009.07.020View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. Cruz DN, de Cal M, Garzotto F, Perazella MA, Lentini P, Corradi V, Piccinni P, Ronco C: Plasma neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin is an early biomarker for acute kidney injury in an adult ICU population. Intensive Care Med 2010, 36: 444-451. 10.1007/s00134-009-1711-1PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. Bagshaw SM, Bellomo R: Cystatin C in acute kidney injury. Curr Opin Crit Care 2010. [Epub ahead of print]Google Scholar
  77. Andrade L, Cleto S, Seguro AC: Door-to-dialysis time and daily hemodialysis in patients with leptospirosis: impact on mortality. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2007, 2: 739-744. 10.2215/CJN.00680207View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. Payen D, Mateo J, Cavaillon JM, Fraisse F, Floriot C, Vicaut E: Impact of continuous venovenous hemofiltration on organ failure during the early phase of severe sepsis: a randomized controlled trial. Crit Care Med 2009, 37: 803-810. 10.1097/CCM.0b013e3181962316View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  79. Rangel-Frausto MS, Pittet D, Costigan M, Hwang T, Davis CS, Wenzel RP: The natural history of the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS). A prospective study. JAMA 1995, 273: 117-123. 10.1001/jama.273.2.117View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. Cole L, Bellomo R, Hart G, Journois D, Davenport P, Tipping P, Ronco C: A phase II randomized, controlled trial of continuous hemofiltration in sepsis. Crit Care Med 2002, 30: 100-106. 10.1097/00003246-200201000-00016View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  81. Joannidis M: Continuous renal replacement therapy in sepsis and multisystem organ failure. Semin Dial 2009, 22: 160-164. 10.1111/j.1525-139X.2008.00552.xView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. Perez-Vela JL, Sanchez CM, Sanchez-Izquierdo Riera JA, Ambros CA, Caballero CR, Alted LE: Neuroleptic malignant syndrome in a patient with head injury. Intensive Care Med 1996, 22: 593-595. 10.1007/BF01708104View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  83. Laurent I, Adrie C, Vinsonneau C, Cariou A, Chiche JD, Ohanessian A, Spaulding C, Carli P, Dhainaut JF, Monchi M: High-volume hemofiltration after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a randomized study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005, 46: 432-437. 10.1016/j.jacc.2005.04.039View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  84. Youssef GM, Hirsch DJ: Validation of a method to predict required dialysis time for cases of methanol and ethylene glycol poisoning. Am J Kidney Dis 2005, 46: 509-511. 10.1053/j.ajkd.2005.05.017View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  85. Okonek S, Boelcke G, Hollmann H: Therapeutic properties of haemodialysis and blood exchange transfusion in organophosphate poisoning. Eur J Intensive Care Med 1976, 2: 13-18. 10.1007/BF00571891View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  86. Zager RA: Rhabdomyolysis and myohemoglobinuric acute renal failure. Kidney Int 1996, 49: 314-326. 10.1038/ki.1996.48View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  87. Polderman KH: Acute renal failure and rhabdomyolysis. Int J Artif Organs 2004, 27: 1030-1033.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  88. Naka T, Jones D, Baldwin I, Fealy N, Bates S, Goehl H, Morgera S, Neumayer HH, Bellomo R: Myoglobin clearance by super high-flux hemofiltration in a case of severe rhabdomyolysis: a case report. Crit Care 2005, 9: R90-R95. 10.1186/cc3034PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  89. Gruberg L, Weissman NJ, Waksman R, Laird JR Jr, Pinnow EE, Wu H, Deible R, Kent KM, Pichard AD, Satler LF, Lindsay J Jr: Comparison of outcomes after percutaneous coronary revascularization with stents in patients with and without mild chronic renal insufficiency. Am J Cardiol 2002, 89: 54-57.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  90. Marenzi G, Bartorelli AL: Hemofiltration in the prevention of radiocontrast agent induced nephropathy. Minerva Anestesiol 2004, 70: 189-191.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  91. Joannidis M, Druml W, Forni LG, Groeneveld AB, Honore P, Oudemans-van Straaten HM, Ronco C, Schetz MR, Woittiez AJ: Prevention of acute kidney injury and protection of renal function in the intensive care unit. Expert opinion of the Working Group for Nephrology, ESICM. Intensive Care Med 2010, 36: 392-411. 10.1007/s00134-009-1678-yView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  92. Uchino S, Bellomo R, Morimatsu H, Morgera S, Schetz M, Tan I, Bouman C, Macedo E, Gibney N, Tolwani A, Straaten HO, Ronco C, Kellum JA: Discontinuation of continuous renal replacement therapy: a post hoc analysis of a prospective multicenter observational study. Crit Care Med 2009, 37: 2576-2582. 10.1097/CCM.0b013e3181a38241View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  93. Wu VC, Ko WJ, Chang HW, Chen YW, Lin YF, Shiao CC, Chen YM, Chen YS, Tsai PR, Hu FC, Wang JY, Lin YH, Wu KD: Risk factors of early redialysis after weaning from postoperative acute renal replacement therapy. Intensive Care Med 2008, 34: 101-108. 10.1007/s00134-007-0813-xView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  94. Tolwani AJ, Campbell RC, Stofan BS, Lai KR, Oster RA, Wille KM: Standard versus high-dose CVVHDF for ICU-related acute renal failure. J Am Soc Nephrol 2008, 19: 1233-1238. 10.1681/ASN.2007111173PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  95. Faulhaber-Walter R, Hafer C, Jahr N, Vahlbruch J, Hoy L, Haller H, Fliser D, Kielstein JT: The Hannover Dialysis Outcome study: comparison of standard versus intensified extended dialysis for treatment of patients with acute kidney injury in the intensive care unit. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2009, 24: 2179-2186. 10.1093/ndt/gfp035View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar


© BioMed Central Ltd 2011