Dataset Information

Protein-bound solute removal during extended multipass versus standard hemodialysis.

ABSTRACT: Multipass hemodialysis (MPHD) is a recently described dialysis modality, involving the use of small volumes of dialysate which are repetitively recycled. Dialysis regimes of 8 hours for six days a week using this device result in an increased removal of small water soluble solutes and middle molecules compared to standard hemodialysis (SHD). Since protein-bound solutes (PBS) exert important pathophysiological effects, we investigated whether MPHD results in improved removal of PBS as well.A cross-over study (Clinical Trial NCT01267760) was performed in nine stable HD patients. At midweek a single dialysis session was performed with either 4 hours SHD using a dialysate flow of 500 mL/min or 8 hours MPHD with a dialysate volume of 50% of estimated body water volume. Blood and dialysate samples were taken every hour to determine concentrations of p-cresylglucuronide (PCG), hippuric acid (HA), indole acetic acid (IAA), indoxyl sulfate (IS), and p-cresylsulfate (PCS). Dialyser extraction ratio, reduction ratio, and solute removal were calculated for these solutes.Already at 60 min after dialysis start, the extraction ratio in the hemodialyser was a factor 1.4-4 lower with MPHD versus SHD, resulting in significantly smaller reduction ratios and lower solute removal within a single session. Even when extrapolating our findings to 3 times 4 h SHD and 6 times 8 h MPHD per week, the latter modality was at best similar in terms of total solute removal for most protein-bound solutes, and worse for the highly protein-bound solutes IS and PCS. When efficiency was calculated as solute removal/litre of dialysate used, MPHD was found superior to SHD.When high water consumption is a concern, a treatment regimen of 6 times/week 8 h MPHD might be an alternative for 3 times/week 4 h SHD, but at the expense of a lower total solute removal of highly protein-bound solutes.

SUBMITTER: Eloot S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4404563 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Protein-bound solute removal during extended multipass versus standard hemodialysis.

Eloot Sunny S Van Biesen Wim W Axelsen Mette M Glorieux Griet G Pedersen Robert Smith RS Heaf James Goya JG

BMC nephrology 20150418

<h4>Background</h4>Multipass hemodialysis (MPHD) is a recently described dialysis modality, involving the use of small volumes of dialysate which are repetitively recycled. Dialysis regimes of 8 hours for six days a week using this device result in an increased removal of small water soluble solutes and middle molecules compared to standard hemodialysis (SHD). Since protein-bound solutes (PBS) exert important pathophysiological effects, we investigated whether MPHD results in improved removal of ...[more]

PMID: 25896788

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background and objectivesCurrent hemodialysis techniques fail to efficiently remove the protein-bound uremic toxins p-cresyl sulfate and indoxyl sulfate due to their high degree of albumin binding. Ibuprofen, which shares the same primary albumin binding site with p-cresyl sulfate and indoxyl sulfate, can be infused during hemodialysis to displace these toxins, thereby augmenting their removal.Design, setting, participants, & measurementsWe infused 800 mg ibuprofen into the arterial bloodline between minutes 21 and 40 of a conventional 4-hour high-flux hemodialysis treatment. We measured arterial, venous, and dialysate outlet concentrations of indoxyl sulfate, p-cresyl sulfate, tryptophan, ibuprofen, urea, and creatinine before, during, and after the ibuprofen infusion. We report clearances of p-cresyl sulfate and indoxyl sulfate before and during ibuprofen infusion and dialysate concentrations of protein-bound uremic toxins normalized to each patient's average preinfusion concentrations.ResultsWe studied 18 patients on maintenance hemodialysis: age 36±11 years old, ten women, and mean vintage of 37±37 months. Compared with during the preinfusion period, the median (interquartile range) clearances of indoxyl sulfate and p-cresyl sulfate increased during ibuprofen infusion from 6.0 (6.5) to 20.2 (27.1) ml/min and from 4.4 (6.7) to 14.9 (27.1) ml/min (each P<0.001), respectively. Relative median (interquartile range) protein-bound uremic toxin dialysate outlet levels increased from preinfusion 1.0 (reference) to 2.4 (1.2) for indoxyl sulfate and to 2.4 (1.0) for p-cresyl sulfate (each P<0.001). Although median serum post- and predialyzer levels in the preinfusion period were similar, infusion led to a marked drop in serum postdialyzer levels for both indoxyl sulfate and p-cresyl sulfate (-1.0 and -0.3 mg/dl, respectively; each P<0.001). The removal of the nonprotein-bound solutes creatinine and urea was not increased by the ibuprofen infusion.ConclusionsInfusion of ibuprofen into the arterial bloodline during hemodialysis significantly increases the dialytic removal of indoxyl sulfate and p-cresyl sulfate and thereby, leads to greater reduction in their serum levels.

Project description:Rationale & objectiveStudies of patients on maintenance dialysis therapy suggest that standard-dose influenza vaccine (SDV) may not prevent influenza-related outcomes. Little is known about the comparative effectiveness of SDV versus high-dose influenza vaccine (HDV) in this population.Study designCohort study using data from the US Renal Data System.Setting & participants507,552 adults undergoing in-center maintenance hemodialysis between the 2010 to 2011 and 2014 to 2015 influenza seasons.ExposuresSDV and HDV.OutcomesAll-cause mortality, hospitalization due to influenza or pneumonia, and influenza-like illness during the influenza season.Analytic approachPatients were eligible for inclusion in multiple yearly cohorts; thus, our unit of analysis was the influenza patient-season. To examine the relationship between vaccine dose and effectiveness outcomes, we estimated risk differences and risk ratios using propensity score weighting of Kaplan-Meier functions, accounting for a wide range of patient- and facility-level characteristics. For nonmortality outcomes, we used competing-risk methods to account for the high mortality rate in the dialysis population.ResultsWithin 225,215 influenza patient-seasons among adults 65 years and older, 97.4% received SDV and 2.6% received HDV. We observed similar risk estimates for HDV and SDV recipients for mortality (risk difference, -0.08%; 95% CI, -0.85% to 0.80%), hospitalization due to influenza or pneumonia (risk difference, 0.15%; 95% CI, -0.69% to 0.93%), and influenza-like illness (risk difference, 0.00%; 95% CI, -1.50% to 1.08%). Our findings were similar among adults younger than 65 years, as well as within other subgroups defined by influenza season, age group, dialysis vintage, month of influenza vaccination, and vaccine valence.LimitationsResidual confounding and outcome misclassification.ConclusionsThe HDV does not appear to provide additional protection beyond the SDV against all-cause mortality or influenza-related outcomes for adults undergoing hemodialysis. The additional cost and side effects associated with HDV should be considered when offering this vaccine. Future studies of HDV and other influenza vaccine strategies are warranted.

Project description:BackgroundWhen human milk is not available for feeding preterm infants, protein hydrolysate rather than standard cow's milk formulas (with intact proteins) are often used because they are perceived as being tolerated better and less likely to lead to complications. However, protein hydrolysate formulas are more expensive than standard formulas, and concern exists that their use in practice is not supported by high-quality evidence.ObjectivesTo assess the effect of feeding preterm infants with hydrolysed formula (versus standard cow's milk formulas) on the risk of feed intolerance, necrotising enterocolitis, and other morbidity and mortality in preterm infants.Search methodsWe used the standard Cochrane Neonatal search strategy including electronic searches of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2017, Issue 4), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) (to April 2017), as well as conference proceedings and previous reviews.Selection criteriaRandomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials that compared feeding preterm infants with protein hydrolysate versus standard (non-hydrolysed) cow's milk formula.Data collection and analysisTwo review authors assessed trial eligibility and risk of bias and extracted data independently. We analysed treatment effects as described in the individual trials and reported risk ratios and risk differences for dichotomous data, and mean differences for continuous data, with respective 95% confidence intervals (CI). We used a fixed-effect model in meta-analyses and explored potential causes of heterogeneity in sensitivity analyses. We assessed quality of evidence at the outcome level using the GRADE approach.Main resultsWe identified 11 trials for inclusion in the review. All trials were small (total participants 665) and had various methodological limitations including uncertainty about methods to ensure allocation concealment and blinding. Most participants were clinically stable preterm infants of gestational age less than about 34 weeks or birth weight less than about 1750 g. Fewer participants were extremely preterm, extremely low birth weight, or growth-restricted. Most trials found no effects on feed intolerance assessed variously as mean prefeed gastric residual volume, incidence of abdominal distention or other concerning gastrointestinal signs, or time taken to achieve full enteral feeds (meta-analysis was limited because studies used different measures). Meta-analysis found no effect on the risk of necrotising enterocolitis (typical risk ratio 1.10, 95% CI 0.36 to 3.34; risk difference 0.00, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.04; 5 trials, 385 infants) (low quality evidence; downgraded for imprecision and design weaknesses).Authors' conclusionsThe identified trials provide only low quality evidence about the effects of feeding preterm infants with protein hydrolysate versus standard formula. The existing data did not support conclusions that feeding with protein hydrolysate affects the risk of feed intolerance or necrotising enterocolitis. Further large, pragmatic trials are needed to provide more reliable and precise estimates of effectiveness and cost-effectiveness.

Project description:BackgroundWhen human milk is not available for feeding preterm infants, protein hydrolysate, rather than standard cow's milk formulas (with intact proteins), is often used because it is perceived as being tolerated better and less likely to lead to complications. However, protein hydrolysate formulas are more expensive than standard formulas, and concern exists that their use in practice is not supported by high-quality evidence.ObjectivesTo assess the effects of feeding preterm infants hydrolysed formula (vs standard cow's milk formula) on risk of feed intolerance, necrotising enterocolitis, and other morbidity and mortality.Search methodsWe used the standard Cochrane Neonatal search strategy including electronic searches of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2019, Issue 1), in the Cochrane Library; Ovid MEDLINE (1966 to 28 January 2019); Ovid Embase (1980 to 28 January 2019); and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) (28 January 2019), as well as conference proceedings and previous reviews.Selection criteriaRandomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials that compared feeding preterm infants protein hydrolysate versus standard (non-hydrolysed) cow's milk formula.Data collection and analysisTwo review authors assessed trial eligibility and risk of bias and extracted data independently. We analysed treatment effects as described in the individual trials and reported risk ratios and risk differences for dichotomous data, and mean differences for continuous data, with respective 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We used a fixed-effect model in meta-analyses and explored potential causes of heterogeneity in sensitivity analyses. We assessed quality of evidence at the outcome level using the GRADE approach.Main resultsWe identified 11 trials for inclusion in the review. All trials were small (total participants 665) and had various methodological limitations including uncertainty about methods to ensure allocation concealment and blinding. Most participants were clinically stable preterm infants of less than about 34 weeks' gestational age or with birth weight less than about 1750 g. Fewer participants were extremely preterm, extremely low birth weight, or growth restricted. Most trials found no effects on feed intolerance, assessed variously as mean pre-feed gastric residual volume, incidence of abdominal distension or other gastrointestinal signs of concern, or time taken to achieve full enteral feeds (meta-analysis was limited because studies used different measures). Meta-analysis showed no effect on the risk of necrotising enterocolitis (typical risk ratio 1.10, 95% CI 0.36 to 3.34; risk difference 0.00, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.04; 5 trials, 385 infants) (low-certainty evidence; downgraded for imprecision and design weaknesses).Authors' conclusionsThe identified trials provide only low-certainty evidence about the effects of feeding preterm infants protein hydrolysate versus standard formula. Existing data do not support conclusions that feeding protein hydrolysate affects the risk of feed intolerance or necrotising enterocolitis. Additional large, pragmatic trials are needed to provide more reliable and precise estimates of effectiveness and cost-effectiveness.

Dataset Information

Protein-bound solute removal during extended multipass versus standard hemodialysis.

Publications

Protein-bound solute removal during extended multipass versus standard hemodialysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets