Randomised trial on clinical performances and biocompatibility of four high-flux hemodialyzers in two mode treatments: hemodialysis vs post dilution hemodiafiltration.
ABSTRACT: This prospective multicenter randomized comparative cross-over trial aimed at evaluating the influence of hemodialysis vs post-dilution hemodiafiltration with high-flux dialyzers in solute clearance and biocompatibility profile. 32 patients were sequentially dialyzed with Leoceed-21HX, Polypure-22S+, Rexsys-27H and VIE-21A. Primary outcome was ?2-microglobulin removal. Secondary outcomes were (i) extraction of other uremic solutes (ii) parameters of inflammation and nutrition and (iii) comparative quantification of perdialytic albumin losses (using total 'TDC' vs partial 'PDC' collection of dialysate). Significant increases in removal rates of ?2-microglobulin (84.7?±?0.8 vs 71.6?±?0.8?mg/L), myoglobin (65.9?±?1.3 vs 38.6?±?1.3?µg/L), free immunoglobulin light chains Kappa (74.9?±?0.8 vs 55.6?±?0.8?mg/L), ?-trace protein (54.8?±?1.3 vs 26.8?±?1.4?mg/L) and orosomucoid (11.0?±?1.1 vs 6.0?±?1.1?g/L) but not myostatin (14.8?±?1.5 vs 13.0?±?1.5?ng/mL) were observed in HDF compared to HD when pooling all dialyzers. Rexsys and VIE-A use in both HD and HDF subgroups was associated to a better removal of middle/large-size molecules compared to Leoceed and Polypure, except ?2-microglobulin for Rexsys. Inflammatory parameters were unchanged between dialyzers without any interaction with dialysis modality. Mean dialysate albumin loss was comparable between TDC and PDC (1.855 vs 1.826?g/session for TDC and PDC respectively). In addition, a significant difference in albumin loss was observed between dialyzers with the highest value (4.5?g/session) observed using Rexsys. Use of all dialyzers was associated with good removals of the large spectrum of uremic toxins tested and good biocompatibility profiles, with an additional gain in removal performances with HDF. Larger surface area, thinner wall and resultant very high ultrafiltration coefficient of Rexsys should be taken into account in its clear performance advantages.
Project description:Diffusive clearance depends on blood and dialysate flow rates and the overall mass transfer area coefficient (K(o)A) of the dialyzer. Although K(o)A should be constant for a given dialyzer, urea K(o)A has been reported to vary with dialysate flow rate possibly because of improvements in flow distribution. This study examined the dependence of K(o)A for urea, phosphate and ?(2)-microglobulin on dialysate flow rate in dialyzers containing undulating fibers to promote flow distribution and two different fiber packing densities.Twelve stable haemodialysis patients underwent dialysis with four different dialyzers, each used with a blood flow rate of 400 mL/min and dialysate flow rates of 350, 500 and 800 mL/min. Clearances of urea, phosphate and ?(2)-microglobulin were measured and K(o)A values calculated.Clearances of urea and phosphate, but not ?(2)-microglobulin, increased significantly with increasing dialysate flow rate. However, increasing dialysate flow rate had no significant effect on K(o)A or K(o) for any of the three solutes examined, although K(o) for urea and phosphate increased significantly as the average flow velocity in the dialysate compartment increased.For dialyzers with features that promote good dialysate flow distribution, increasing dialysate flow rate beyond 600 mL/min at a blood flow rate of 400 mL/min is likely to have only a modest impact on dialyzer performance, limited to the theoretical increase predicted for a constant K(o)A.
Project description:Sieving coefficients reported in dialyzer data sheets and instructions for use (IFUs) indicate the potential of different solutes to pass across a particular membrane. Despite being measured in vitro, sieving coefficient data are often used as a predictor of the clinical performance of dialyzers. Although standards for the measurement of sieving coefficients exist, the stated methodologies do not offer sufficient guidance to ensure comparability of test results between different dialyzers. The aim of this work was to investigate the relationship between sieving coefficients and published clinical performance indicators for two solutes, albumin loss and beta-2 microglobulin (?2 M) reduction ratio (RR), and to assess the impact of different in vitro test parameters on sieving coefficient values for albumin, ?2 M, and myoglobin. Clinical albumin loss and ?2 M RR for commercially available dialyzers used in hemodialysis (HD) and post-dilution hemodiafiltration (HDF) were extracted from the literature and plotted against sieving coefficients reported in data sheets and IFUs. Albumin, ?2 M, and myoglobin sieving coefficients of a selection of dialyzers were measured per the ISO 8637 standard. The impact of in vitro testing conditions was assessed by changing blood flow rate, ultrafiltration (UF) rate, sampling time, and origin of test plasma. Results showed variation in albumin loss and ?2 M RR for the same sieving coefficient across different dialyzers in HD and HDF. Changes in blood flow rates, UF rates, sampling time, and test plasma (bovine vs. human) caused marked differences in sieving coefficient values for all investigated solutes. When identical testing conditions were used, sieving coefficient values for the same dialyzer were reproducible. Testing conditions have a marked impact on the measurement of sieving coefficients, and values should not be compared unless identical conditions are used. Further, variability in observed clinical data in part reflects the lack of definition of test conditions.
Project description:Compared to high-flux dialysis membranes, novel medium cut-off (MCO) membranes show greater permeability for larger middle molecules.In two prospective, open-label, controlled, randomized, crossover pilot studies, 39 prevalent hemodialysis (HD) patients were studied in four dialysis treatments as follows: study 1, three MCO prototype dialyzers (AA, BB and CC with increasing permeability) and one high-flux dialyzer in HD; and study 2, two MCO prototype dialyzers (AA and BB) in HD and high-flux dialyzers in HD and hemodiafiltration (HDF). Primary outcome was lambda free light chain (λFLC) overall clearance. Secondary outcomes included overall clearances and pre-to-post-reduction ratios of middle and small molecules, and safety of MCO HD treatments.MCO HD provided greater λFLC overall clearance [least square mean (standard error)] as follows: study 1: MCO AA 8.5 (0.54), MCO BB 11.3 (0.51), MCO CC 15.0 (0.53) versus high-flux HD 3.6 (0.51) mL/min; study 2: MCO AA 10.0 (0.58), MCO BB 12.5 (0.57) versus high-flux HD 4.4 (0.57) and HDF 6.2 (0.58) mL/min. Differences between MCO and high-flux dialyzers were consistently significant in mixed model analysis (each P < 0.001). Reduction ratios of λFLC were greater for MCO. Clearances of α1-microglobulin, complement factor D, kappa FLC (κFLC) and myoglobin were generally greater with MCO than with high-flux HD and similar to or greater than clearances with HDF. Albumin loss was moderate with MCO, but greater than with high-flux HD and HDF.MCO HD removes a wide range of middle molecules more effectively than high-flux HD and even exceeds the performance of high-volume HDF for large solutes, particularly λFLC.
Project description:Maintenance hemodialysis (HD) patients universally suffer from excess toxin load. Hemodiafiltration (HDF) has shown its potential in better removal of small as well as large sized toxins, but its efficacy is restricted by inter-compartmental clearance. Intra-dialytic exercise on the other hand is also found to be effective for removal of toxins; the augmented removal is apparently obtained by better perfusion of skeletal muscles and decreased inter-compartmental resistance. The aim of this trial is to compare the toxin removal outcome associated with intra-dialytic exercise in HD and with post-dilution HDF.The main hypothesis of this study is that intra-dialytic exercise enhances toxin removal by decreasing the inter-compartmental resistance, a major impediment for toxin removal. To compare the HDF and HD with exercise, the toxin rebound for urea, creatinine, phosphate, and ?2-microglobulin will be calculated after 2 hours of dialysis. Spent dialysate will also be collected to calculate the removed toxin mass. To quantify the decrease in inter-compartmental resistance, the recently developed regional blood flow model will be employed. The study will be single center, randomized, self-control, open-label prospective clinical research where 15 study subjects will undergo three dialysis protocols (a) high flux HD, (b) post-dilution HDF, (c) high flux HD with exercise. Multiple blood samples during each study session will be collected to estimate the unknown model parameters.This will be the first study to investigate the exercise induced physiological change(s) responsible for enhanced toxin removal, and compare the toxin removal outcome both for small and middle sized toxins in HD with exercise and HDF. Successful completion of this clinical research will give important insights into exercise effect on factors responsible for enhanced toxin removal. The knowledge will give confidence for implementing, sustaining, and optimizing the exercise in routine dialysis care. We anticipate that toxin removal outcomes from intra-dialytic exercise session will be comparable to that obtained by standalone HDF. These results will encourage clinicians to combine HDF with intra-dialytic exercise for significantly enhanced toxin removal.ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01674153.
Project description:During an outbreak of methanol poisonings in the Czech Republic in 2012, we were able to study methanol and formate elimination half-lives during intermittent hemodialysis (IHD) and continuous veno-venous hemodialysis/hemodiafiltration (CVVHD/HDF) and the relative impact of dialysate and blood flow rates on elimination. Data were obtained from 11 IHD and 13 CVVHD/HDF patients. Serum methanol and formate concentrations were measured by gas chromatography and an enzymatic method. The groups were relatively comparable, but the CVVHD/HDF group was significantly more acidotic (mean pH 6.9 vs. 7.1 IHD). The mean elimination half-life of methanol was 3.7 and formate 1.6 h with IHD, versus 8.1 and 3.6 h, respectively, with CVVHD/HDF (both significant). The 54% greater reduction in methanol and 56% reduction in formate elimination half-life during IHD resulted from the higher blood and dialysate flow rates. Increased blood and dialysate flow on the CVVHD/HDF also increased elimination significantly. Thus, IHD is superior to CVVHD/HDF for more rapid methanol and formate elimination, and if CVVHD/HDF is the only treatment available then elimination is greater with greater blood and dialysate flow rates.
Project description:Cool dialysate is often recommended for prevention of intra-dialytic hypotensive episodes in maintenance hemodialysis (HD) patients. However, its effect on toxin removal is not studied. It is known that inter-compartmental resistance is the main barrier for toxin removal. Cool dialysate can potentially increase this resistance by vasoconstriction and thus impair the toxin removal. The aim of this trial is to compare the toxin removal outcome associated with cool vs. warm dialysate.This study is based on the hypothesis that dialysate temperature, a potential maneuver to maintain hemodynamic stability during HD, may influence inter-compartmental resistance and hence, toxin removal. Only stable HD patients will be recruited for this study. The quantum of removed toxins will be assessed by the total spent dialysate, which is a gold standard to quantify the efficacy of a single dialysis session. Collected samples will be analyzed for urea, creatinine, phosphate, β2-microglobulin, and uric acid. The study is a single center, self-controlled, randomized prospective clinical research where 20 study subjects will undergo 2 dialysis sessions: (a) cool dialysis with dialysate at 35.5°C, and (b) warm dialysis with dialysate at 37°C. Pre- and post-dialysis blood samples will be collected to quantify the dialysis adequacy and toxin reduction ratio.This is the first clinical research to investigate the effect of dialysate temperature on removal of both small and large-sized toxins. Successful completion of this research will provide important knowledge pertaining to dialysate temperature prescription. Results can also lead to the hypothesis that cool dialysate may help in by preventing intra-dialytic hypotensive episodes, but prolonged prescription of cool dialysate may lead to comorbidities associated with excess toxin accumulation. The new knowledge will encourage for personalized dialysate temperature profiling.Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier--NCT02064153.
Project description:Dialysis urea removal metrics may not translate into proportional removal efficiency of non-urea solutes. We show that the Kt factor (plasma volume totally cleared of any solutes) differentiates removal efficiency of non-urea solutes in different technologies, and can easily be calculated by instant blood-dialysate collections. We performed mass balances of urea, creatinine, phosphorus and beta2-microglobulin by whole dialysate collection in 4 low-flux and 3 high-flux hemodialysis, 2 high-volume post-hemodiafiltration and 7 short-daily dialysis with the NxStage-One system. Instant dialysate/blood determinations were also performed at different times, and Kt was calculated as the product of the D/P ratio by volume of delivered dialysate plus UF. There were significant differences in single session and weekly Kt (whole dialysate and instant calculations) between methodologies, most notably for creatinine, phosphorus and beta2-microglobulin. Urea Kt messured in balance studies was almost equal to that derived from the usual plasma kinetic model-based Daugirdas' equation (eKt/V) and independent V calculation, indicating full correspondence. Non-urea solute Kt as a fraction of urea Kt (i.e. fractional removal relative to urea) showed significant differences between technologies, indicating non-proportional removal of non-urea solutes and urea. Instant Kt was higher than that in full balances, accounting for concentration disequilibrium between arterial and systemic blood, but measured and calculated quantitative solute removal were equal, as were qualitative Kt comparisons between technologies. Thus, we show that urea metrics may not reliably express removal efficiency of non-urea solutes, as indicated by Kt. Kt can easily be measured without whole dialysate collection, allowing to expand the metrics of dialytic efficiency to almost any non-urea solute removed by dialysis.
Project description:Previous in vitro and clinical studies showed that the urea mass transfer-area coefficient (K(o)A) increased with increasing dialysate flow rate. This observation led to increased dialysate flow rates in an attempt to maximize the delivered dose of dialysis (Kt/V(urea)). Recently, we showed that urea K(o)A was independent of dialysate flow rate in the range 500 to 800 ml/min for dialyzers incorporating features to enhance dialysate flow distribution, suggesting that increasing the dialysate flow rate with such dialyzers would not significantly increase delivered Kt/V(urea).We performed a multi-center randomized clinical trial to compare delivered Kt/V(urea) at dialysate flow rates of 600 and 800 ml/min in 42 patients. All other aspects of the dialysis prescription, including treatment time, blood flow rate, and dialyzer, were kept constant for a given patient. Delivered single-pool and equilibrated Kt/V(urea) were calculated from pre- and postdialysis plasma urea concentrations, and ionic Kt/V was determined from serial measurements of ionic dialysance made throughout each treatment.Delivered Kt/V(urea) differed between centers; however, the difference in Kt/V(urea) between dialysate flow rates of 800 and 600 ml/min was NS by any measure (95% confidence intervals of -0.064 to 0.024 for single-pool Kt/V(urea), -0.051 to 0.023 for equilibrated Kt/V(urea), and -0.029 to 0.099 for ionic Kt/V).These data suggest that increasing the dialysate flow rate beyond 600 ml/min for these dialyzers offers no benefit in terms of delivered Kt/V(urea).
Project description:BACKGROUND:Fluid overload is frequent among hemodialysis (HD) patients. Dialysis therapy itself may favor sodium imbalance from sodium dialysate prescription. As on-line hemodiafiltration (OL-HDF) requires large amounts of dialysate infusion, this technique can expose to fluid accumulation in case of a positive sodium gradient between dialysate and plasma. To evaluate this risk, we have analyzed and compared the fluid status of patients treated with HD or OL-HDF in French NephroCare centers. METHOD:This is a cross-sectional and retrospective analysis of prevalent dialysis patients. Data were extracted from the EUCLID5 data base. Patients were split in 2 groups (HD and OL-HDF) and compared as whole group or matched patients for fluid status criteria including predialysis relative fluid overload (RelFO%) status from the BCM®. RESULTS:2242 patients (age 71 years; female: 39%; vintage: 38 months; Charlson index: 6) were studied. 58% of the cohort were prescribed post-dilution OL-HDF. Comparing the HD and OL-HDF groups, there was no difference between HD and OL-HDF patients regarding the predialysis systolic BP, the interdialytic weight gain, the dialysate-plasma sodium gradient, and the predialysis RelFO%. The stepwise logistic regression did not find dialysis modality (HD or OL-HDF) associated with fluid overload or high predialysis systolic blood pressure. In OL-HDF patients, monthly average convective or weekly infusion volumes per session were not related with the presence of fluid overload. CONCLUSIONS:In this cross-sectional study we did not find association between the use of post-dilution OL-HDF and markers of fluid volume excess. Aligned dialysis fluid sodium concentrations to patient predialysis plasma sodium and regular monitoring of fluid volume status by bioimpedance spectroscopy may have been helpful to manage adequately the fluid status in both OL-HDF and HD patients.
Project description:Bisphenol A (BPA) is an ubiquitous environmental toxin that is also found in dialyzers. Online hemodiafiltration (OL-HDF) more efficiently clears high molecular weight molecules, and this may improve BPA clearance. However, the BPA contents of dialysis membranes may be a source of BPA loading during OL-HDF.A prospective study assessed plasma BPA levels in OL-HDF patients using BPA-free (polynephron) or BPA-containing (polysulfone) dialyzers in a crossover design with two arms, after a run-in OL-HDF period of at least 6 months with the same membrane: 31 patients on polynephron at baseline were switched to polysulfone membranes for 3 months (polynephron-to-polysulfone) and 29 patients on polysulfone were switched to polynephron for 3 months (polysulfone-to-polynephron).After a run-in OL-HDF period of at least 6 months with the same membrane, baseline pre-dialysis BPA was lower in patients on polynephron (8.79±7.97 ng/ml) than in those on polysulfone (23.42±20.38 ng/mL, p<0.01), but still higher than in healthy controls (<2 ng/mL). After 3 months of polynephron-to-polysulfone switch, BPA was unchanged (8.98±7.88 to 11.14±15.98 ng/mL, ns) while it decreased on the polysulfone-to-polynephron group (23.42±20.38 to 11.41±12.38 ng/mL, p<0.01).OL-HDF for 3 months with BPA-free dialyzer membranes was associated to a significant decrease in predialysis BPA levels when compared to baseline BPA levels while on a BPA-containing membrane.