Hemodynamic instability related to renal replacement therapy (HIRRT) is a frequent complication of all renal replacement therapy (RRT) modalities commonly used in the intensive care unit. HIRRT is associated with increased mortality and may impair kidney recovery. Our current understanding of the physiologic basis for HIRRT comes primarily from studies of end-stage kidney disease patients on maintenance hemodialysis in whom HIRRT is referred to as ‘intradialytic hypotension’. Nonetheless, there are many studies that provide additional insights into the underlying mechanisms for HIRRT specifically in critically ill patients. In particular, recent evidence challenges the notion that HIRRT is almost entirely related to excessive ultrafiltration. Although excessive ultrafiltration is a key mechanism, multiple other RRT-related mechanisms may precipitate HIRRT and this could have implications for how HIRRT should be managed (e.g., the appropriate response might not always be to reduce ultrafiltration, particularly in the context of significant fluid overload). This review briefly summarizes the incidence and adverse effects of HIRRT and reviews what is currently known regarding the mechanisms underpinning it. This includes consideration of the evidence that exists for various RRT-related interventions to prevent or limit HIRRT. An enhanced understanding of the mechanisms that underlie HIRRT, beyond just excessive ultrafiltration, may lead to more effective RRT-related interventions to mitigate its occurrence and consequences.

Vascular access–related complications can lead to patient morbidity and reduced patient quality of life. Some of the common arteriovenous access complications include failure to mature, stenosis formation, and thrombosis.

Introduction: High-volume hemofiltration (HVHF) is an attractive therapy for the treatment of septic acute kidney injury (AKI). Small experimental and uncontrolled studies have suggested hemodynamic and survival benefits at higher doses of HVHF than those used for the high-intensity arms of the RENAL and ATN studies. Our aim was to evaluate the effects of high-volume hemofiltration (HVHF) compared with standard-volume hemofiltration (SVHF) for septic AKI. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis of publications between 1966 and 2013 was performed. The review was limited to randomized-controlled trials that compared HVHF (effluent rate greater than 50 ml/kg per hour) versus SVHF in the treatment of sepsis and septic shock. The primary outcome assessed was 28-day mortality. Other outcomes assessed were recovery of kidney function, lengths of ICU and hospital stays, vasopressor dose reduction, and adverse events. Results: Four trials, including 470 total participants, were included. Pooled analysis for 28-day mortality did not show any meaningful difference between HVHF compared with SVHF (OR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.45 to 1.29). No included studies reported statistically significant differences between groups for any of the secondary outcomes. Adverse events, including hypophosphatemia and hypokalemia, were more commonly observed in HVHF-treated patients, although reporting was inconsistent across studies. Conclusions: Insufficient evidence exists of a therapeutic benefit for routine use of HVHF for septic AKI, other than on an experimental basis. Given the logistic challenges related to patient recruitment along with an incomplete understanding of the biologic mechanisms by which HVHF may modify outcomes, further trials should focus on alternative extracorporeal therapies as an adjuvant therapy for septic AKI rather than HVHF.

Catheter-related bloodstream infections, exit-site infections, and tunnel infections are common complications related to hemodialysis central venous catheter use. The various definitions of catheter-related infections are reviewed, and various preventive strategies are discussed. Treatment options, for both empiric and definitive infections, including antibiotic locks and systemic antibiotics, are reviewed.