Therapeutic effect of pulse high volume hemofiltration for treatment of patients with sepsis: a systemic review and Meta-analysis
Huibin Huang,Jianqin Liu,Xiaoli Chen,Jiandong Lin
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1008-9691.2018.02.001
2018-01-01
Abstract:Objective To systematically evaluate the therapeutic effect of pulse high volume hemofiltration (PHVHF) for treatment of patients with sepsis. Methods Databases such as PubMed in American National Medical Library, Holland medical abstract Embase, the Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Internet (CNKI), China Biological Medical Literature Database (CBM), VIP, WanFang databases, etc. were searched by computer to retrieve randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on PHVHF for treatment of patients with sepsis, and the retrieval time ranged from the creation of database to March 25, 2017. Both groups of patients received conventional treatments, including antibiotics, fluid resuscitation, vasoactive agents as well as other organ function support treatments to maintain the basic vital signs stable. Patients in PHVHF group received PHVHF besides conventional treatment, while the patients in control group received conventional treatment or any other continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) mode with PHVHF excluded. The literatures accepted should at least include one of the following changes of outcome indicators, such as overall mortality, the levels of inflammatory mediators eliminated, acute physiology and chronic health evaluation Ⅱ(APACHE Ⅱ) score, service life of filter, amount of replacement fluids used. Two researchers independently screened literatures, extracted data, and assessed the methodological quality of included studies. Meta-analysis was conducted by using RevMan 5.3 software and the publication bias was evaluated by visually inspecting funnel plots. Results A total of 11 RCTs involving 410 patients met eligibility criteria, of which 204 patients in the PHVHF group and 206 patients in the control group. In the control group 5 RCTs used other CRRT modes, and 6 RCTs applied the conventional therapy. Meta-analyses showed that interleukin-6 [IL-6, standard mean difference (SMD) = -0.80, 95% confidence interval (95%CI) = -1.56 to -0.06, P = 0.04], tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α, SMD = -0.78, 95%CI = -1.33 to -0.23, P = 0.006), APACHE Ⅱ scores [mean difference (MD) = -3.80, 95%CI = -5.08 to -2.52, P < 0.000 01] were obviously lower than those in control group, but no significant statistical significance in mortality was seen between the two groups [relative risk (RR) = 0.72, 95%CI = 0.49 - 1.07, P = 0.10]. Further subgroup analyses suggested that compared with conventional treatment group, in PHVHF group mortality (RR = 0.40, 95%CI = 0.16 - 0.95, P = 0.04), IL-6 (SMD =-1.87, 95%CI = -3.58 to -0.16, P = 0.03), TNF-α (SMD = -1.32, 95%CI = -2.24 to -0.40, P = 0.005), and APACHE Ⅱscore (MD = -4.29, 95%CI = -6.02 to -2.56, P < 0.000 01) were significantly decreased; however, only a significantly decreased APACHE Ⅱ score (MD = -2.95, 95%CI = -4.56 to -1.35, P = 0.000 3) was observed in PHVHF group compared to that in subgroup of other CRRT modes. Conclusions Compared with using conventional therapy alone, using PHVHF combined with conventional therapy for treatment of patients with sepsis can more effectively improve their prognosis, and PHVHF can be the efficacious alternatives of other CRRT modes especially the HVHF. However, due to the limited quantity and quality of the included studies, further high-quality, multicenter, large-scale RCTs are needed to verify the above conclusion.