Dataset Information

Survival on four compared with three times per week haemodialysis in high ultrafiltration patients: an observational study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The harm caused by the long interdialytic interval in three-times-per-week haemodialysis regimens (3×WHD) may relate to fluid accumulation and associated high ultrafiltration rate (UFR). Four-times-per-week haemodialysis (4×WHD) may offer a solution, but its impact on mortality, hospitalization and vascular access complications is unknown.

Methods

From the AROii cohort of incident in-centre haemodialysis patients, 3×WHD patients with a UFR >10?mL/kg/h were identified. The hazard for the outcomes of mortality, hospitalization and vascular access complications in those who switched to 4×WHD compared with staying on 3×WHD was estimated using a marginal structural Cox proportional hazards model. Adjustment included baseline patient and treatment characteristics with inverse probability weighting used to adjust for time-varying UFR and cardiovascular comorbidities.

Results

From 10 637 European 3×WHD patients, 3842 (36%) exceeded a UFR >10?mL/kg/h. Of these, 288 (7.5%) started 4×WHD and at baseline were more comorbid. Event rates while receiving 4×WHD compared with 3×WHD were 12.6 compared with 10.8 per 100 patient years for mortality, 0.96 compared with 0.65 per year for hospitalization and 14.7 compared with 8.0 per 100 patient years for vascular access complications. Compared with 3×WHD, the unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) for mortality on 4×WHD was 1.05 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78-1.42]. Following adjustment for baseline demographics, time-varying treatment probability and censoring risks, this HR was 0.73 (95% CI 0.50-1.05; P?=?0.095). Despite these adjustments on 4×WHD, the HR for hospitalization remained elevated and vascular access complications were similar to 3×WHD.

Conclusions

This observational study was not able to demonstrate a mortality benefit in patients switched to 4×WHD. To demonstrate the true benefits of 4×WHD requires a large, well-designed clinical trial. Our data may help in the design of such a study.

SUBMITTER: Fotheringham J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7886573 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Survival on four compared with three times per week haemodialysis in high ultrafiltration patients: an observational study.

Fotheringham James J Latimer Nicholas N Froissart Marc M Kronenberg Florian F Stenvinkel Peter P Floege Jürgen J Eckardt Kai-Uwe KU Wheeler David C DC

Clinical kidney journal 20201228 2

<h4>Background</h4>The harm caused by the long interdialytic interval in three-times-per-week haemodialysis regimens (3×WHD) may relate to fluid accumulation and associated high ultrafiltration rate (UFR). Four-times-per-week haemodialysis (4×WHD) may offer a solution, but its impact on mortality, hospitalization and vascular access complications is unknown.<h4>Methods</h4>From the AROii cohort of incident in-centre haemodialysis patients, 3×WHD patients with a UFR >10 mL/kg/h were identified. T ...[more]

PMID: 33623692

Similar Datasets

Project description:In this randomized clinical trial, we aimed to determine whether increasing the frequency of in-center hemodialysis would result in beneficial changes in left ventricular mass, self-reported physical health, and other intermediate outcomes among patients undergoing maintenance hemodialysis.Patients were randomly assigned to undergo hemodialysis six times per week (frequent hemodialysis, 125 patients) or three times per week (conventional hemodialysis, 120 patients) for 12 months. The two coprimary composite outcomes were death or change (from baseline to 12 months) in left ventricular mass, as assessed by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging, and death or change in the physical-health composite score of the RAND 36-item health survey. Secondary outcomes included cognitive performance; self-reported depression; laboratory markers of nutrition, mineral metabolism, and anemia; blood pressure; and rates of hospitalization and of interventions related to vascular access.Patients in the frequent-hemodialysis group averaged 5.2 sessions per week; the weekly standard Kt/V(urea) (the product of the urea clearance and the duration of the dialysis session normalized to the volume of distribution of urea) was significantly higher in the frequent-hemodialysis group than in the conventional-hemodialysis group (3.54±0.56 vs. 2.49±0.27). Frequent hemodialysis was associated with significant benefits with respect to both coprimary composite outcomes (hazard ratio for death or increase in left ventricular mass, 0.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.46 to 0.82; hazard ratio for death or a decrease in the physical-health composite score, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.92). Patients randomly assigned to frequent hemodialysis were more likely to undergo interventions related to vascular access than were patients assigned to conventional hemodialysis (hazard ratio, 1.71; 95% CI, 1.08 to 2.73). Frequent hemodialysis was associated with improved control of hypertension and hyperphosphatemia. There were no significant effects of frequent hemodialysis on cognitive performance, self-reported depression, serum albumin concentration, or use of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents.Frequent hemodialysis, as compared with conventional hemodialysis, was associated with favorable results with respect to the composite outcomes of death or change in left ventricular mass and death or change in a physical-health composite score but prompted more frequent interventions related to vascular access. (Funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00264758.).

Project description:OBJECTIVES:Nocturnal haemodialysis (NHD), characterised by 8-hour sessions??3?times a week, is known to improve clinical parameters in the short term compared with conventional-schedule haemodialysis (HD), generally 3×3.5-4?hours a week. We studied long-term effects of NHD and used patients on conventional HD/haemodiafiltration (HDF) as controls. DESIGN:Four-year prospective follow-up of patients who switched to NHD; we compared patients with patients on HD/HDF using propensity score matching. SETTING:28 Dutch dialysis centres. PARTICIPANTS:We included 159 patients starting with NHD any time since 2004, aged 56.7±12.9 years, with median dialysis vintage 2.3 (0.9-5.1) years. We propensity-score matched 100 patients on NHD to 100 on HD/HDF. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES:Control of hypertension (predialysis blood pressure, number of antihypertensives), phosphate (phosphate, number of phosphate binders), nutritional status and inflammation (albumin, C reactive protein and postdialysis weight) and anaemia (erythropoiesis-stimulating agent (ESA) resistance). RESULTS:Switching to NHD was associated with a non-significant reduction of antihypertensives compared with HD/HDF (OR <2 types 2.17, 95%?CI 0.86 to 5.50, P=0.11); and a prolonged lower need for phosphate binders (OR <2 types 1.83, 95%?CI 1.10 to 3.03, P=0.02). NHD was not associated with significant changes in blood pressure or phosphate. NHD was associated with significantly higher albumin over time compared with HD/HDF (0.70?g/L/year, 95%?CI 0.10 to 1.30, P=0.02). ESA resistance decreased significantly in NHD compared with HD/HDF, resulting in a 33% lower ESA dose in the long term. CONCLUSIONS:After switching to NHD, the lower need for antihypertensives, phosphate binders and ESA persists for at least 4 years. These sustained improvements in NHD contrast significantly with the course of these parameters during continued treatment with conventional-schedule HD and HDF. NHD provides an optimal form of dialysis, also suitable for patients expected to have a long waiting time for transplantation or those convicted to indefinite dialysis.

Project description:BackgroundThe International Diabetes Federation estimates that 16.2% of livebirths in 2017 were affected by hyperglycemia in pregnancy, with 85.1% due to gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). Daily blood glucose monitoring compared with alternate day testing in mild GDM is associated with similar pregnancy outcomes. Data are sparse on the ideal frequency for self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) in mild GDM for glycemic control. A higher HbA1c at late pregnancy is associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes. We sought to evaluate three days compared to one day per week of four-point self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) in gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) controlled by lifestyle changes for glycemic control.MethodsThis randomized trial was conducted from February-December 2018. A total of 106 women with lifestyle-controlled GDM were randomized to three days (SMBG3) or one day (SMBG1) per week of four-point (fasting and two-hours post-meal) SMBG. The primary outcome was the change in the HbA1c level at recruitment and 36-weeks gestation within and across trial arms. The student t-test was used for between-arm analyses and a paired t-test for within-arm analyses.ResultsThe HbA1c level through pregnancy increased significantly in both trial arms: mean increase of 0.21% ± 0.26%, p < 0.001 (SMBG3), and 0.19% ± 0.24%, p < 0.001 (SMBG1), but the 0.02% difference across trial arms was not significant (p = 0.79). Maternal weight gain (3.1 ± 2.1 kg vs. 3.3 ± 3.0 kg, p = 0.72), cesarean delivery (24/52 (48%) vs. 23/53 (43%), RR 1.06, 95% CI: 0.69-1.62, p = 0.77), neonatal birthweight (3.1 ± 0.4 kg vs. 3.0 ± 0.4 kg, p = 0.53) and neonatal intensive care unit admission (4/52 (8%) vs. 3/53 (6%), RR 1.36, 95% CI: 0.32-5.78, p = 0.68) were not significantly different for SMBG3 vs. SMBG1, respectively. Other maternal and neonatal secondary outcomes were not significantly different.ConclusionIn mild GDM, three days compared to one day per week showed a similar HbA1c levels change at 36-weeks gestation. Maternal and neonatal outcomes were also not significantly different. Less frequent monitoring of SMBG as a standard of care in mild GDM deserves further study and consideration.

Dataset Information

Survival on four compared with three times per week haemodialysis in high ultrafiltration patients: an observational study.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Survival on four compared with three times per week haemodialysis in high ultrafiltration patients: an observational study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure