Abstract: 【Abstract】 Objective In this article we investigated the feasibility and advantages of hemofiltration (HF) by comparing the application of hemofiltration and conventional hemodialysis (HD) in induction period. Methods We retrospectively analyzed 85 patients beginning to accept renal replacement therapy for chronic renal failure. In these patients, 38 cases were treated with hemofiltration (HF Group) and 47 cases received conventional hemodialysis (HD Group). BUN, Cr, total ultrafiltration (TUF), mean arterial pressure (MAP) and APACHE III score were observed on admission day, and on third and seventh day after treatment. Complications, medical expenses, and hospitalization days were also recorded. Results Patients age was older in HF group than in HD group (P＜0.05). On admission, BUN, Cr, MAP and APACHE III score were statistically indifferent between the two groups. On the third and seventh days after the treatment, APACHE III score, MAP and TUF were statistically different between the two groups. Comparison of patients older than 60 years old in the two groups found that patient age, BUN, Cr, MAP and APACHE III score had no differences on admission, but APACHE III score, MAP and TUF were statistically different on the third and seventh days after the treatment. In addition, hospitalization days were less in HF group, but medical expenses were similar between the two groups. Dialysis disequilibrium syndrome was not found in both groups. Conclusion HF may replace HD in the induction period of renal replacement therapy.

Key words: Hemodialysis, Induced dialysis