The following is a summary of “Continuous venovenous hemodiafiltration versus standard medical therapy for the prevention of rhabdomyolysis-induced acute kidney injury: a retrospective cohort study,” published in the July 2023 issue of Nephrology by Meng et al.
Researchers performed a retrospective and cohort study to compare the effectiveness of continuous venovenous hemodiafiltration (CVVHDF) in conjunction with standard medical therapy (SMT) versus SMT alone in preventing acute kidney injury (AKI) caused by rhabdomyolysis (RM). The study included 9 RM patients without AKI, coronary heart disease, or chronic kidney disease treated with CVVHDF plus SMT (CVVHDF + SMT group).
Nine matched RM patients without AKI, treated with SMT only, were used as controls (SMT group). Baseline characteristics, biochemical indexes, renal survival data, and health economic data were compared between the groups. Within the CVVHDF + SMT group, biochemical data were compared at different time points.
After 2 and 7 days of admission, serum biochemical indices (myoglobin, creatine kinase, creatinine, and blood urea nitrogen) showed no significant differences between the CVVHDF + SMT group and the SMT group. However, total (P = 0.011) and daily hospitalization costs (P = 0.002) were higher in the CVVHDF + SMT group. Over a 53-month follow-up period, no patient, except one who died of acute myocardial infarction, showed increased serum creatinine. In the CVVHDF + SMT group, myoglobin levels significantly differed before and after the first CVVHDF treatment (P = 0.008), and serum myoglobin, creatinine, and blood urea nitrogen decreased significantly at different time points after CVVHDF.
The study concluded that CVVHDF did not improve biochemical indices or long-term renal prognosis compared to SMT alone. Hospitalization costs were higher in the CVVHDF + SMT group despite similar durations.
Source: bmcnephrol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12882-023-03242-x