Comparison of diluted vs concentrated regional citrate anticoagulation in continuous renal replacement therapy: A quasi‐experimental study

Background The incidence of coagulation of continuous renal replacement therapy circuits remains high. To the best of our knowledge, no scholar has published a protocol to avoid management errors when different types of citrates coexist in the same Intensive Care Unit. Aim To assess the safety and efficacy of the unification of two protocols with different concentrations of citrate solution. Study Desing A prospective, quasi‐experimental study was carried out in the intensive care unit of a tertiary referral hospital (in Barcelona, Spain), over 3 years. Consecutive adult patients requiring continuous renal replacement therapy with citrate were included. The sample was divided into two groups, a control group (concentrated citrate) and an intervention group (diluted citrate). The decision to initiate anticoagulation with diluted (18 mmol/L) or concentrated (136 mmol/L) citrate was made based on the machine available and the decision of the doctor responsible for the patient. It was not possible to randomize the sample. Both protocols were matched with a starting citrate dose of 3.5 mmol/L, and a dialysis solution was used. Post‐filter replacement was not used, and the citrate solution was the only fluid administered pre‐filter. Results The analysis included 59 circuits in the concentrated citrate group and 40 circuits in the diluted citrate group. An increased need for electrolyte replacement was observed in the diluted group (p