Dataset Information

Pilot study to investigate differences in middle molecules, oxidative stress and markers of peripheral vascular disease in patients treated by high flux haemodialysis and haemodiafiltration.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Dialysis patients have an increased risk of mortality. Recently treatment with haemodiafiltration (HDF) has been reported to reduce mortality, particularly cardiovascular mortality, compared to standard high-flux haemodialysis (HD). However, why HDF may offer a survival advantage remains to be determined. So, we conducted a pilot study to explore differences in middle-molecules, inflammation and markers of vascular disease in patients treated by HD and HDF.

Methods

Observational cross-sectional study measuring serum β2-microglobulin (β2M), Advanced Glycosylation End Products (AGEs) by skin autofluorescence (SAF), oxidative stress with ischaemia modified albumin ratio (IMAR) and peripheral vascular disease assessment using Ankle-Brachial Index (ABI), and arterial stiffness using Cardio-Ankle Vascular Index (CAVI).

Results

We studied 196 patients, mean age 69.1 ± 12.4 years, 172 (87.8%) treated by HD and 24 (12.2%) by HDF. Age, body mass index, co-morbidity and dialysis vintage were not different between HD and HDF groups. Middle molecules; β2M (31±9.9 vs 31.2±10 ug/mL) and SAF (2.99±0.72 vs 3.0±0.84 AU), ABI (1.06±0.05 vs 1.07±0.10) and CAVI (9.34±1.55 vs 9.35±1.23) were not different, but IMAR was higher in the HD patients (38.4±14.8 vs 31.3 ± 17.4, P = 0.035).

Conclusions

In this pilot observational study, we found patients treated by HDF had lower oxidative stress as measured by IMAR, with no differences in middle molecules. Lower oxidative stress would be expected to have diverse protective effects on the cardiovascular system Although we found no differences in ABI and CAVI, future studies are required to determine whether reduced oxidative stress translates into clinically relevant differences over time.

SUBMITTER: Nongnuch A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8494338 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionEnd-stage kidney disease (ESKD) is a major public health problem affecting more than 2 million people worldwide. It is one of the most severe chronic non-communicable diseases. Haemodialysis (HD) is the most common therapeutic option but is also associated with a risk of cardiovascular events, hospitalisation and suboptimal quality of life. Over the past decades, haemodiafiltration (HDF) has become available. Although high-dose HDF has shown some promising survival advantage compared to conventional HD, the evidence remains controversial. A Cochrane systematic review found, in low-quality trials, with various convective forms of dialysis, a reduction in cardiovascular, but not all-cause mortality and the effects on non-fatal cardiovascular events and hospitalisation were uncertain. In contrast, an individual patient data analysis suggested that high-dose HDF reduced both all-cause and cardiovascular mortality compared to HD. In view of these discrepant results, a definitive trial is required to determine whether high-dose HDF is preferable to high-flux HD. The comparison of high-dose HDF with high-flux HD (CONVINCE) study will assess the benefits and harms of high-dose HDF versus a conventional high-flux HD in adults with ESKD.Methods and analysisThis international, prospective, open label, randomised controlled trial aims to recruit 1800 ESKD adults treated with HD in nine European countries. Patients will be randomised 1:1 to high-dose HDF versus continuation of conventional high-flux HD. The primary outcome will be all-cause mortality at 3 years' follow-up. Secondary outcomes will include cause-specific mortality, cardiovascular events, all-cause and infection-related hospitalisations, patient-reported outcomes (eg, health-related quality of life) and cost-effectiveness.Ethics and disseminationThe CONVINCE study will address the question of benefits and harms of high-dose HDF compared to high-flux HD for kidney replacement therapy in patients with ESKD with a focus on survival, patient perspectives and cost-effectiveness.Trial registration numberNetherlands National Trial Register (NTR 7138).

Project description:BackgroundMore than a third of the 65,000 people living with kidney failure in the UK attend a dialysis unit 2-5 times a week to have their blood cleaned for 3-5 h. In haemodialysis (HD), toxins are removed by diffusion, which can be enhanced using a high-flux dialyser. This can be augmented with convection, as occurs in haemodiafiltration (HDF), and improved outcomes have been reported in people who are able to achieve high volumes of convection. This study compares the clinical- and cost-effectiveness of high-volume HDF compared with high-flux HD in the treatment of kidney failure.MethodsThis is a UK-based, multi-centre, non-blinded randomised controlled trial. Adult patients already receiving HD or HDF will be randomised 1:1 to high-volume HDF (aiming for 21+ L of substitution fluid adjusted for body surface area) or high-flux HD. Exclusion criteria include lack of capacity to consent, life expectancy less than 3 months, on HD/HDF for less than 4 weeks, planned living kidney donor transplant or home dialysis scheduled within 3 months, prior intolerance of HDF and not suitable for high-volume HDF for other clinical reasons. The primary outcome is a composite of non-cancer mortality or hospital admission with a cardiovascular event or infection during follow-up (minimum 32 months, maximum 91 months) determined from routine data. Secondary outcomes include all-cause mortality, cardiovascular- and infection-related morbidity and mortality, health-related quality of life, cost-effectiveness and environmental impact. Baseline data will be collected by research personnel on-site. Follow-up data will be collected by linkage to routine healthcare databases - Hospital Episode Statistics, Civil Registration, Public Health England and the UK Renal Registry (UKRR) in England, and equivalent databases in Scotland and Wales, as necessary - and centrally administered patient-completed questionnaires. In addition, research personnel on-site will monitor for adverse events and collect data on adherence to the protocol (monthly during recruitment and quarterly during follow-up).DiscussionThis study will provide evidence of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of HD as compared to HDF for adults with kidney failure in-centre HD or HDF. It will inform management for this patient group in the UK and internationally.Trial registrationISRCTN10997319 . Registered on 10 October 2017.

Project description:BackgroundResidual Kidney Function (RKF) is associated with survival benefits in haemodialysis (HD) but is difficult to measure without urine collection. Middle molecules such as Cystatin C and ?2-microglobulin accumulate in renal disease and plasma levels have been used to estimate kidney function early in this condition. We investigated their use to estimate RKF in patients on HD.DesignCystatin C, ?2-microglobulin, urea and creatinine levels were studied in patients on incremental high-flux HD or hemodiafiltration(HDF). Over sequential HD sessions, blood was sampled pre- and post-session 1 and pre-session 2, for estimation of these parameters. Urine was collected during the whole interdialytic interval, for estimation of residual GFR (GFRResidual = mean of urea and creatinine clearance). The relationships of plasma Cystatin C and ?2-microglobulin levels to GFRResidual and urea clearance were determined.ResultsOf the 341 patients studied, 64% had urine output>100 ml/day, 32.6% were on high-flux HD and 67.4% on HDF. Parameters most closely correlated with GFRResidual were 1/?2-micoglobulin (r2 0.67) and 1/Cystatin C (r2 0.50). Both these relationships were weaker at low GFRResidual. The best regression model for GFRResidual, explaining 67% of the variation, was: GFRResidual = 160.3 · (1/?2m) - 4.2. Where ?2m is the pre-dialysis ?2 microglobulin concentration (mg/L). This model was validated in a separate cohort of 50 patients using Bland-Altman analysis. Areas under the curve in Receiver Operating Characteristic analysis aimed at identifying subjects with urea clearance?2 ml/min/1.73 m2 was 0.91 for ?2-microglobulin and 0.86 for Cystatin C. A plasma ?2-microglobulin cut-off of ?19.2 mg/L allowed identification of patients with urea clearance ?2 ml/min/1.73 m2 with 90% specificity and 65% sensitivity.ConclusionPlasma pre-dialysis ?2-microglobulin levels can provide estimates of RKF which may have clinical utility and appear superior to cystatin C. Use of cut-off levels to identify patients with RKF may provide a simple way to individualise dialysis dose based on RKF.

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:BACKGROUND:Haemodialysis treatment requires reliable vascular access. Optimal access is provided via functional arteriovenous fistula (fistula), which compared with other forms of vascular access, provides superior long-term patency, requires few interventions, has low thrombosis and infection rates and cost. However, it has been estimated that between 20% and 60% of fistulas never mature sufficiently to enable haemodialysis treatment. Mapping blood vessels using imaging technologies before surgery may identify vessels that are most suitable for fistula creation. OBJECTIVES:We compared the effect of conducting routine radiological imaging evaluation for vascular access creation preoperatively with standard care without routine preoperative vessel imaging on fistula creation and use. SEARCH METHODS:We searched Cochrane Kidney and Transplant's Specialised Register to 14 April 2015 through contact with the Trials' Search Co-ordinator using search terms relevant to this review. SELECTION CRITERIA:We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that enrolled adult participants (aged ? 18 years) with chronic or end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) who needed fistulas (both before dialysis and after dialysis initiation) that compared fistula maturation rates relating to use of imaging technologies to map blood vessels before fistula surgery with standard care (no imaging). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS:Two authors assessed study quality and extracted data. Dichotomous outcomes, including fistula creation, maturation and need for catheters at dialysis initiation, were expressed as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Continuous outcomes, such as numbers of interventions required to maintain patency, were expressed as mean differences (MD). We used the random-effects model to measure mean effects. MAIN RESULTS:Four studies enrolling 450 participants met our inclusion criteria. Overall risk of bias was judged to be low in one study, unclear in two, and high in one.There was no significant differences in the number of fistulas that were successfully created (4 studies, 433 patients: RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.28; I² = 76%); the number of fistulas that matured at six months (3 studies, 356 participants: RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.25; I² = 0%); number of fistulas that were used successfully for dialysis (2 studies, 286 participants: RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.28; I² = 0%); the number of patients initiating dialysis with a catheter (1 study, 214 patients: RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.04); and in the rate of interventions required to maintain patency (1 study, 70 patients: MD 14.70 interventions/1000 patient-days, 95% CI -7.51 to 36.91) between the use of preoperative imaging technologies compared with standard care (no imaging). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS:Based on four small studies, preoperative vessel imaging did not improve fistula outcomes compared with standard care. Adequately powered prospective studies are required to fully answer this question.