RIFLE标准和APACHE-Ⅱ评分在CRRT治疗MODS合并ARF时机选择中的价值评价

目的 探讨RIFLE标准和APACHE-Ⅱ评分在多器官功能障碍综合征(MODS)合并急性肾功能衰竭(ARF)时选择连续性肾替代治疗(CRRT)时机中的价值.方法 选取该院ICU住院的105例MODS合并AKF行CRRT的患者,分别用RIFLE标准和APACHE-Ⅱ评分进行分组.RIFLE标准组分为RIFLE-R(危险)、RIFLE-Ⅰ(损伤)和RIFLE-F(衰竭)三个亚组;APACHE-Ⅱ评分组分为APACHE-Ⅱ<15、APACHE-ⅠⅡ 15～25、APACHE-Ⅱ>25三个亚组.比较两组亚组间的ICU住院存活率,存活患者肾功能的转归、CRKT累积量、ICU内平均住院时间和医疗费用的差异.结果 RIFLE-R+1组的存活率、肾功能的转归显著高于APACHE-Ⅱ15～25组[P<0.05),CRRT累积量、ICU内平均住院时间和医疗费用则显著降低(P<0.05);RIFLE-F组与A-PACHE-Ⅱ>25组相比,ICU住院存活率、肾功能的转归、CRRT累积量、ICU内平均住院时间和医疗费用无显著差异(P>0.05).结论 对MODS合并AKF患者,采用RIFLE标准选择CRRT,效一价比要优于采用A-PACHE-ⅠⅡ评分选择CRRT.     

重症急性肾功能衰竭连续性肾脏替代治疗与间歇性血液透析

目的　比较连续性肾脏替代治疗 (CRRT)与间歇性血液透析 (IHD)治疗重症急性肾功能衰竭 (ARF)的疗效。　方法　 ARF重症患者 75例 ,CRRT组 33例 ,IHD组 4 2例 ,回顾性对比分析两组的临床资料和疗效。　结果　 CRRT组病情明显重于 IHD组 :患者年龄大 ,平均动脉压低 ,APACHE 积分高 ,衰竭器官数目多 ,需要机械通气和升压药物的患者数高于 IHD组 (P<0 .0 1 )。但 CRRT组存活 2 4例 (72 .7% ) ,死亡 9例 (2 7.3% ) ;IHD组存活 2 3例 (5 4 .8% ) ,死亡 1 9例 (4 5 .2 % )。两组存活率比较差异有极显著性 (P<0 .0 1 )。　结论　 CRRT治疗重症ARF的疗效优于 IHD,能提高重症 ARF患者的存活率 ,改善重症 ARF的预后     

RIFLE标准和AKIN标准诊断急性肾损伤的对比研究

目的 用RIFLE标准和AKIN标准评估急性肾损伤(AKI)的发生率,并比较AKIN 标准和RIFLE标准在预测入住ICU危重患者病死率方面的优缺点.方法 回顾性分析2003年1月-2008年6月入住ICU的331例患者(终末肾衰竭进行肾脏替代治疗的不包括在内)的临床资料.结果 AKIN标准比RIFLE标准诊断了更多的AKI患者(50.5% vs.43.8%,P=0.049),分类中1期 (RIFLE标准中的风险期)患者更多(21.1% vs.14.8%,P=0.004),但是在对2期(RIFLE标准中的损伤期) (10.3% vs.10.9%,P=0.668)和3期(RIFLE标准中的衰竭期) (19.0% vs.18.1%,P=0.712)患者的诊断方面两者没有差异.按RIFLE标准定义的AKI患者的病死率明显高于非AKI患者(42.5% vs.12.4%,P＜0.001),按AKIN标准定义的AKI患者的病死率明显高于非AKI患者(40.7% vs.9.8%,P＜0.001).RIFLE标准和AKIN标准在预测住院患者病死率方面差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).结论 和RIFLE标准相比,AKIN标准可以提高AKI诊断的敏感性,但在预测住院危重患者的病死率方面两者无差别.     

肾功能分级在成人心脏术后肾功能衰竭的应用

目的 探讨RIFLE分级对成人心脏术后患者临床转归的预测价值.方法 收集509例行冠状动脉移植术、瓣膜替换术成年患者资料.按照RIFLE分级、APACHE Ⅱ及SOFA评分,在心脏手术后住院期间分别对患者进行评分并记录最高分值.结果 术后呼吸机辅助时间18(14～19)h,监护室停留时间(1.4 ±1.0)d,术后住院时间12.0 d(10.0～15.0)d.根据RIFLE分级,发生不同程度急性肾功能衰竭共167例,占32.8%;住院死亡22例,死亡率4.3%,死亡率随RIFLE分级的递进有升高趋势(P<0.01).RIFLEmax的ROC曲线下面积为0.933(P<0.001).结论 ARF是心脏术后常见并发症之一,RIFLE分级对此类患者住院死亡有良好预测能力;分级进入I级和F级会明显增加住院死亡的可能.     

介入时机对CRRT治疗脓毒症致AKI的疗效影响

目的 比较不同介入时机的连续性肾脏替代治疗(CRRT)治疗脓毒症致急性肾损伤(AKI)的临床疗效.方法 选择2018年3月至2020年2月收治的120例脓毒症致AKI患者,分为早期肾脏替代治疗(RRT)组(n=61,RIFLE受损期启动CRRT)与延迟RRT组(n=59,RIFLE衰竭期启动CRRT).比较两组28 d死亡率和治疗5 d后肾功能指标[血肌酐(Scr)、血尿素氮(BUN)]、炎性指标[白细胞计数(WBC)、降钙素原(PCT)、白细胞介素-6(IL-6)]和疾病严重程度评分[序贯器官衰竭(SOFA)评分、急性生理与慢性健康(A-PACHEⅡ)评分].结果 早期RRT组治疗5 d后Scr、BUN、IL-6水平及第28天死亡率均低于延迟RRT组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05).结论 早期CRRT可以有效缓解脓毒症患者的肾脏损伤程度.     

脓毒血症合并急性肾损伤患者的CRRT早期治疗

目的:观察基于RIFLE标准重症加强护理病房(Intensive Care Unit,ICU)脓毒血症合并急性肾损伤患者连续性肾脏替代治疗(continuous renal replacement therapy,CRRT)早期治疗方法和效果。方法:收集72例脓毒症合并急性肾损伤患者作为研究对象,按照急性肾损伤的诊断和分级(RIFLE)标准分为Ⅰ期组(25例)、Ⅱ期组(23例)、Ⅲ期组(24例),对所有患者均实施经CRRT早期治疗,观察各组患者的死亡率及肾功能恢复率。结果:AKIⅠ期组患者死亡率为12.0%,AKIⅡ期组患者死亡率为26.09%,AKIⅢ期组患者死亡率为50.0%,AKI分级与死亡率呈正相关关系(P<0.05);AKIⅠ期组患者肾功能恢复率为80.0%,AKIⅡ期组患者肾功能恢复率为60.87%,AKIⅢ期组患者肾功能恢复率为37.5%,AKI分级与肾功能恢复率呈负相关关系(P<0.05)。结论:结合RIFLE标准可准确判定患者的病情程度并合理选择治疗时机和方法,达到降低患者的死亡率,提高患者的肾功能恢复率目的。     

连续性肾脏替代治疗多器官功能障碍综合征的急救

目的 探讨应用连续性肾脏替代治疗(CRRT)对多器官功能障碍综合征(MODS)合并重症急性肾衰竭(ARF)患者的临床疗效和影响预后的因素. 方法 回顾性分析36例MODS患者行CRRT的临床资料,根据存活时间是否超过15 d分为存活组和死亡组,分别对器官衰竭数目及类型、APACHEⅡ评分、从出现肾功能不全至开始行CRRT的时间、行CRRT总时间及临床指标进行比较. 结果 存活组与死亡组年龄、性别、原发病类型比较无统计学差异,而在器官衰竭数目及类型、APACHEⅡ评分、从出现肾功能不全至行CRRT时间、治疗总时间及并发症发生率方面,两组均有统计学差异. 结论 CRRT为MODS的急救手段之一,早期根据病情选择合适的治疗模式和剂量应用CRRT可提高MODS抢救成功率.     

CRRT治疗148例重症急性肾功能衰竭的疗效观察

目的观察连续性肾替代治疗(CRRT)重症急性肾衰竭(ARF)患者的疗效。方法回顾性的分析CRRT技术治疗148例重症ARF患者的临床资料及疗效。结果行CRRT治疗过程中148例重症ARF患者的收缩压、舒张压、平均动脉压及心率均无显著变化,其中97例使用升压药、64例需要机械通气、115例并发2个以上脏器功能障碍或衰竭患者的上述参数也无明显改变。与CRRT治疗前比较,治疗后血尿素氮和肌酐明显降低(P<0.05);电介质紊乱及代谢性酸中毒明显纠正(P<0.05);肾功能完全恢复72例(占48.6%),肾功能不全恢复28例(占18.9%),死亡48例(占32.5%)。结论CRRT是重症ARF患者的安全、有效的治疗措施。     

肝移植术后早期急性肾功能衰竭的预防和治疗

目的 探讨原位肝移植术后早期急性肾功能衰竭的预防和治疗措施.方法 对2004年1月至2006年12月中山大学附属第一医院施行的516例同种原位肝移植患者的临床资料进行回顾件分析.总结肝移植术后早期急性肾功能衰竭(ARF)的发生情况.结果 共发生早期急性肾功能衰竭106例(20.5%),其中属轻度21例,中度40例,重度45例.分别采取了纠正肾前性因素、调整免疫抑制方案、药物疗法和血液净化相结合的综合防治措施,其中有21例重度肾功能不全者术后需行连续肾脏替代治疗(CRRT).在本组资料中,原发病为重型肝炎患者75例,术后36例合并ARF,发生率明显高于其他原发病(P<0.05);4例术前存在重度肾功能不全者,术后有3例发生ARF,明显高于其他术前轻-中度肾功能不全者的术后ARF的发生率(P<0.05).106例肝移植术后早期ARF患者,术后1个月内死亡37例,病死率为34.9%,且终末期肝病模型(MELD)评分值≤20分组的1个月存活率显著高于MELD值为20～30分组和>30分两组.结论 肝移植术后ARF的防治是一个从术前评估到术后管理的系列过程;术前完善对患者的评估,术中采取多方面措施保护肾脏功能,术后减少药物性肾功能损害和必要时行CRRT治疗是肝移植围术期防治ARF的重要步骤.     

ICU中急性肾功能衰竭的RIFLE分层及临床分析

目的探讨重症监护病房（intensive care unit,ICU）中急性肾功能衰竭的RIFLE分级、预后及其相关因素。方法收集整理67例急性肾功能衰竭患者的临床资料,统一标准对AHF的RIFLE分级、病因、发病时间（分两组。A组：0～2天,B组：≥3天）与预后的相互关系进行分析。结果ARF67例,死亡44例,死亡率高达65．67％。按RIFIZ分层标准,ICU内急性肾功能衰竭的患者中以急性肾损伤的患者最多,占41．79％（28例）。ICU中导致ARF的常见原因为低血容量性休克、感染性休克、脑卒中、重度颅脑损伤、心源性疾病和肺源性疾病。A组死亡率为53．33％,B组为75．68％。结论ARF是ICU中常见危重症,ARF患者的死亡率随RIFLE分层的增高而升高。入ICU3天以后发生ARF的患者死亡率较高,但ARF发生的早晚不能预测患者的预后。     

Predictive value of RIFLE classification on prognosis of critically ill patients with acute kidney injury treated with continuous renal replacement therapy

Background The optimal timing to start continuous renal replacement therapy （CRRT） for acute kidney injury （AKI） patients has not been accurately established. The recently proposed risk, injury, failure, loss, end-stage kidney disease （RIFLE） criteria for diagnosis and classification of AKI may provide a method for clinicians to decide the ＂optimal timing＂ for starting CRRT under uniform guidelines. The present study aimed： （1） to analyze the correlation between RIFLE stage at the start of CRRT and 90-day survival rate after CRRT start, （2） to further investigate the correlation of RIFLE stage with the malignant kidney outcome in the 90-day survivors, and （3） to determine the influence of the timing of CRRT defined by RIFLE classification on the 90-day survival and malignant kidney outcome in 90-day survivors.
Methods A retrospective cohort analysis was performed on the data of 106 critically ill patients with AKI, treated with CRRT during a 6-year period in a university affiliated surgical intensive care unit （SICU）. Information such as sex, age, RIFLE stage, sepsis, sepsis-related organ failure assessment （SOFA） score, number of organ failures before CRRT, CRRT time during SICU, survival, and kidney outcome conditions at 90 days after CRRT start was collected. According to their baseline severity of AKI at the start of CRRT, the patients were assigned to three groups according to the increasing severity of RIFLE stages： RIFLE-R （risk of renal dysfunction, R）, RIFLE-I （injury to the kidney, I） and RIFLE-F （failure of kidney function, F） using RIFLE criteria. The malignant kidney outcome was classified as RIFLE-L （loss of kidney function L） or RIFLE-E （end-stage kidney disease, E） using RIFLE criteria. The correlation between RIFLE stage and 90-day survival rate was analyzed among these three RIFLE-categorized groups. Additionally, the association between RIFLE stage and the malignant kidney outcome （RIFLE-L＋RIFLF-E） in the 90-day survivors was analyzed.Results Fifty-three of the overall 106 patients survived to 90 days after the start of CRRT. There were 16, 22 and 68 patients in RIFLE-R, RIFLE-I and RIFLE-F groups respectively with corresponding 90-day survival rate of 75.0% （12/16）, 63.6% （14/22） and 39.7% （27/68） （P 〈0.01, compared among groups）. The percentage of the malignant kidney outcome of 90-day survivors in the RIFLE-R, RIFLE-I, and RIFLE-F groups was 16.7% （2/12）, 21.4% （3/14） and 55.6% （15/27）,respectively （P for trend 〈0.01）. After adjustment for other baseline risk factors, the relative risk （RR） for the 90-day mortality significantly increased with baseline RIFLE stage. Patients in RIFLE-F had a higher RR of 1.96 （95% confidence interval （C/）： 1.06-3.62） than patients in RIFLE-I （RR： 1.09, 95% CI： 0.55-2.15） compared with patients in RIFLE-R （P for trend 〈0.01）. Similarly, baseline RIFLE stage also significantly correlated with the odds ratio （OR） for the malignant kidney outcome in 90-day survivors （P for trend 〈0.05）. Ninety-day survivors in the RIFLE-F group had a borderline significantly highest OR of 6.88 （95% CI： 0.85-55.67）.
Conclusions The RIFLE classification may be used to predict 90-day survival after starting CRRT and the malignant kidney outcome of 90-day survivors in the critically ill patients with AKI treated with CRRT. Starting CRRT prior to RIFLE-F stage may be the optimal timing. Prospective, multi-center, randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm its predictive value in these patients.     

大器官移植术中和术后连续性肾脏替代治疗(CRRT)的应用

目的 探讨肝脏移植、心脏移植、肾脏移植、心肾联合移植、肝肾联合移植、胰肾联合移植等大器官移植及联合器官移植术中术后出现肾功能损害及多器官功能衰竭时，采用连续性肾脏替代治疗(CRRT)的方法和对人／移植物存活率的影响。方法 应用PRISMA(Hospal)机器或AK-10(Gambro)单泵机与3台Baxter 6201型流量泵并用，行SCUF、CVVH、CVVHD、CVVH-DF，治疗大器官移植术中术后出现肾功能损害及多器官功能衰竭共51例次。结果 全部病例CRRT治疗期间生命体征、血流动力学稳定。治疗6h后电解质及血气明显改善。治疗48h，各脏器功能稳定，大部分移植物功能逐渐恢复。结论 CRRT救治大器官移植术中术后出现肾功能损害及多器官功能衰竭可明显提高人／移植物存活率，是大器官移植术中及术后良好的肾脏支持方式.     

Is it necessary to stent renal artery stenosis patients before cardiopulmonary bypass procedures?

Background  Acute kidney injury (AKI) is associated with poor prognosis after cardiopulmonary bypass. The aim of this retrospective study was to investigate whether stent implantation before cardiopulmonary bypass has beneficial effect on development of AKI in renal artery stenosis (RAS) patients.

Methods  In this retrospective study, patients with abnormal baseline serum creatinine (SCr, >106 μmol/L) were not included. Included patients (n=69) were divided into two groups. Group 1 included 31 RAS patients receiving no stent implantation before cardiopulmonary bypass. Group 2 included 38 RAS patients having received stent implantation just before cardiopulmonary bypass. To assess AKI after cardiopulmonary bypass, serum urea nitrogen, SCr and creatinine clearance were recorded at baseline, at the end of operation, during the first and second postoperative 24 hours.

Results  Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. Serum urea nitrogen, SCr, creatinine clearance before and after cardiopulmonary bypass were also similar class groups. Incidence of AKI in group 1 was not significantly different from group 2. In group 1, AKI defined by RIFLE between occurred in 7 (22.6%) patients: 5 (16.1%) with RIFLE-R, 2 (6.5%) with RIFLE-I, and no patients with RIFLE-F. In group 2, 10 patients (26.3%) had an episode of AKI during hospitalization: 6 (15.8%) had RIFLE-R, 4 (10.5%) had RIFLE-I, and no patients had RIFLE-F.

Conclusions  There are no data suggesting that it is necessary to stent RAS patients with normal SCr before cardio- pulmonary bypass. However, it cannot be concluded that RAS is not associated with AKI after cardiopulmonary bypass.

     

A retrospective study of continuous renal replacement therapy versus intermitt ent hemodialysis in severe acute renal failure

Objective To investigate the efficacy of continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) versu s intermittent hemodialysis (IHD) in patients with severe acute renal failure (A RF).Methods One hundred and ninety -three severe ARF patients who received renal support be tween December 1978 and December 1998 were involved in this study. Of them, 101 (52.3%) were treated with CRRT (CRRT group), and 92 (47.7%) with IHD (IHD gro up).Results Sixty (59.4%) patients in the CRRT group got through the acute phase of disease and 41 (40.6%) patients did not survive while in the IHD group 59 (64.1%) pat ients survived and 33 (35.9%) patients did not. No significant difference in s urvival rate was found between the two groups. 24 of 64 patients (37.5%) in th e CRRT group with multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (MODS) survived, while in the IHD group, 8 out of 44 (27.3%) survived, their survival rate was much lowe r than that in the CRRT group. Patients in CRRT group were more severely ill, a s manifested by lower mean arterial pressure, higher APACHE Ⅱ score, more dysfu nctioned organs and requiring mechanical ventilation and vasopressor support as compared with patients in the IHD group, CRRT was found to improve hemodynamic stability with a better fluid balance and control of biochemical status, increas ed nutritional intake and a shorter duration of acute renal failure (P&lt;0.05 ). Conclusion CRRT perhaps may be the best choice in the treatment of severe ARF patients, for it can offer several distinct advantages compared to IHD. These may contribute to improving the survival rate of ARF patients, particularly those that are cri tically ill patients.     

血清胱抑素C对急性肾衰竭患者的早期诊断价值

目的探讨血清胱抑素C（cystatinC）在急性肾衰竭（acuterenalfailure,ARF）患者的早期诊断价值。方法在入ICU即刻及以后每日清晨收集352例ICU患者血清,用酶法测定肌酐（serumcreatinine,Scr）,用颗粒增强散射免疫比浊法测定血清cystatinC,用公式计算肾小球滤过率（glomerularfiltrationrate,GFR）,按RIFLE标准把患者分为ARF组和非ARF组,对上述各指标进行比较分析。结果ARF组患者的cystatinC与Scr水平高于非ARF组（P〈0．01）;ARF组患者血清cystatinC与GFR呈负相关（r=-0．72,P〈0．01）;急性肾衰竭患者cystatinC与Scr出现异常在病程上有差别：cystatinC为（4．6±2．5）d;Ser为（5．8±3．9）d（P〈0．01）。结论ARF组患者血清cystatinC明显升高,与急性肾衰竭患者肾小球滤过率有较好的相关性,cystatinC早于Scr发现肾功能的异常,cystatinC检测可用于ICU患者并发ARF的早期诊断指标。     

急性肾功能衰竭的流行病学研究

目的 对急性肾功能衰竭（ARF）进行前瞻性研究,总结ARF病因和临床特点。方法 收集内、外、妇、儿等科室的ARF住院病人,分析其病因,鉴别ARF类型（肾前性,肾性,肾后性）以及分析各种类型所占的比例、治疗方法及预后,着重分析小管间质病变,药物性,及急性横纹肌溶解综合征所致的ARF的临床特点和预后,结果 125例ARF病人中,肾前性ARF20例,占16%;肾后性ARF7例,占5.6%;肾性ARF98例,占78.4%,其中急性小管间质病变79例,占肾性ARF的80.6%(79/98)。感染、休克是主要原因;药物性ARF28/125例,占ARF的22.4%呈上升趋势;横纹肌溶解综合征11/125例,占ARF的8.8%,多脏器功能障碍综合征125例,占ARF的22.4%,呈上升趋势,横纹肌溶解综合征11/125例,占ARF的8.8%,多脏器功能障碍综合征合并ARF14/125例。占ARF的11.2%。肾活检32例,急性小管间质病变和肾小球、血血管病变约各占50%,ARF总的死亡率23.2%,肾实质性ARF的死亡率29.6%。结论 ARF发生率和死亡率较高,早期诊治有助于改善ARF的预后。     

连续性肾脏替代疗法治疗重症急性肾功能衰竭的临床研究

目的 评价连续性肾脏替代疗法(CRRT)治疗重症急性肾功能衰竭(ARF)的临床应用价值及影响预后的因素。方法 回顾分析CRRT治疗(CRRT组)的116例重症ARF患者的临床特点、疾病严重程度及其预后,并与同期行间歇性血液透析(IHD)治疗(IHD组)的102例重症ARF患者相对照。结果 (1)CRRT组患者的平均APACHEⅡ评分为27.0±7.5,其中≥29分56例(48%),24~29分36例(31%),<24分24例(21%);而IHD组患者的平均APACHEⅡ评分为21.9±5.2,其中≥29分0例(0%),24~29分44例(43%),<24分58例(57%)。CRRT组平均APACHEⅡ评分显著高于IHD组(t=4.769,P=0.000),提示CRRT治疗的患者多为病情危重的重症病例。(2)CRRT组患者治疗后的存活率为37%(43/116),而IHD组为48%(49/102),两组比较无显著性差异(χ²=2.678,P=0.1018);若仅选取APACHEⅡ评分≥24分的危重病人进行比较显示:CRRT组的存活率24%(22/92)显著高于IHD治疗组的9%(4/44)(χ²=4.229,P=0.0397),提示对危重ARF患者,CRRT效果优于传统IHD。(3)对CRRT存活与死亡亚组患者的一般临床资料、疾病的严重程度(用APACHEⅡ评分表示)等因素进行统计学分析,结果显示死亡亚组患者的年龄、病情严重程度以及需要使用机械通气和升压药的百分率明显高于存活亚组(P<0.05)。结论 (1)CRRT是治疗重症AFR的有效方法之一     

连续性肾脏替代疗法治疗重症急性肾功能衰竭的临床研究

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the clinical value of continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) in the treatment of severe acute renal failure (ARF) and identify the factors influencing the patients' prognosis. METHODS: The clinical characteristics, disease severity and prognosis were retrospectively studied in 116 patients with severe ARF undergoing CRRT from January, 1998 to May, 2004, in comparison with those in 102 such patients treated with intermittent hemodialysis (IHD). RESULTS: The mean score of Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) was 27.0+/-7.5 in patients receiving CRRT, of whom 56 (48%) had a score no less than 29, 36 (31%) between 24 to 29 and 24 (21%) less than 24. The mean APACHE II score was 21.9+/-5.2 in patients with IHD, and none of them had a score over 29, 44 (43%) had a score between 24 to 29 and 58 (57%) less than 24. The mean APACHE II score of CRRT group was significantly higher than that of IHD group (t=4.769, P=0.000), suggesting that most of the patients treated with CRRT were in critical condition. The patients' survival rate, however, did not differ significantly between the two groups, being 37% (43/116) in CRRT group and 48/ (49/102) in IHD group (X2=2.678, P=0.101 8). When only the patients with a score no less than 24 were compared, the survival rate of CRRT group was significantly higher than that of IHD group (24% vs 9%, X2=4.229, P=0.039 7), demonstrating better effect of CRRT than IHD in the management of critical ARF cases. In patients treated with CRRT, the patients in fatal cases had significantly older age, more critical condition (indicated by APACHE II score) and greater dependence on mechanical ventilation or vasoactive support than those who survived (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: CRRT is one of the effective methods for management of severe ARF patients, especially in those with critical conditions, with better effect than that of IHD. The prognosis of severe ARF patients treated with CRRT can be influenced by the patients' age and disease severity, and the need of vasoactive drugs or mechanical ventilation may help predict the patients' prognosis.