Smarter Decisions,
Better Care

UpToDate synthesizes the most recent medical information into evidence-based practical recommendations clinicians trust to make the right point-of-care decisions.

  • Rigorous editorial process: Evidence-based treatment recommendations
  • World-Renowned physician authors: over 5,100 physician authors and editors around the globe
  • Innovative technology: integrates into the workflow; access from EMRs

Choose from the list below to learn more about subscriptions for a:


Subscribers log in here


Drug removal during continuous renal replacement therapy

INTRODUCTION

The different forms of continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) are generally reserved for critically ill patients in whom errors in drug dosing may be particularly deleterious [1]. Thus, knowledge of factors that determine drug removal in this setting is essential [2].

This discussion is limited to the removal of drugs by CRRTs. Drug elimination is the sum of regional clearances, including metabolism as well as the removal by an extracorporeal therapy, as are most CRRTs (exception is peritoneal dialysis). In the settings where CRRTs may be applied, the metabolic clearances of drugs may be different from the metabolism of that drug in the normal circumstance. That concept is not discussed in this topic review.

HEMOFILTRATION

Hemofiltration refers to the removal of an ultrafiltrate of plasma in which there is no solute loss by diffusion since the plasma flowing through the filter is not exposed to dialysate flowing on the other side of the membrane (see "Renal replacement therapy (dialysis) in acute kidney injury (acute renal failure): Metabolic and hemodynamic considerations"). Solute removal during hemofiltration occurs by convection (or solvent drag). The frictional forces between water and solutes result in the movement of small and middle molecular weight solutes (<5000 daltons) in the same direction as plasma water.

Sieving coefficient — The efficiency of the removal of drugs or any other solute is related to the sieving coefficient (SC). The SC is the mathematical expression of the ability of a solute to convectively cross a membrane. It is determined from the ratio of the solute concentration in the ultrafiltrate to the solute concentration in the plasma. Since the arterial and venous concentrations may be different because of solute removal, it is more accurate to estimate the SC during hemofiltration from the average of the arterial (A) and venous (V) concentrations:

 SC   =   [UF]  ÷  ([A]  +  [V]  ÷  2)

     

Subscribers log in here

To continue reading this article, you must log in with your personal, hospital, or group practice subscription. For more information or to purchase a personal subscription, click below on the option that best describes you:
Literature review current through: Oct 2014. | This topic last updated: Dec 4, 2013.
The content on the UpToDate website is not intended nor recommended as a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Always seek the advice of your own physician or other qualified health care professional regarding any medical questions or conditions. The use of this website is governed by the UpToDate Terms of Use ©2014 UpToDate, Inc.
References
Top
  1. Manns M, Sigler MH, Teehan BP. Continuous renal replacement therapies: an update. Am J Kidney Dis 1998; 32:185.
  2. Joy MS, Matzke GR, Armstrong DK, et al. A primer on continuous renal replacement therapy for critically ill patients. Ann Pharmacother 1998; 32:362.
  3. Colton CK, Henderson LW, Ford CA, Lysaght MJ. Kinetics of hemodiafiltration. I. In vitro transport characteristics of a hollow-fiber blood ultrafilter. J Lab Clin Med 1975; 85:355.
  4. Golper TA, Wedel SK, Kaplan AA, et al. Drug removal during continuous arteriovenous hemofiltration: theory and clinical observations. Int J Artif Organs 1985; 8:307.
  5. Kronfol NO, Lau AH, Colon-Rivera J, Libertin CL. Effect of CAVH membrane types on drug-sieving coefficients and clearances. ASAIO Trans 1986; 32:85.
  6. Rumpf KW, Rieger J, Ansorg R, et al. Binding of antibiotics by dialysis membranes and its clinical relevance. Proc Eur Dial Transplant Assoc 1977; 14:607.
  7. Kraft D, Lode H. Elimination of ampicillin and gentamicin by hemofiltration. Klin Wochenschr 1979; 57:195.
  8. Kronfol NO, Lau AH, Barakat MM. Aminoglycoside binding to polyacrylonitrile hemofilter membranes during continuous hemofiltration. ASAIO Trans 1987; 33:300.
  9. Suh B, Craig WA, England AC, Elliott RL. Effect of free fatty acids on protein binding of antimicrobial agents. J Infect Dis 1981; 143:609.
  10. Golper TA, Saad AM. Gentamicin and phenytoin sieving through hollow-fiber polysulfone hemofilters. Kidney Int 1986; 30:937.
  11. Kroh U, Hofmann W, Dehne M, et al. [Dosage adjustment of drugs during continuous hemofiltration. Results and practical consequences of a prospective clinical study]. Anaesthesist 1989; 38:225.
  12. Aronoff GR, Bennett WM, Berns JS, et al. Drug Prescribing in Renal Failure: Dosing Guidelines for Adults and Children, 5th ed., American College of Physicians, Philadelphia 2007.
  13. Henderson, LW. Hemodialysis: Rationale and physical principles. In: The Kidney, 1st ed, Brenner, BM, Rector, FC (Eds), Saunders, Philadelphia 1976. p.1643-1671.
  14. De Bock V, Verbeelen D, Maes V, Sennesael J. Pharmacokinetics of vancomycin in patients undergoing haemodialysis and haemofiltration. Nephrol Dial Transplant 1989; 4:635.
  15. Agarwal R, Cronin RE. Heterogeneity in gentamicin clearance between high-efficiency hemodialyzers. Am J Kidney Dis 1994; 23:47.
  16. Vincent HH, Vos MC, Akçahuseyin E, et al. Drug clearance by continuous haemodiafiltration. Analysis of sieving coefficients and mass transfer coefficients of diffusion. Blood Purif 1993; 11:99.
  17. Golper TA, Cigarran-Guldris S, Jenkins RD, Brier ME. The role of convection during simulated continuous arteriovenous hemodialysis. Contrib Nephrol 1991; 93:146.
  18. Sprenger KG, Stephan H, Kratz W, et al. Optimising of hemodiafiltration with modern membranes? Contrib Nephrol 1985; 46:43.
  19. Thalhammer F, Schenk P, Burgmann H, et al. Single-dose pharmacokinetics of meropenem during continuous venovenous hemofiltration. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1998; 42:2417.
  20. Tegeder I, Neumann F, Bremer F, et al. Pharmacokinetics of meropenem in critically ill patients with acute renal failure undergoing continuous venovenous hemofiltration. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1999; 65:50.
  21. Mueller BA, Pasko DA, Sowinski KM. Higher renal replacement therapy dose delivery influences on drug therapy. Artif Organs 2003; 27:808.
  22. Heintz BH, Matzke GR, Dager WE. Antimicrobial dosing concepts and recommendations for critically ill adult patients receiving continuous renal replacement therapy or intermittent hemodialysis. Pharmacotherapy 2009; 29:562.
  23. Matzke GR, Aronoff GR, Atkinson AJ Jr, et al. Drug dosing consideration in patients with acute and chronic kidney disease-a clinical update from Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO). Kidney Int 2011; 80:1122.