Early experience of using regional citrate anticoagulation for continuous renal replacement therapy in critically ill patients in a resource-limited setting.

AIM: Despite the superiority of regional citrate anticoagulation (RCA) in continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT), its application is limited in resource-limited settings. We aim to explore the cost and safety of RCA for CRRT in critically ill patients, compared to usual care. METHODS: This prospective observational study included patients requiring CRRT in a tertiary intensive care unit (ICU) from February 2022 to January 2023. They were classified to either the RCA or usual care groups based on the anticoagulation technique chosen by the treating physician, considering contraindications. The CRRT prescription follows the institutional protocol. All relevant data were obtained from the ICU CRRT-RCA charts and electronic medical records. A cost analysis was performed. RESULTS: A total of 54 patients (27 per group) were included, with no demographic differences. Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score and lactate levels were significantly higher in the usual care group. The number of filters used were comparable (p = .108). The median filter duration in the RCA group was numerically longer (35.00 [15.50-56.00] vs. 23.00 [17.00-29.00] h), but not statistically significant (p = .253). The duration of mechanical ventilation, vasopressor requirement, and mortality were similar, but the RCA group had a significantly longer ICU stay. The rate of adverse events was similar, with four severe metabolic alkalosis cases in the RCA group. The RCA group had higher total cost per patient per day (USD 611 vs. 408; p = .013). CONCLUSION: In this resource-limited setting, RCA for CRRT appeared safe and had clinically longer filter lifespan compared with usual care, albeit the increased cost.

Cost-effectiveness of the TherMax blood warmer during continuous renal replacement therapy.

Hypothermia is a common adverse event during continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT), affecting multiple organ systems and increasing risk of poor health outcomes among patients with acute kidney injury (AKI) undergoing CRRT. TheraMax blood warmers are the next generation of extracorporeal blood warmers which reduce risk of hypothermia during CRRT. The purpose of this study is to elucidate the potential health economic impacts of avoiding CRRT-induced hypothermia by using the novel TherMax blood warming device. This study compares health care costs associated with use of the new TherMax blood warmer unit integrated with the PrisMax system compared to CRRT with a standalone blood warming device to avoid hypothermia in continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT). An economic model was developed in which relevant health states for each intervention were normothermia, hypothermia, discharge, and death. Clinical inputs and costs were obtained from a combination of retrospective chart review and publicly available summary estimates. The proportion of AKI patients treated with CRRT who became hypothermic (<36°C) during CRRT treatment was 34.5% in the TherMax group compared to 71.9% in the 'standalone warmer' group. Given the 78.7-year average life expectancy in the US and the assumed average patient age at discharge/death of 65.4 years, the total life-years gained by avoiding mortality related to hypothermia was 9.0 in the TherMax group compared to 8.0 in the 'standalone warmer' group. Cost per life-year gained was $8,615 in the TherMax group versus $10,115 in the 'standalone warmer' group for a difference of -$1,501 favoring TherMax. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was negative, indicating superior cost-effectiveness for TherMax versus 'standalone warmer'. The TherMax blood warming device used with the PrisMax system is associated with lower risk of hypothermia, which our model indicates leads to lower costs, lower risk of mortality due to hypothermia, and superior cost-effectiveness.

A systematic review of cost-effectiveness analyses of continuous versus intermittent renal replacement therapy in acute kidney injury.

INTRODUCTION: Though cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) have evaluated continuous renal replacement therapy (RRTs) and intermittent RRTs in acute kidney injury (AKI) patients; it is yet to establish which RRT technique is most cost-effective. We systematically reviewed the current evidence from CEAs of CRRT versus IRRT in patients with AKI. AREAS COVERED: PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases searched for CEAs comparing two RRTs. Overall, seven CEAs, two from Brazil and one from US, Canada, Colombia, Belgium, and Argentina were included. Five CEAs used Markov model, three reported following CHEERS, none accounted indirect costs. Time horizon varied from 1-year-lifetime. Marginal QALY gain with CRRT compared to IRRT was reported across CEAs. Older CEAs found CRRT to be costlier and not cost-effective than IRRT (ICER 2019 US$: 152,671$/QALY); latest CEAs (industry-sponsored) reported CRRT to be cost-saving versus IRRT (-117,614$/QALY). Risk of mortality, dialysis dependence, and incidence of renal recovery were the key drivers of cost-effectiveness. EXPERT OPINION: CEAs of RRTs for AKI show conflicting findings with secular trends. Latest CEAs suggested CRRT to be cost-effective versus IRRT with dialysis dependence rate as major driver of cost-effectiveness. Future CEAs, preferably non-industry sponsored, may account for indirect costs to improve the generalizability of CEAs.

The Cost-Effectiveness of Continuous Versus Intermittent Renal Replacement Therapies in Acute Kidney Injury: Perspective of the Social Services for the Elderly in Argentina.

BACKGROUND: Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a public health problem that affects millions of hospitalized patients worldwide. In Argentina, evidence suggests that its incidence has risen in recent years. When severe, AKI may require a renal replacement therapy (RRT) where continuous RRT (CRRT) and intermittent RRT (IRRT) are plausible options for patients in the intensive care unit. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost utility of CRRT versus IRRT for the National Institute of Social Services for Retirees and Pensioners, the largest social security health insurance for elders in Argentina. METHODS: This was a model-based cost-utility analysis. Long-term costs and health outcomes were estimated for a hypothetical cohort with a Markov model. Parameters used were obtained from published literature and validated with local experts. Local costs were estimated and expressed in $AR of 2016. Several sensitivity analyses were run to analyze the impact of uncertainty on results. RESULTS: Continuous RRT dominated IRRT by cumulating over the model more quality-adjusted life years and less costs. Total discounted quality-adjusted life years for both cohorts were 1049 and 1034, respectively, and total costs were $95 362 and $103 871. Cost-effectiveness (CE) results reflect these differences in favor of CRRT with a deterministic cost-saving incremental CE ratio and a probability of CRRT being CE of 65.4%, considering a CE threshold of 1 gross domestic product per capita. CONCLUSIONS: Continuous RRT for patients with AKI eligible for CRRT or IRRT would probably be a cost-effective intervention for the National Institute of Social Services for Retirees and Pensioners' view. Nevertheless, there is considerable uncertainty around results, mainly due to the lack of adequate controlled studies and local data on the prognosis of these patients in Argentina.