Sociedad Americana de Hirudoterapia

Low-dose versus high-dose heparin locks for hemodialysis catheters: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Review published in Clinical nephrology (2016)

Última actualización: 18 de junio de 2026Revisado por: ASH Editorial Board
Artículo de investigación — revisión de evidenciaReferencia del artículo
Evidence: Meta-analysisEnsayos clínicosDesarrollo de fármacosHan et al. · Clinical nephrology, 2016

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Low-dose heparin lock has been suggested as an effective and safe catheter lock in hemodialysis. However, whether a low-dose lock is superior to a high-dose heparin lock in preventing catheter-related infections and maintaining catheter patency is inconclusive. STUDY DESIGN: A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed by searching in NGC (National Guideline Clearinghouse), Cochrane Library, Joanna Briggs Institute Library, MEDLINE, EMbase, RNAO (Registered Nurses' Association of Ontario), Nursing Consult, PubMed, OVID, China Biology Medicine disc (CBMdisc), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chongqing VIP (CQVIP), Wanfang Data Knowledge Service Platform, and major nephrology journals. SETTING AND POPULATION: Patients receiving hemodialysis with central venous catheters. SELECTION CRITERIA FOR STUDIES: Randomized controlled trials (RCT), controlled clinical trials (CCT), and cohort studies comparing low-dose heparin lock with high-dose heparin lock in hemodialysis patients with central venous catheters. Intervention (exposure): Locking central venous catheters with low-dose heparin lock. OUTCOMES: Primary outcomes include bleeding-related complications and catheter-related infections. Secondary outcomes include catheter retention time, catheter thrombosis/occlusion incidence, and catheter dysfunction. RESULTS: Five RCTs and three CCTs were eventually identified for the meta-analysis, with 916 patients in total. Meta-analysis showed that, compared with the high-dose heparin group (≥ 5,000 U/mL), the low-dose (< 5,000 U/mL) heparin lock could significantly reduce the incidences of bleeding- related complications RR = 3.29, 95% CI (2.19, 4.94), p < 0.00001) and catheterrelated infections (RR = 1.66, 95% CI (1.01, 2.73), p = 0.04). However, no significant differences were observed in the catheter retention time MD = 9.32, 95% CI (-6.70, 25.35), p = 0.25), catheter thrombosis/occlusion incidence (RR = 0.68, 95% CI (0.28, 1.65), p = 0.39), or catheter dysfunction (RR = 1.07, 95% CI (0.75, 1.53), p = 0.71) between the high- and low-dose heparin groups. CONCLUSION: Low-dose heparin lock could decrease the incidences of catheter-related infections and bleeding-related complications without influencing the catheter retention time or the incidence of catheter thrombosis/occlusion or catheter dysfunction. Low-dose heparin lock solution should be recommended for the hemodialysis patients using central venous catheter in clinic.

Abstract sourced from PubMed (NCBI) for the cited record. See the original publication for the authoritative version.

Publication typeJournal ArticleMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
Indexed MeSH termsAnticoagulantsCatheter-Related InfectionsCentral Venous CathetersEquipment FailureHemorrhageHeparinHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRenal DialysisThrombosis

Resumen

Low-dose heparin lock has been suggested as an effective and safe catheter lock in hemodialysis. However, whether a low-dose lock is superior to a high-dose heparin lock in preventing catheter-related infections and maintaining catheter patency is inconclusive.

Por qué esto importa para la hirudoterapia

Esta revisión sistemática y metanálisis comparó los sellos de heparina a dosis baja frente a dosis alta para catéteres venosos centrales de hemodiálisis a lo largo de ocho ensayos y 916 pacientes, hallando que los sellos a dosis baja redujeron las complicaciones hemorrágicas y las infecciones relacionadas con el catéter sin comprometer la permeabilidad del catéter. Su relevancia para la ASH es mínima e indirecta: concierne a la farmacología de la heparina y al mantenimiento de catéteres, no a anticoagulantes derivados de sanguijuela ni a la hirudoterapia. Aunque la heparina y la hirudina son anticoagulantes relevantes para la prevención de trombosis, este estudio no involucra sanguijuelas, el secretoma de la sanguijuela ni ninguna aplicación de terapia con sanguijuelas. No existe un vínculo directo defendible con la hirudoterapia.

Citación

Low-dose versus high-dose heparin locks for hemodialysis catheters: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Han et al. · Clinical nephrology, 2016

Contexto clínico relacionado

Añadido a la biblioteca ASH: May 28, 2026 · Última actualización del sitio: June 18, 2026

Este sitio web proporciona información educativa y no constituye consejo médico, diagnóstico ni recomendaciones de tratamiento. La terapia con sanguijuelas medicinales conlleva riesgos clínicamente significativos y debe ser realizada únicamente por profesionales calificados bajo protocolos aprobados institucionalmente. La autorización 510(k) de la FDA para sanguijuelas medicinales se limita a indicaciones específicas; las discusiones sobre uso investigativo y fuera de indicación se señalan correspondientemente. Para orientación médica específica, consulte a un profesional de salud calificado.