Prowle, John R.

ABSTRACT Adsorption-based extracorporeal therapies have been subject to technical developments and clinical application for close to five decades. More recently, new technological developments in membrane and sorbent manipulation have made it possible to deliver more biocompatible extracorporeal adsorption therapies to patients with a variety of conditions. There are several key rationales based on physicochemical principles and clinical considerations that justify the application and investigation of such therapies as evidenced by multiple ex vivo, experimental and clinical observations. Accordingly, unspecific adsorptive extracorporeal therapies have now been applied to the treatment of a wide array of conditions from poisoning to drug overdoses, to inflammatory states and sepsis, and acute or chronic liver and kidney failure. In response to the rapidly expanding knowledge base and increased clinical evidence, we convened an Acute Disease Quality Initiative consensus conference dedicated to such treatment. The data show that hemoadsorption has clinically acceptable short-term biocompatibility and safety, technical feasibility and experimental demonstration of specified target molecule removal. Pilot studies demonstrate potentially beneficial effects on physiology and larger studies of endotoxin-based hemoadsorption have identified possible target phenotypes for larger randomized controlled trials. Moreover, in a variety of endogenous and exogenous intoxications, removal of target molecules has been confirmed in vivo. However, some studies have raised concerns about harm, or failed to deliver benefits. Thus, despite many achievements, modern hemoadsorption remains a novel and experimental intervention with limited data, and a large research agenda.

Objective: Acute kidney injury requiring renal replacement therapy in severe vasodilatory shock is associated with an unfavorable prognosis. Angiotensin II treatment may help these patients by potentially restoring renal function without decreasing intrarenal oxygenation. We analyzed the impact of angiotensin II on the outcomes of acute kidney injury requiring renal replacement therapy. Design: Post hoc analysis of the Angiotensin II for the Treatment of High-Output Shock 3 trial. Setting: ICUs. Patients: Patients with acute kidney injury treated with renal replacement therapy at initiation of angiotensin II or placebo ( n = 45 and n = 60, respectively). Interventions: IV angiotensin II or placebo. Measurements and Main Results: Primary end point: survival through day 28; secondary outcomes included renal recovery through day 7 and increase in mean arterial pressure from baseline of ≥ 10 mm Hg or increase to ≥ 75 mm Hg at hour 3. Survival rates through day 28 were 53% (95% CI, 38%–67%) and 30% (95% CI, 19%–41%) in patients treated with angiotensin II and placebo ( p = 0.012), respectively. By day 7, 38% (95% CI, 25%–54%) of angiotensin II patients discontinued RRT versus 15% (95% CI, 8%–27%) placebo ( p = 0.007). Mean arterial pressure response was achieved in 53% (95% CI, 38%–68%) and 22% (95% CI, 12%–34%) of patients treated with angiotensin II and placebo ( p = 0.001), respectively. Conclusions: In patients with acute kidney injury requiring renal replacement therapy at study drug initiation, 28-day survival and mean arterial pressure response were higher, and rate of renal replacement therapy liberation was greater in the angiotensin II group versus the placebo group. These findings suggest that patients with vasodilatory shock and acute kidney injury requiring renal replacement therapy may preferentially benefit from angiotensin II.