Haemodialysis-membrane biocompatibility and mortality of patients with dialysis-dependent acute renal failure: a prospective randomised multicentre trial. International Multicentre Study Group
There is controversy as to whether haemodialysis-membrane biocompatibility (ie, the potential to activate complement and neutrophils) influences mortality of patients with acute renal failure. We did a prospective randomised multicentre trial in patients with dialysis-dependent acute renal failure t...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The Lancet (British edition) 1999-10, Vol.354 (9187), p.1337-1341 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 1341 |
---|---|
container_issue | 9187 |
container_start_page | 1337 |
container_title | The Lancet (British edition) |
container_volume | 354 |
creator | Jörres, A Gahl, G M Dobis, C Polenakovic, M H Cakalaroski, K Rutkowski, B Kisielnicka, E Krieter, D H Rumpf, K W Guenther, C Gaus, W Hoegel, J |
description | There is controversy as to whether haemodialysis-membrane biocompatibility (ie, the potential to activate complement and neutrophils) influences mortality of patients with acute renal failure. We did a prospective randomised multicentre trial in patients with dialysis-dependent acute renal failure treated with two different types of low-flux membrane.
180 patients with acute renal failure were randomly assigned bioincompatible Cuprophan (n=90) or polymethyl-methacrylate (n=90) membranes. The main outcome was survival 14 days after the end of therapy (treatment success). Odds ratios for survival were calculated and the two groups were compared by Fisher's exact test. Analyses were based on patients treated according to protocol (76 Cuprophan, 84 polymethyl methacrylate).
At the start of dialysis, the groups did not differ significantly in age, sex, severity of illness (as calculated by APACHE II scores), prevalence of oliguria, or biochemical measures of acute renal failure. 44 patients (58% [95% CI 46-69]) assigned Cuprophan membranes and 50 patients (60% [48-70]) assigned polymethyl-methacrylate membranes survived. The odds ratio for treatment failure on Cuprophan compared with polymethyl-methacrylate membranes was 1.07 (0.54-2.11; p=0.87). No difference between Cuprophan and polymethyl-methacrylate membranes was detected when the analysis was adjusted for age and APACHE II score. 18 patients in the Cuprophan group and 20 in the polymethyl-methacrylate group had clinical complications of therapy (mainly hypotension).
There were no differences in outcome for patients with dialysis-dependent acute renal failure between those treated with Cuprophan membranes and those treated with polymethyl-methacrylate membranes. |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_69207811</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>69207811</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-p542-82c190a74d2839adcd20b5b16b975ab1de9de7bb01d90773d3f153869113e62f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpNkM1OwzAQhH0A0VJ4BeQTtyA7zk_DDVXQViriQO-RHW-EkR0H_4DydjwaLhTEabWa2W9Hc4LmhBYkq2pWzdC596-EkKIi5RmaUVIytqzyOfrccDBWKq4nr3xmwAjHB8BC2c6akQcllFZhwnyQ2FgX-Pdme3zQYAgef6jwgv8IEkYYZBIw72IA7GDgGvdc6ejgFnM8OutH6IJ6T2KiWqM8JHbUQXXpzgEOLtFu8HYI4Ib0xh4Qj_8MzyHKCa-djeMFOu259nB5nAu0f7jfrzbZ7mm9Xd3tsrEs8myZd7QhvC5kvmQNl53MiSgFrURTl1xQCY2EWghCZUPqmknW0zI11FDKoMp7tkDXP9gU_y2CD22K3YHWqSwbfVs1OamXyb1AV0djFAZkOzpluJva38rZFzJDguk</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>69207811</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Haemodialysis-membrane biocompatibility and mortality of patients with dialysis-dependent acute renal failure: a prospective randomised multicentre trial. International Multicentre Study Group</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>EBSCOhost Business Source Complete</source><source>Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)</source><source>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</source><creator>Jörres, A ; Gahl, G M ; Dobis, C ; Polenakovic, M H ; Cakalaroski, K ; Rutkowski, B ; Kisielnicka, E ; Krieter, D H ; Rumpf, K W ; Guenther, C ; Gaus, W ; Hoegel, J</creator><creatorcontrib>Jörres, A ; Gahl, G M ; Dobis, C ; Polenakovic, M H ; Cakalaroski, K ; Rutkowski, B ; Kisielnicka, E ; Krieter, D H ; Rumpf, K W ; Guenther, C ; Gaus, W ; Hoegel, J</creatorcontrib><description>There is controversy as to whether haemodialysis-membrane biocompatibility (ie, the potential to activate complement and neutrophils) influences mortality of patients with acute renal failure. We did a prospective randomised multicentre trial in patients with dialysis-dependent acute renal failure treated with two different types of low-flux membrane.
180 patients with acute renal failure were randomly assigned bioincompatible Cuprophan (n=90) or polymethyl-methacrylate (n=90) membranes. The main outcome was survival 14 days after the end of therapy (treatment success). Odds ratios for survival were calculated and the two groups were compared by Fisher's exact test. Analyses were based on patients treated according to protocol (76 Cuprophan, 84 polymethyl methacrylate).
At the start of dialysis, the groups did not differ significantly in age, sex, severity of illness (as calculated by APACHE II scores), prevalence of oliguria, or biochemical measures of acute renal failure. 44 patients (58% [95% CI 46-69]) assigned Cuprophan membranes and 50 patients (60% [48-70]) assigned polymethyl-methacrylate membranes survived. The odds ratio for treatment failure on Cuprophan compared with polymethyl-methacrylate membranes was 1.07 (0.54-2.11; p=0.87). No difference between Cuprophan and polymethyl-methacrylate membranes was detected when the analysis was adjusted for age and APACHE II score. 18 patients in the Cuprophan group and 20 in the polymethyl-methacrylate group had clinical complications of therapy (mainly hypotension).
There were no differences in outcome for patients with dialysis-dependent acute renal failure between those treated with Cuprophan membranes and those treated with polymethyl-methacrylate membranes.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0140-6736</identifier><identifier>PMID: 10533862</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England</publisher><subject>Acute Kidney Injury - classification ; Acute Kidney Injury - etiology ; Acute Kidney Injury - mortality ; Acute Kidney Injury - therapy ; APACHE ; Biocompatible Materials ; Cellulose - analogs & derivatives ; Female ; Humans ; Logistic Models ; Male ; Membranes, Artificial ; Polymethyl Methacrylate ; Renal Dialysis - instrumentation ; Treatment Outcome</subject><ispartof>The Lancet (British edition), 1999-10, Vol.354 (9187), p.1337-1341</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,64387</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10533862$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Jörres, A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gahl, G M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dobis, C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Polenakovic, M H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cakalaroski, K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rutkowski, B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kisielnicka, E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Krieter, D H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rumpf, K W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Guenther, C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gaus, W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hoegel, J</creatorcontrib><title>Haemodialysis-membrane biocompatibility and mortality of patients with dialysis-dependent acute renal failure: a prospective randomised multicentre trial. International Multicentre Study Group</title><title>The Lancet (British edition)</title><addtitle>Lancet</addtitle><description>There is controversy as to whether haemodialysis-membrane biocompatibility (ie, the potential to activate complement and neutrophils) influences mortality of patients with acute renal failure. We did a prospective randomised multicentre trial in patients with dialysis-dependent acute renal failure treated with two different types of low-flux membrane.
180 patients with acute renal failure were randomly assigned bioincompatible Cuprophan (n=90) or polymethyl-methacrylate (n=90) membranes. The main outcome was survival 14 days after the end of therapy (treatment success). Odds ratios for survival were calculated and the two groups were compared by Fisher's exact test. Analyses were based on patients treated according to protocol (76 Cuprophan, 84 polymethyl methacrylate).
At the start of dialysis, the groups did not differ significantly in age, sex, severity of illness (as calculated by APACHE II scores), prevalence of oliguria, or biochemical measures of acute renal failure. 44 patients (58% [95% CI 46-69]) assigned Cuprophan membranes and 50 patients (60% [48-70]) assigned polymethyl-methacrylate membranes survived. The odds ratio for treatment failure on Cuprophan compared with polymethyl-methacrylate membranes was 1.07 (0.54-2.11; p=0.87). No difference between Cuprophan and polymethyl-methacrylate membranes was detected when the analysis was adjusted for age and APACHE II score. 18 patients in the Cuprophan group and 20 in the polymethyl-methacrylate group had clinical complications of therapy (mainly hypotension).
There were no differences in outcome for patients with dialysis-dependent acute renal failure between those treated with Cuprophan membranes and those treated with polymethyl-methacrylate membranes.</description><subject>Acute Kidney Injury - classification</subject><subject>Acute Kidney Injury - etiology</subject><subject>Acute Kidney Injury - mortality</subject><subject>Acute Kidney Injury - therapy</subject><subject>APACHE</subject><subject>Biocompatible Materials</subject><subject>Cellulose - analogs & derivatives</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Logistic Models</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Membranes, Artificial</subject><subject>Polymethyl Methacrylate</subject><subject>Renal Dialysis - instrumentation</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><issn>0140-6736</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1999</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpNkM1OwzAQhH0A0VJ4BeQTtyA7zk_DDVXQViriQO-RHW-EkR0H_4DydjwaLhTEabWa2W9Hc4LmhBYkq2pWzdC596-EkKIi5RmaUVIytqzyOfrccDBWKq4nr3xmwAjHB8BC2c6akQcllFZhwnyQ2FgX-Pdme3zQYAgef6jwgv8IEkYYZBIw72IA7GDgGvdc6ejgFnM8OutH6IJ6T2KiWqM8JHbUQXXpzgEOLtFu8HYI4Ib0xh4Qj_8MzyHKCa-djeMFOu259nB5nAu0f7jfrzbZ7mm9Xd3tsrEs8myZd7QhvC5kvmQNl53MiSgFrURTl1xQCY2EWghCZUPqmknW0zI11FDKoMp7tkDXP9gU_y2CD22K3YHWqSwbfVs1OamXyb1AV0djFAZkOzpluJva38rZFzJDguk</recordid><startdate>19991016</startdate><enddate>19991016</enddate><creator>Jörres, A</creator><creator>Gahl, G M</creator><creator>Dobis, C</creator><creator>Polenakovic, M H</creator><creator>Cakalaroski, K</creator><creator>Rutkowski, B</creator><creator>Kisielnicka, E</creator><creator>Krieter, D H</creator><creator>Rumpf, K W</creator><creator>Guenther, C</creator><creator>Gaus, W</creator><creator>Hoegel, J</creator><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>19991016</creationdate><title>Haemodialysis-membrane biocompatibility and mortality of patients with dialysis-dependent acute renal failure: a prospective randomised multicentre trial. International Multicentre Study Group</title><author>Jörres, A ; Gahl, G M ; Dobis, C ; Polenakovic, M H ; Cakalaroski, K ; Rutkowski, B ; Kisielnicka, E ; Krieter, D H ; Rumpf, K W ; Guenther, C ; Gaus, W ; Hoegel, J</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-p542-82c190a74d2839adcd20b5b16b975ab1de9de7bb01d90773d3f153869113e62f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1999</creationdate><topic>Acute Kidney Injury - classification</topic><topic>Acute Kidney Injury - etiology</topic><topic>Acute Kidney Injury - mortality</topic><topic>Acute Kidney Injury - therapy</topic><topic>APACHE</topic><topic>Biocompatible Materials</topic><topic>Cellulose - analogs & derivatives</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Logistic Models</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Membranes, Artificial</topic><topic>Polymethyl Methacrylate</topic><topic>Renal Dialysis - instrumentation</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Jörres, A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gahl, G M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dobis, C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Polenakovic, M H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cakalaroski, K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rutkowski, B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kisielnicka, E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Krieter, D H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rumpf, K W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Guenther, C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gaus, W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hoegel, J</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>The Lancet (British edition)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Jörres, A</au><au>Gahl, G M</au><au>Dobis, C</au><au>Polenakovic, M H</au><au>Cakalaroski, K</au><au>Rutkowski, B</au><au>Kisielnicka, E</au><au>Krieter, D H</au><au>Rumpf, K W</au><au>Guenther, C</au><au>Gaus, W</au><au>Hoegel, J</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Haemodialysis-membrane biocompatibility and mortality of patients with dialysis-dependent acute renal failure: a prospective randomised multicentre trial. International Multicentre Study Group</atitle><jtitle>The Lancet (British edition)</jtitle><addtitle>Lancet</addtitle><date>1999-10-16</date><risdate>1999</risdate><volume>354</volume><issue>9187</issue><spage>1337</spage><epage>1341</epage><pages>1337-1341</pages><issn>0140-6736</issn><abstract>There is controversy as to whether haemodialysis-membrane biocompatibility (ie, the potential to activate complement and neutrophils) influences mortality of patients with acute renal failure. We did a prospective randomised multicentre trial in patients with dialysis-dependent acute renal failure treated with two different types of low-flux membrane.
180 patients with acute renal failure were randomly assigned bioincompatible Cuprophan (n=90) or polymethyl-methacrylate (n=90) membranes. The main outcome was survival 14 days after the end of therapy (treatment success). Odds ratios for survival were calculated and the two groups were compared by Fisher's exact test. Analyses were based on patients treated according to protocol (76 Cuprophan, 84 polymethyl methacrylate).
At the start of dialysis, the groups did not differ significantly in age, sex, severity of illness (as calculated by APACHE II scores), prevalence of oliguria, or biochemical measures of acute renal failure. 44 patients (58% [95% CI 46-69]) assigned Cuprophan membranes and 50 patients (60% [48-70]) assigned polymethyl-methacrylate membranes survived. The odds ratio for treatment failure on Cuprophan compared with polymethyl-methacrylate membranes was 1.07 (0.54-2.11; p=0.87). No difference between Cuprophan and polymethyl-methacrylate membranes was detected when the analysis was adjusted for age and APACHE II score. 18 patients in the Cuprophan group and 20 in the polymethyl-methacrylate group had clinical complications of therapy (mainly hypotension).
There were no differences in outcome for patients with dialysis-dependent acute renal failure between those treated with Cuprophan membranes and those treated with polymethyl-methacrylate membranes.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pmid>10533862</pmid><tpages>5</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0140-6736 |
ispartof | The Lancet (British edition), 1999-10, Vol.354 (9187), p.1337-1341 |
issn | 0140-6736 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_69207811 |
source | MEDLINE; EBSCOhost Business Source Complete; Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier); ProQuest Central UK/Ireland |
subjects | Acute Kidney Injury - classification Acute Kidney Injury - etiology Acute Kidney Injury - mortality Acute Kidney Injury - therapy APACHE Biocompatible Materials Cellulose - analogs & derivatives Female Humans Logistic Models Male Membranes, Artificial Polymethyl Methacrylate Renal Dialysis - instrumentation Treatment Outcome |
title | Haemodialysis-membrane biocompatibility and mortality of patients with dialysis-dependent acute renal failure: a prospective randomised multicentre trial. International Multicentre Study Group |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-03T22%3A41%3A39IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Haemodialysis-membrane%20biocompatibility%20and%20mortality%20of%20patients%20with%20dialysis-dependent%20acute%20renal%20failure:%20a%20prospective%20randomised%20multicentre%20trial.%20International%20Multicentre%20Study%20Group&rft.jtitle=The%20Lancet%20(British%20edition)&rft.au=J%C3%B6rres,%20A&rft.date=1999-10-16&rft.volume=354&rft.issue=9187&rft.spage=1337&rft.epage=1341&rft.pages=1337-1341&rft.issn=0140-6736&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E69207811%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=69207811&rft_id=info:pmid/10533862&rfr_iscdi=true |