Dataset Information

Comparison of Hemodialysis Using a Medium Cutoff Dialyzer versus Hemodiafiltration: A Controlled Cross-Over Study.

ABSTRACT: Purpose:Conventional hemodialysis (HD) treatment has an acceptable removal of small uremic molecules, but so-called "middle molecules" in the range of 0.5-60 kDa are poorly cleared with HD compared to a native kidney, which may contribute to morbidity in the dialysis population. Hemodiafiltration (HDF) has a better removal of middle molecules compared to HD but is technically demanding and requires well-functioning dialysis access. The newly introduced medium cutoff (MCO) filters have been developed to enhance middle molecule clearance in HD-mode. The aim of this study was to compare reduction ratios (RRs) of molecules with different molecular weights (0.06-150 kDa) during dialysis with MCO dialyzer (used in HD-mode) compared to online-hemodiafiltration (ol-HDF) treatment with a conventional high-flux dialyzer. Patients and Methods:This is a prospective controlled single-center cross-over study, including 16 patients in Malmö, Sweden. All patients had ongoing post-dilution ol-HDF treatment before the study. The study compared reduction ratios of small-, middle-, and large-sized molecules during a single 4h dialysis treatment with post-dilution ol-HDF (Polyflux 210H) to a 4h dialysis treatment with MCO dialyzer (Theranova 500) in HD-mode. Between treatments, the patients had a washout period of at least two weeks of their ordinary HDF treatment to reach their ordinary steady state. Results:ol-HDF had significantly higher RR for cystatin C (13 kDa), compared to MCO (RR 68.1 vs 65.8, p=0.003), during a 4h dialysis treatment (mean convection volume of 24.5 L for HDF, and mean Qb of 324 mL/min for HDF and 323 mL/min for MCO). There was no significant difference in the RR for other middle molecules, or for smaller or larger molecules. Conclusion:Overall, the RRs were comparable for ol-HDF and MCO-HD. There was a slightly higher RR of cystatin C (a small middle molecule) for HDF compared to MCO but no difference in other measured molecules.

SUBMITTER: Lindgren A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7602900 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparison of Hemodialysis Using a Medium Cutoff Dialyzer versus Hemodiafiltration: A Controlled Cross-Over Study.

Lindgren Anna A Fjellstedt Erik E Christensson Anders A

International journal of nephrology and renovascular disease 20201027

<h4>Purpose</h4>Conventional hemodialysis (HD) treatment has an acceptable removal of small uremic molecules, but so-called "middle molecules" in the range of 0.5-60 kDa are poorly cleared with HD compared to a native kidney, which may contribute to morbidity in the dialysis population. Hemodiafiltration (HDF) has a better removal of middle molecules compared to HD but is technically demanding and requires well-functioning dialysis access. The newly introduced medium cutoff (MCO) filters have be ...[more]

PMID: 33149656

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundMyoglobin clearance in acute kidney injury requiring renal replacement therapy is important because myoglobin has direct renal toxic effects. Clinical data comparing different modalities of renal replacement therapy addressing myoglobin clearance are limited. This study aimed to compare two renal replacement modalities regarding myoglobin clearance.MethodsIn this prospective, randomized, single-blinded, single-center trial, 70 critically ill patients requiring renal replacement therapy were randomized 1:1 into an intervention arm using continuous veno-venous hemodialysis with high cutoff dialyzer and a control arm using continuous veno-venous hemodiafiltration postdilution with high-flux dialyzer. Regional citrate anticoagulation was used in both groups to maintain the extracorporeal circuit. The concentrations of myoglobin, urea, creatinine, ?2-microglobulin, interleukin-6 and albumin were measured before and after the dialyzer at 1 h, 6 h, 12 h, 24 h and 48 h after initiating continuous renal replacement therapy.ResultsThirty-three patients were allocated to the control arm (CVVHDF with high-flux dialyzer) and 35 patients to the intervention arm (CVVHD with high cutoff dialyzer). Myoglobin clearance, as a primary endpoint, was significantly better in the intervention arm than in the control arm throughout the whole study period. The clearance values for urea and creatinine were higher in the control arm. There was no measurable albumin clearance in both arms. The clearance data for ?2-microglobulin and interleukin-6 were non-inferior in the intervention arm compared to those for the control arm. Dialyzer lifespan was 57.0 [38.0, 72.0] hours in the control arm and 70.0 [56.75, 72.0] hours in the intervention arm (p?=?0.029).ConclusionsMyoglobin clearance using continuous veno-venous hemodialysis with high cutoff dialyzer and regional citrate anticoagulation is better than that with continuous veno-venous hemodiafiltration with regional citrate anticoagulation.Trial registrationGerman Clinical Trials Registry (DRKS00012407); date of registration 23/05/2017. https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00012407 .

Project description:BackgroundRegional anticoagulation with citrate during renal replacement therapy (RRT) reduces the risk of bleeding, extends dialyzer lifespan and is cost-effective. Therefore, current guidelines recommend its use if patients are not anticoagulated for another reason and if there are no contraindications against citrate. RRT with regional citrate anticoagulation has been established in critically ill patients as continuous veno-venous hemodialysis (CVVHD) to reduce citrate load. However, CVVHD is inferior regarding middle molecule clearance compared to continuous veno-venous hemofiltration (CVVH). The use of a high cut-off dialyzer in CVVHD may thus present an option for middle molecule clearance similar to CVVH. This may allow combining the advantages of both techniques.MethodsIn this prospective, randomized, single-blinded single-center-trial, sixty patients with acute renal failure and established indication for renal replacement therapy were randomized 1:1 into two groups. The control group was put on CVVHD using regional citrate anticoagulation and a high-flux dialyzer, while the intervention group was on CVVHD using regional citrate anticoagulation and a high-cut-off dialyzer. The concentrations of urea, creatinine, β2-microglobulin, myoglobin, interleukin 6 and albumin were measured pre- and post-dialyzer 1, 6, 12, 24 and 48 hours after initiating CVVHD.ResultsMean plasma clearance for β2-microglobulin was 19.6±5.8 ml/min in the intervention group vs. 12.2±3.6 ml/min in the control group (p<0.001). For myoglobin (8.0±4.5 ml/min vs. 0.2±3.6 ml/min, p<0.001) and IL-6 (1.5±4.3 vs. -2.5±3.5 ml/min, p = 0.002) a higher mean plasma clearance using high-cut-off dialyzer could be detected too, but no difference for urea, creatinine and albumin could be observed concerning this parameter between the two groups.ConclusionCVVHD using a high cut-off dialyzer results in more effective middle molecule clearance than that with high-flux dialyzer.Trial registrationGerman Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00005254, registered 26th November 2013).

Project description:Treatment of end stage renal disease patients with short daily hemodialysis has been associated with an improvement in blood pressure. It is unclear from these studies if anti-hypertensive management had been optimized prior to starting short daily hemodialysis. Also, the potential mechanism(s) of blood pressure improvement remain to be fully elucidated.We undertook a randomized cross-over trial in adult hypertensive patients with ESRD treated with conventional hemodialysis to determine: 1) if short-daily hemodialysis is associated with a reduction in systolic blood pressure after a 3-month blood pressure optimization period and; 2) the potential mechanism(s) of blood pressure reduction. Blood pressure was measured using Canadian Hypertension Education Program guidelines. Extracellular fluid volume (ECFV) was assessed with bioimpedance. Serum catecholamines were used to assess the sympathetic nervous system. Interleukin-6 (IL-6) and thiobarbituric acid reactive substances (T-BARS) were used as markers of inflammation and oxidative stress respectively.After a 3-month run-in phase in which systolic blood pressure improved, there was no significant difference in pre-dialysis systolic pressure between short-daily and conventional hemodialysis (p?=?0.39). However, similar blood pressures were achieved on fewer anti-hypertensive medications with short daily hemodialysis compared to conventional hemodialysis (p?=?0.01). Short daily hemodialysis, compared to conventional hemodialysis, was not associated with a difference in dry weight or ECFV (p?=?0.77). Sympathetic nervous system activity as assessed by plasma epinephrine (p?=?1.0) and norepinephrine (p?=?0.52) was also not different. Markers of inflammation (p?=?0.42) and oxidative stress (p?=?0.83) were also similar between the two treatment arms.Patients treated with short daily, compared to conventional hemodialysis, have similar blood pressure control on fewer anti-hypertensive medications. The mechanism(s) by which short daily hemodialysis allows for decreased anti-hypertensive medication use remains unclear but effects on sodium balance and changes in peripheral vascular resistance require further study.ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00759967.

Project description:Background and objectivesExpanded hemodialysis therapy enabled by medium cut-off membranes may promote greater clearance of larger middle molecules that comprise putative uremic solutes than conventional high-flux dialysis. This randomized trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of hemodialysis treatment with a medium cut-off dialyzer.Design, setting, participants, & measurementsClinically stable patients on maintenance hemodialysis were randomized to receive dialysis with either a medium cut-off dialyzer (Theranova 400) or a high-flux dialyzer (Elisio-17H) over 24 weeks of treatment. The primary safety end point was the predialysis serum albumin level after 24 weeks of treatment. The primary efficacy end point was the reduction ratio of free λ light chains at 24 weeks of treatment.ResultsAmong 172 patients on maintenance hemodialysis, mean age was 59±13 years, 61% were men, 40% were Black, and mean dialysis vintage was 5±4 years. Of the 86 patients randomized to each dialyzer, 65 completed the trial in each group. The reduction ratio for the removal of free λ light chains was significantly higher in the Theranova 400 group compared with the Elisio-17H group after 4 weeks (39% versus 20%) and 24 weeks (33% versus 17%; both P<0.001). Among secondary end points, the Theranova 400 group demonstrated significantly larger reduction ratios at 4 and 24 weeks for complement factor D, free κ light chains, TNFα, and β2-microglobulin (P<0.001 for all), but not for IL-6. Predialysis serum albumin levels were similar between groups after 24 weeks (4 g/dl with the Theranova 400 and 4.1 g/dl with the Elisio-17H), consistent with noninferiority of the Theranova 400 dialyzer in maintaining predialysis serum albumin levels after 24 weeks of treatment.ConclusionsHemodialysis therapy with the Theranova 400 dialyzer provides superior removal of larger middle molecules, as exemplified by free λ light chains, compared with a similar size high-flux dialyzer, while maintaining serum albumin level.Clinical trial registry name and registration numberA Multi-Center, Prospective, Randomized, Controlled, Open-Label, Parallel Study to Evaluate the Safety and Efficacy of the Theranova 400 Dialyzer in End Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) Patients, NCT03257410.

Project description:Rationale & objectiveCurrent hemodialysis (HD) treatments have limited ability to clear larger-molecular-weight uremic toxins. Retention is associated with increased symptom burden, low health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and high mortality. Improved clearance, using novel medium cut-off dialyzers, termed expanded HD (HDx), may be associated with improved subjective experience. We have previously developed a dynamic patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) instrument to allow iterative recording to better appreciate the overall burden of disease and assess the impact of therapy changes.Study designSingle-center interventional pilot study.Setting & participants28 patients established on maintenance HD, London, Ontario, Canada.InterventionInitial study consisting of 2-week observation (baseline-conventional high-flux HD) followed by 12 weeks of HDx. HRQoL was assessed using the dynamic PROM instrument thrice weekly (enabled in a dedicated app as the London Evaluation of Illness [LEVIL]). Extension phase; 2-week baseline with 24 weeks of HDx and 8-week washout.OutcomesPrincipal aim was to establish whether HDx therapy was associated with improved HRQoL, evidence of dose-dependant response, and whether effects were durable over time, using LEVIL.ResultsPatients with lower LEVIL scores (<70/100) at baseline showed improvement in overall HRQoL after 8 weeks of therapy with similar carryover effect. General well-being, energy, and sleep quality were improved significantly as a consequence of HDx therapy. There were no detrimental effects of HDx detected in patients with higher baseline HRQoL.LimitationsSmall nonrandomized sample size. The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic interfered with the extension phase.ConclusionsDynamic PROM assessment effectively identified patients with lower HRQoL and higher symptom burden, demonstrating durable time/dose-dependent improvements across a range of symptom domains. The use of this instrument may allow targeted selection of patients most likely to benefit from HDx therapy and assist in monitoring response and defining effect size and treatment duration to allow optimal design of further definitive randomized controlled trials of this newly introduced technology.FundingBaxter Healthcare Canada.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT03640858.

Project description:BackgroundRecent randomized clinical trials have demonstrated beneficial effects of hemodiafiltration (HDF) compared with hemodialysis (HD) on mortality and hemodynamic stability. Data on quality of life in HDF compared with HD is limited.ObjectiveThis study aimed to determine whether patients receiving HD experience improvements in quality of life, hemodynamic and laboratory parameters after switching to HDF.DesignObservational controlled cohort study.Setting & patientsAdult patients receiving maintenance dialysis were followed for 3 months both before and after transfer to a new unit, where they received HDF. Prior to transfer, control patients were already treated by HDF.MethodsQuality of life at baseline and follow-up was measured using the validated minutes to recovery (MR) question. Dialysis data were collected for 3 consecutive sessions monthly; laboratory values were collected monthly. Wilcoxon signed rank test and repeated measures analysis of covariance were used to evaluate pre/post transfer changes and quantile regression to identify predictors of change in recovery time.ResultsOf 227 patients, 82 died, were transplanted, were hospitalized or did not transfer, leaving 123 subjects and 22 controls for analysis. MR did not improve with switching to HDF, although patients with MR > 60 min before transfer experienced a significant decrease in their MR, compared with controls. There was no improvement in intradialytic hypotension with HDF. There were no differences in laboratory values before vs after switch.LimitationsNonrandomized single-center study, including only small numbers of patients and covering a short follow-up period; hemodynamic values only evaluated over 1 week per month; residual kidney function not recorded.ConclusionsIn this Canadian experience of HDF, patients remained stable with respect to several laboratory and dialysis related parameters. Switch to HDF was associated with substantially reduced recovery time in patients with MR > 60 minutes at baseline.

Dataset Information

Comparison of Hemodialysis Using a Medium Cutoff Dialyzer versus Hemodiafiltration: A Controlled Cross-Over Study.

Publications

Comparison of Hemodialysis Using a Medium Cutoff Dialyzer versus Hemodiafiltration: A Controlled Cross-Over Study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets