Abstract
BACKGROUND: Anticoagulation is recommended to maintain the patency of the circuit in continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT). However, anticoagulation-associated complications can occur. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of citrate anticoagulation to heparin anticoagulation in critically ill patients treated with CRRT. METHODS: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the safety and efficacy of citrate anticoagulation and heparin in CRRT were included. Articles not describing the incidence of metabolic and/or electrolyte disturbances induced by the anticoagulation strategy were excluded. The PubMed, Embase, and MEDLINE electronic databases were searched. The last search was performed on 18 February 2022. RESULTS: Twelve articles comprising 1592 patients met the inclusion criteria. There was no significant difference between the groups in the development of metabolic alkalosis (RR = 1.46; (95% CI (0.52-4.11); p = 0.470)) or metabolic acidosis (RR = 1.71, (95% CI (0.99-2.93); p = 0.054)). Patients in the citrate group developed hypocalcaemia more frequently (RR = 3.81; 95% CI (1.67-8.66); p = 0.001). Bleeding complications in patients randomised to the citrate group were significantly lower than those in the heparin group (RR 0.32 (95% CI (0.22-0.47); p < 0.0001)). Citrate showed a significantly longer filter lifespan of 14.52 h (95% CI (7.22-21.83); p < 0.0001), compared to heparin. There was no significant difference between the groups for 28-day mortality (RR = 1.08 (95% CI (0.89-1.31); p = 0.424) or 90-day mortality (RR 0.9 (95% CI (0.8-1.02); p = 0.110). CONCLUSION: regional citrate anticoagulation is a safe anticoagulant for critically ill patients who require CRRT, as no significant differences were found in metabolic complications between the groups. Additionally, citrate has a lower risk of bleeding and circuit loss than heparin.