The New England Journal of Medicine
e-mail icon  FREE NEJM E-TOC    HOME   |   SUBSCRIBE   |   CURRENT ISSUE   |   PAST ISSUES   |   COLLECTIONS   |    Advanced Search
Sign in | Get NEJM's E-Mail Table of Contents — Free | Subscribe
 
Original Article
PreviousPrevious
Volume 331:1338-1342 November 17, 1994 Number 20
NextNext

Effect of the Dialysis Membrane in the Treatment of Patients with Acute Renal Failure
Raymond M. Hakim, Rebecca L. Wingard, and Robert A. Parker

 Sign up for free e-toc
 

This Article
-Full Text

Commentary
-Letters

Tools and Services
-Add to Personal Archive
-Add to Citation Manager
-Notify a Friend
-E-mail When Cited

More Information
-PubMed Citation
ABSTRACT

Background The mortality rate among patients with acute renal failure remains high, and the role of the biocompatibility of the dialysis membrane in the resolution of this disorder is not known.

Methods We prospectively studied 72 patients with acute renal failure who required hemodialysis and assigned them to two treatment groups. One group underwent dialysis with the widely used cuprophane dialysis membrane, which activates the complement system and leukocytes, and the other group underwent dialysis with a synthetic polymethyl methacrylate membrane, which has a more limited effect on complement and leukocytes. Scores on the Acute Physiology, Age, and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE II) were calculated at the initiation of dialysis. Survival and the recovery of renal function were determined with the use of proportional-hazards and exact logistic-regression analyses.

Results When dialysis was initiated, the patients in the two groups were similar in terms of age, APACHE II scores, the prevalence of oliguria, and biochemical indexes of renal failure. Twenty-three of the 37 patients (62 percent) in the group undergoing dialysis with the polymethyl methacrylate membrane recovered renal function, as compared with 13 of the 35 patients (37 percent) in the group undergoing dialysis with the cuprophane membrane (P = 0.04 after adjustment for the APACHE II score). The median number of dialysis treatments required before the recovery of renal function was 5 in the former group and 17 in the latter group (P = 0.02). Twenty-one patients (57 percent) undergoing dialysis with the polymethyl methacrylate membrane survived, as compared with 13 patients (37 percent) undergoing dialysis with the cuprophane membrane (P = 0.11). Of the 20 patients in each group who initially had nonoliguric acute renal failure, the survival rates were 80 percent with the polymethyl methacrylate membrane and 40 percent with the cuprophane membrane (P = 0.01).

Conclusions Among patients with acute renal failure requiring hemodialysis, the use of the polymethyl methacrylate membrane, as compared with the cuprophane membrane, resulted in improved recovery of renal function.


Source Information

From the Department of Medicine, Division of Nephrology (R.M.H., R.L.W.), and the Department of Preventive Medicine, Division of Biostatistics (R.A.P.), Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville.

Address reprint requests to Dr. Hakim at S-3307 MCN, 1161 21st Ave. S. and Garland, Nashville, TN 37232-2372.

Full Text of this Article


Related Letters:

Effect of the Dialysis Membrane in Acute Renal Failure
Kaplan A. A., Paganini E. P., Bosch J. P., Hakim R. M., Wingard R. L., Parker R. A.
Extract | Full Text  
N Engl J Med 1995; 332:961-962, Apr 6, 1995. Correspondence

This article has been cited by other articles:



HOME  |  SUBSCRIBE  |  SEARCH  |  CURRENT ISSUE  |  PAST ISSUES  |  COLLECTIONS  |  PRIVACY  |  TERMS OF USE  |  HELP  |  beta.nejm.org

Comments and questions? Please contact us.

The New England Journal of Medicine is owned, published, and copyrighted © 2009 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.