Dataset Information

Hemodiafiltration Is Associated With Reduced Inflammation and Increased Bone Formation Compared With Conventional Hemodialysis in Children: The HDF, Hearts and Heights (3H) Study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Patients on dialysis have a high burden of bone-related comorbidities, including fractures. We report a post hoc analysis of the prospective cohort study HDF, Hearts and Heights (3H) to determine the prevalence and risk factors for chronic kidney disease-related bone disease in children on hemodiafiltration (HDF) and conventional hemodialysis (HD).

Methods

The baseline cross-sectional analysis included 144 children, of which 103 (61 HD, 42 HDF) completed 12-month follow-up. Circulating biomarkers of bone formation and resorption, inflammatory markers, fibroblast growth factor-23, and klotho were measured.

Results

Inflammatory markers interleukin-6, tumor necrosis factor-α, and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein were lower in HDF than in HD cohorts at baseline and at 12 months (P < .001). Concentrations of bone formation (bone-specific alkaline phosphatase) and resorption (tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase 5b) markers were comparable between cohorts at baseline, but after 12-months the bone-specific alkaline phosphatase/tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase 5b ratio increased in HDF (P = .004) and was unchanged in HD (P = .44). On adjusted analysis, the bone-specific alkaline phosphatase/tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase 5b ratio was 2.66-fold lower (95% confidence interval, -3.91 to -1.41; P < .0001) in HD compared with HDF. Fibroblast growth factor-23 was comparable between groups at baseline (P = .52) but increased in HD (P < .0001) and remained unchanged in HDF (P = .34) at 12 months. Klotho levels were similar between groups and unchanged during follow-up. The fibroblast growth factor-23/klotho ratio was 3.86-fold higher (95% confidence interval, 2.15-6.93; P < .0001) after 12 months of HD compared with HDF.

Conclusion

Children on HDF have an attenuated inflammatory profile, increased bone formation, and lower fibroblast growth factor-23/klotho ratios compared with those on HD. Long-term studies are required to determine the effects of an improved bone biomarker profile on fracture risk and cardiovascular health.

SUBMITTER: Fischer DC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8418977 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Randomized trials in adults have shown reduced all-cause and cardiovascular mortality on hemodiafiltration (HDF) compared to high-flux hemodialysis (HD), but the mechanisms leading to improved outcomes are not clear. We studied biomarkers of inflammation, oxidative stress, anti-oxidant capacity and endothelial dysfunction in 22 children (13 female, age 8-15 years). All children received HD for at least 3 months, and were then switched to HDF, keeping all dialysis related parameters and dialysis time constant. All the biomarkers of inflammation (ß2-microglobulin, IL-6, IL-10, high sensitive C-reactive protein [hsCRP]), oxidative stress (nitrotyrosine, advanced glycation end-products [AGEs], oxidized low density lipoprotein [ox-LDL] and anti-oxidant capacity) and endothelial dysfunction (asymmetric dimethyl arginine [ADMA], symmetric dimethyl arginine [SDMA]), were comparable between incident and prevalent patients on HD, suggesting that even a short dialysis vintage of 3 months on HD increases inflammation and endothelial stress. After 3 months of HDF therapy there was a significant reduction in ß2-microglobulin (p<0.001), hCRP, ADMA, SDMA, AGEs, ox-LDL (p<0.01 for all) and an increase in total antioxidant capacity (p<0.001) compared to HD. All children were maintained on the same dialyser, dialysis water quality, dialysis time and blood flow speeds suggesting that improved clearances on HDF led to an improved biomarker profile. Even in children with residual renal function there was a significant reduction in ß2 microglobulin, hsCRP, SDMA, ox-LDL and AGEs on HDF compared to HD. Children with a lower blood flow had higher inflammatory status (higher IL-6/IL-10 ratio; p = 0.04, r = -0.43). Children who achieved a higher convective volume (?median 12.8L/m2) had lower ox-LDL (p = 0.02). In conclusion, we have shown that a significant improvement in inflammation, antioxidant capacity and endothelial risk profile is achieved even within a short time (3 months) on HDF compared to HD treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02063776.

Project description:BackgroundProvision of in-centre nocturnal hemodialysis (ICNHD; 6-8 hours thrice weekly) is associated with health benefits, but the economic implications of providing this treatment are unclear.ObjectiveWe conducted a health care costing study comparing ICNHD to in-centre thrice-weekly conventional hemodialysis (CvHD).DesignMicro-costing of both ICNHD and CvHD as practiced at our centre.SettingHemodialysis unit at a tertiary-care hospital in Edmonton.ParticipantsAn informal survey of 2 other Canadian ICNHD programs was conducted to inform practices that may deviate from ours to guide sensitivity analysis.MeasurementsResources consumed for each strategy were determined, and the cost of each unit (CAN $2012) was used to calculate incremental costs of ICNHD and CvHD.MethodsWe focused on resources that differ between strategies (staffing, dialysis materials, and utilities). The reference case considered 1:3 staff to patient ratio; alternate scenarios explored nursing pay grade and ratio, full care vs. self-care dialysis (including training costs), and medication costs.ResultsIn the reference case, ICNHD was $61 more costly per dialysis treatment compared with CvHD ($9,538 per patient per year). Incremental annual costs for staffing, dialysis materials, and utilities were $8,201, $1,193, and $144, respectively. If ICNHD reduces medication use (anti-hypertensives, bone mineral metabolism medications), the incremental cost of ICNHD decreases to $8,620 per patient per year. In a scenario of self-care ICNHD utilizing a staff-to-patient ratio of 1:10, ICNHD is more costly in year 1 ($15,196), but results in cost savings of $2,625 in subsequent years compared with CvHD.LimitationsThe findings of this cost analysis may not be generalizable to other health care systems, including other parts of Canada.ConclusionsCompared to CvHD, provision of ICNHD is more expensive, largely driven by increased staffing costs as patients dialyze longer. Alternate staffing models, including self-care ICNHD with minimal staff, may lead to net cost savings. The incremental cost of treatment should be considered in the context of impact on patient health outcomes, staffing model, and pragmatic factors, such as current capacity for daytime CvHD and the capital costs of new dialysis stations.

Project description:Most patients with end-stage kidney disease value their health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and want to know how it will be affected by their dialysis modality. We extended the findings of two prior clinical trial reports to estimate the effects of frequent compared to conventional hemodialysis on additional measures of HRQoL. The Daily Trial randomly assigned 245 patients to receive frequent (six times per week) or conventional (three times per week) in-center hemodialysis. The Nocturnal Trial randomly assigned 87 patients to receive frequent nocturnal (six times per week) or conventional (three times per week) home hemodialysis. All patients were on conventional hemodialysis prior to randomization, with an average feeling thermometer score of 70 to 75 (a visual analog scale from 0 to 100 where 100 is perfect health), an average general health scale score of 40 to 47 (a score from 0 to 100 where 100 is perfect health), and an average dialysis session recovery time of 2 to 3 hours. Outcomes are reported as the between-treatment group differences in one-year change in HRQoL measures and analyzed using linear mixed effects models. After one year in the Daily Trial, patients assigned to frequent in-center hemodialysis reported a higher feeling thermometer score, better general health, and a shorter recovery time after a dialysis session compared to standard thrice-weekly dialysis. After one year in the Nocturnal Trial, patients assigned to frequent home hemodialysis also reported a shorter recovery time after a dialysis session, but no statistical difference in their feeling thermometer or general health scores compared to standard home dialysis schedules. Thus, patients receiving day or nocturnal hemodialysis on average recovered approximately one hour earlier from a frequent compared to conventional hemodialysis session. Patients treated in an in-center dialysis facility reported better HRQoL with frequent compared to conventional hemodialysis.