Randomized Controlled Trial of Individualized Dialysate Cooling for Cardiac Protection in Hemodialysis Patients

Characterizing Cardiac Involvement in Chronic Kidney Disease Using CMR-a Systematic Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The aim of the review was to identify and describe recent advances (over the last 3 years) in cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). We conducted a literature review in line with current guidelines.

RECENT FINDINGS

The authors identified 22 studies. Patients with CKD had left ventricular global and regional dysfunction and adverse remodeling. Stress testing with CMR revealed a reduced stress-response in CKD patients. Native T1 relaxation times (as a surrogate markers of fibrosis) are elevated in CKD patients, proportional to disease duration. Patients with CKD have reduced strain magnitudes and reduced aortic distensibility.

SUMMARY

CMR has diagnostic utility to identify and characterize cardiac involvement in this patient group. A number of papers have described novel findings over the last 3 years, suggesting that CMR has potential to become more widely used in studies in this patient group.

Intradialytic hypotension

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review focuses on recent advances in our understanding of intradialytic hypotension (IDH) and measures that may reduce its frequency.

RECENT FINDINGS

The frequency and severity of IDH predict the risk for adverse clinical outcomes. The highest mortality risks associated with IDH were observed when the intradialytic systolic blood pressure (SBP) nadirs were <90 and <100 mmHg and the predialysis SBP were ≤159 mmHg or ≥160 mmHg, respectively. Interdialytic weight gain (IDWG) ≥3 kg occurs more frequently among patients with IDH. Prolonged and possibly more frequent dialysis, use of biofeedback devices, dialysate cooling and limiting sodium loading are useful measures to reduce the frequency of IDH.

SUMMARY

Frequent IDH is associated with high IDWGs and a poor prognosis. Studies on prolonged dialysis, biofeedback devices and cooled dialysate have yielded promising results. Intradialytic relative blood volume monitoring devices have been investigated in preventing IDH but results are mixed. Administration of a sodium/hydrogen exchange isoform 3 inhibitor increases stool sodium but has not been shown to decrease IDWG. IDH continues to be a significant dialysis complication deserving of further investigation.

Clinical validation of the nursing diagnosis of ineffective protection in haemodialysis patients

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the clinical validity of indicators of the nursing diagnosis of "ineffective protection" in haemodialysis patients.

BACKGROUND

Haemodialysis patients have reduced protection. Studies on the nursing diagnosis of "ineffective protection" are scarce in the literature. The use of indicators to diagnose "ineffective protection" could improve the care of haemodialysis patients. The clinical usefulness of the indicators requires clinical validation.

DESIGN

This was a diagnostic accuracy study.

METHOD

This study assessed a sample of 200 patients undergoing haemodialysis in a reference clinic for nephrology during the first half of 2015. Operational definitions were created for each clinical indicator based on concept analysis and content validation by experts for these indicators. Diagnostic accuracy measurement was performed with latent class analysis with randomised effects.

RESULTS

The clinical indicator of "fatigue" had high sensitivity (p = .999) and specificity (p = 1.000) for the identification of "ineffective protection." Additionally, "maladaptive response to stress" (p = .711) and "coagulation change" (p = .653) were sensitive indicators. The main indicators that showed high specificity were "fever" (p = .987), "increased number of hospitalisations" (p = .911), "weakness" (p = .937), "infected vascular access" (p = .962) and "vascular access dysfunction" (p = .722).

CONCLUSION

A set of nine clinical indicators of "ineffective protection" were accurate and statistically significant for haemodialysis patients. Three clinical indicators showed sensitivity, and six indicators showed specificity.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Accurate measures for nursing diagnoses can help nurses confirm or rule out the probability of the occurrence of "ineffective protection" in patients undergoing haemodialysis.

The impact of dialysis modality and membrane characteristics on intradialytic hypotension

The risk of intradialytic hypotension (IDH) is determined by various factors, among them dialysis modality and dialyzer membrane. We conducted a literature search in PubMed on November 1, 2016 and selected relevant randomized controlled and cross-over trials, and prospective and retrospective cohort studies published in English that investigated the association between IDH and dialysis modality and membrane, respectively. This literature search revealed 669 publications on dialysis modality, 64 on dialysis membrane, and 24 on acetate/bicarbonate dialysate. After omission of duplicate papers and publications outside the scope of this review, we selected 34 papers for inclusion, 19 on dialysis modality, 8 on dialyzer membrane, and 7 on acetate/bicarbonate dialysate. Several strands of evidence indicate that hemodiafiltration (HDF) is associated with lower IDH rates compared to hemodialysis (HD). Data do not show an unequivocal benefit of synthetic vs nonsynthetic dialyzer membranes with respect to IDH occurrence. Acetate-based vs bicarbonate-based dialysate appears to be associated with an increased IDH rate.

Special situations: Intradialytic hypertension/chronic hypertension and intradialytic hypotension

Hypertension is a comorbidity that is present in the majority of end-stage renal disease patients on maintenance hemodialysis. This population is particularly unique because of the dynamic nature of blood pressure (BP) during dialysis. Modest BP decreases are expected in most hemodialysis patients, but intradialytic hypotension and intradialytic hypertension are two special situations that deviate from this as either an exaggerated or paradoxical response to the dialysis procedure. Both of these phenomena are particularly important because they are associated with increased mortality risk compared to patients with modest decreases in BP during dialysis. While the detailed pathophysiology is complex, intradialytic hypotension occurs more often in patients prescribed fast ultrafiltration rates, and reducing this rate is recommended in patients that regularly exhibit this pattern. Patients with intradialytic hypertension have a poorly explained increase in vascular resistance during dialysis, but the consistent associations with extracellular volume overload point toward more aggressive fluid management as the initial management choices for these patients. This up to date review provides the most recent evidence supporting these recommendations as well as the most up to date epidemiologic and mechanistic research studies that have added to this area of dialysis management.

Barriers and facilitators to healthcare professional behaviour change in clinical trials using the Theoretical Domains Framework: a case study of a trial of individualized temperature-reduced haemodialysis

BACKGROUND

Implementing the treatment arm of a clinical trial often requires changes to healthcare practices. Barriers to such changes may undermine the delivery of the treatment making it more likely that the trial will demonstrate no treatment effect. The 'Major outcomes with personalized dialysate temperature' (MyTEMP) is a cluster-randomised trial to be conducted in 84 haemodialysis centres across Ontario, Canada to investigate whether there is a difference in major outcomes with an individualized dialysis temperature (IDT) of 0.5 °C below a patient's body temperature measured at the beginning of each haemodialysis session, compared to a standard dialysis temperature of 36.5 °C. To inform how to deploy the IDT across many haemodialysis centres, we assessed haemodialysis physicians' and nurses' perceived barriers and enablers to IDT use.

METHODS

We developed two topic guides using the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) to assess perceived barriers and enablers to IDT ordering and IDT setting (physician and nurse behaviours, respectively). We recruited a purposive sample of haemodialysis physicians and nurses from across Ontario and conducted in-person or telephone interviews. We used directed content analysis to double-code transcribed utterances into TDF domains, and inductive thematic analysis to develop themes.

RESULTS

We interviewed nine physicians and nine nurses from 11 Ontario haemodialysis centres. We identified seven themes of potential barriers and facilitators to implementing IDTs: (1) awareness of clinical guidelines and how IDT fits with local policies (knowledge; goals), (2) benefits and motivation to use IDT (beliefs about consequences; optimism; reinforcement; intention; goals), (3) alignment of IDTs with usual practice and roles (social/professional role and identity; nature of the behaviour; beliefs about capabilities), (4) thermometer availability/accuracy and dialysis machine characteristics (environmental context and resources), (5) impact on workload (beliefs about consequences; beliefs about capabilities), (6) patient comfort (behavioural regulation; beliefs about consequences; emotion), and (7) forgetting to prescribe or set IDT (memory, attention, decision making processes; emotion).

CONCLUSIONS

There are anticipatable barriers to changing healthcare professionals' behaviours to effectively deliver an intervention within a randomised clinical trial. A behaviour change framework can help to systematically identify such barriers to inform better delivery and evaluation of the treatment, therefore potentially increasing the fidelity of the intervention to increase the internal validity of the trial. These findings will be used to optimise the delivery of IDT in the MyTEMP trial and demonstrate how this approach can be used to plan intervention delivery in other clinical trials.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02628366 . Registered November 16 2015.

The importance of accurate measurement of aortic stiffness in patients with chronic kidney disease and end-stage renal disease

Cardiovascular (CV) disease is the leading cause of death in chronic kidney disease (CKD) and end-stage renal disease (ESRD). A key driver in this pathology is increased aortic stiffness, which is a strong, independent predictor of CV mortality in this population. Aortic stiffening is a potentially modifiable biomarker of CV dysfunction and in risk stratification for patients with CKD and ESRD. Previous work has suggested that therapeutic modification of aortic stiffness may ameliorate CV mortality. Nevertheless, future clinical implementation relies on the ability to accurately and reliably quantify stiffness in renal disease. Pulse wave velocity (PWV) is an indirect measure of stiffness and is the accepted standard for non-invasive assessment of aortic stiffness. It has typically been measured using techniques such as applanation tonometry, which is easy to use but hindered by issues such as the inability to visualize the aorta. Advances in cardiac magnetic resonance imaging now allow direct measurement of stiffness, using aortic distensibility, in addition to PWV. These techniques allow measurement of aortic stiffness locally and are obtainable as part of a comprehensive, multiparametric CV assessment. The evidence cannot yet provide a definitive answer regarding which technique or parameter can be considered superior. This review discusses the advantages and limitations of non-invasive methods that have been used to assess aortic stiffness, the key studies that have assessed aortic stiffness in patients with renal disease and why these tools should be standardized for use in clinical trial work.

Cold dialysis and its impact on renal patients’ health: An evidence-based mini review

Chronic renal disease is associated with advanced age, diabetes, hypertension, obesity, musculoskeletal problems and cardiovascular disease, the latter being the main cause of mortality in patients receiving haemodialysis (HD). Cooled dialysate (35 °C-36 °C) is recently employed to reduce the incidence of intradialytic hypotension in patients on chronic HD. The studies to date that have evaluated cooled dialysate are limited, however, data suggest that cooled dialysate improves hemodynamic tolerability of dialysis, minimizes hypotension and exerts a protective effect over major organs including the heart and brain. The current evidence-based review is dealing with the protective effect of cold dialysis and the benefits of it in aspects affecting patients’ quality of care and life. There is evidence to suggest that cold dialysis can reduce cardiovascular mortality. However, large multicentre randomized clinical trials are urgently needed to provide further supporting evidence in order to incorporate cold dialysis in routine clinical practice.

Bicarbonate Balance and Prescription in ESRD

The optimal approach to managing acid-base balance is less well defined for patients receiving hemodialysis than for those receiving peritoneal dialysis. Interventional studies in hemodialysis have been limited and inconsistent in their findings, whereas more compelling data are available from interventional studies in peritoneal dialysis. Both high and low serum bicarbonate levels associate with an increased risk of mortality in patients receiving hemodialysis, but high values are a marker for poor nutrition and comorbidity and are often highly variable from month to month. Measurement of pH would likely provide useful additional data. Concern has arisen regarding high-bicarbonate dialysate and dialysis-induced alkalemia, but whether these truly cause harm remains to be determined. The available evidence is insufficient for determining the optimal target for therapy at this time.

Sudden Cardiac Death Among Hemodialysis Patients

Hemodialysis patients carry a large burden of cardiovascular disease; most onerous is the high risk for sudden cardiac death. Defining sudden cardiac death among hemodialysis patients and understanding its pathogenesis are challenging, but inferences from the existing literature reveal differences between sudden cardiac death among hemodialysis patients and the general population. Vascular calcifications and left ventricular hypertrophy may play a role in the pathophysiology of sudden cardiac death, whereas traditional cardiovascular risk factors seem to have a more muted effect. Arrhythmic triggers also differ in this group as compared to the general population, with some arising uniquely from the hemodialysis procedure. Combined, these factors may alter the types of terminal arrhythmias that lead to sudden cardiac death among hemodialysis patients, having important implications for prevention strategies. This review highlights current knowledge on the epidemiology, pathophysiology, and risk factors for sudden cardiac death among hemodialysis patients. We then examine strategies for prevention, including the use of specific cardiac medications and device-based therapies such as implantable defibrillators. We also discuss dialysis-specific prevention strategies, including minimizing exposure to low potassium and calcium dialysate concentrations, extending dialysis treatment times or adding sessions to avoid rapid ultrafiltration, and lowering dialysate temperature.

Intestinal Barrier Disturbances in Haemodialysis Patients: Mechanisms, Consequences, and Therapeutic Options

There is accumulating evidence that the intestinal barrier and the microbiota may play a role in the systemic inflammation present in HD patients. HD patients are subject to a number of unique factors, some related to the HD process and others simply to the uraemic milieu but with common characteristic that they can both alter the intestinal barrier and the microbiota. This review is intended to provide an overview of the current methods for measuring such changes in HD patients, the mechanisms behind these changes, and potential strategies that may mitigate these modifications. Lastly, intradialytic exercise is an increasingly employed intervention in HD patients; however the potential implications that this may have for the intestinal barrier are not known; therefore future research directions are also covered.

Dialysate temperature of 36 °C: association with clinical outcomes

Dialysate cooling, either individualized based upon patient body temperature, or to a standardized temperature below 37 °C, has been proposed to minimize hemodynamic insults and improve outcomes among hemodialysis patients. However, low dialysate temperatures (35-35.5 °C) are associated with patient discomfort, and individualized dialysate cooling is difficult to operationalize. Here, we tested whether a standardized dialysate temperature of 36 °C (dT36) was associated with improved clinical outcomes compared to the default temperature of 37 °C (dT37). Because patients with known hemodynamic instability may be selectively prescribed dT36, we minimized selection bias by considering only incident adult in-center hemodialysis patients who, between Jan 2011 and Dec 2013 received their first-ever hemodialysis treatment at a large dialysis organization. Exposure status was based on the treatment order for this first-ever treatment. 313 dT36 patients were identified and propensity-score matched (1:5) to 1565 dT37 controls. Death, hospitalization, and missed hemodialysis treatments were considered from the date of first-ever hemodialysis treatment until the earliest of death, loss to follow-up, crossover (month in which prescribed dialysate temperature was consistent with patient's exposure group for <80% of treatments), or study end (June 2015). During follow-up, rates of death, hospitalization and missed hemodialysis treatments did not differ between the two groups. This study therefor showed no benefit of dT36 vs. dT37 with respect to these clinical outcomes. Our results do not favor conversion to a default dialysate temperature of 36 °C. Individualized dialysate cooling may provide a more reliable approach to achieve the hemodynamic benefits associated with reduced dialysate temperature.

Intradialytic Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging to Assess Cardiovascular Responses in a Short-Term Trial of Hemodiafiltration and Hemodialysis

Hemodynamic stress during hemodialysis (HD) results in recurrent segmental ischemic injury (myocardial stunning) that drives cumulative cardiac damage. We performed a fully comprehensive study of the cardiovascular effect of dialysis sessions using intradialytic cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to examine the comparative acute effects of standard HD versus hemodiafiltration (HDF) in stable patients. We randomly allocated 12 patients on HD (ages 32-72 years old) to either HD or HDF. Patients were stabilized on a modality for 2 weeks before undergoing serial cardiac MRI assessment during dialysis. Patients then crossed over to the other modality and were rescanned after 2 weeks. Cardiac MRI measurements included cardiac index, stroke volume index, global and regional contractile function (myocardial strain), coronary artery flow, and myocardial perfusion. Patients had mean±SEM ultrafiltration rates of 3.8±2.9 ml/kg per hour during HD and 4.4±2.5 ml/kg per hour during HDF (P=0.29), and both modalities provided a similar degree of cooling. All measures of systolic contractile function fell during HD and HDF, with partial recovery after dialysis. All patients experienced some degree of segmental left ventricular dysfunction, with severity proportional to ultrafiltration rate and BP reduction. Myocardial perfusion decreased significantly during HD and HDF. Treatment modality did not influence any of the cardiovascular responses to dialysis. In conclusion, in this randomized, crossover study, there was no significant difference in the cardiovascular response to HDF or HD with cooled dialysate as assessed with intradialytic MRI.

An Update on Intradialytic Cardiac Dysfunction

Cardiac dysfunction is a key factor in the high morbidity and mortality rates seen in hemodialysis (HD) patients. Much of the dysfunction is manifest as adverse changes in cardiac and vascular structure prior to commencing dialysis. This adverse vascular remodeling arises as a dysregulation between pro- and antiproliferative signaling pathways in response to hemodynamic and nonhemodynamic factors. The HD procedure itself further promotes cardiomyopathy by inducing hypotension and episodic regional cardiac ischemia that precedes global dysfunction, fibrosis, worsening symptoms, and increased mortality. Drug-based therapies have been largely ineffective in reversing HD-associated cardiomyopathy, in part due to targeting single pathways of low yield. Few studies have sought to establish natural history and there is no framework of priorities for future clinical trials. Targeting intradialytic cardiac dysfunction by altering dialysate temperature, composition, or ultrafiltration rate might prevent the development of global cardiomyopathy, heart failure, and mortality through multiple pathways. Novel imaging techniques show promise in characterizing the physiological response to HD that is a unique model of repetitive ischemia-reperfusion injury. Reducing HD-associated cardiomyopathy may need a paradigm shift from empirical delivery of solute clearance to a personalized therapy balancing solute and fluid removal with microvascular protection. This review describes the evidence for intradialytic cardiac dysfunction outlining cardioprotective strategies that extend to multiple organs with potential impacts on exercise tolerance, sleep, cognitive function, and quality of life.

The heart and vascular system in dialysis

The heart and the vascular tree undergo major structural and functional changes when kidney function declines and renal replacement therapy is required. The many cardiovascular risk factors and adaptive changes the heart undergoes include left ventricular hypertrophy and dilatation with concomitant systolic and diastolic dysfunction. Myocardial fibrosis is the consequence of impaired angio-adaptation, reduced capillary angiogenesis, myocyte-capillary mismatch, and myocardial micro-arteriopathy. The vascular tree can be affected by both atherosclerosis and arteriosclerosis with both lipid rich plaques and abundant media calcification. Development of cardiac and vascular disease is rapid, especially in young patients, and the phenotype resembles all aspects of an accelerated ageing process and latent cardiac failure. The major cause of left ventricular hypertrophy and failure and the most common problem directly affecting myocardial function is fluid overload and, usually, hypertension. In situations of stress, such as intradialytic hypotension and hypoxaemia, the hearts of these patients are more vulnerable to developing cardiac arrest, especially when such episodes occur frequently. As a result, cardiac and vascular mortality are several times higher in dialysis patients than in the general population. Trials investigating one pharmacological intervention (eg, statins) have shown limitations. Pragmatic designs for large trials on cardio-active interventions are mandatory for adequate cardioprotective renal replacement therapy.

Hemodialysis-induced regional left ventricular systolic dysfunction

Introduction Hemodialysis (HD) patients are under observably elevated cardiovascular mortality. Cardiac dysfunction is closely related to death caused by cardiovascular diseases (CVD). In the general population, repetitive myocardial ischemia induced left ventricular (LV) dysfunction may progress to irreversible loss of contraction step by step, and finally lead to cardiac death. In HD patients, to remove water and solute accumulated from 48 or 72 hours of interdialysis period in a 4-hour HD session will induce myocardial ischemia. In this study, we evaluated the prevalence and potential risk factors associated with HD-induced LV systolic dysfunction and provide some evidences for clinical strategies. Methods We recruited 31 standard HD patients for this study from Fudan University Zhongshan hospital. Echocardiography was performed predialysis, at peak stress during HD (15 minutes prior to the end of dialysis), and 30 minutes after HD. Auto functional imaging (AFI) was used to assess the incidence and persistence of HD-induced regional wall motion abnormalities (RWMAs). Blood samples were drawn to measure biochemical variables. Findings Among totally 527 segments of 31 patients, 93.54% (29/31) patients and 51.40% (276/527) segments were diagnosed as RWMAs. Higher cTnT (0.060 ± 0.030 vs. 0.048 ± 0.015 ng/mL, P = 0.023), phosphate (2.07 ± 0.50 vs. 1.49 ± 0.96 mmol/L, P = 0.001), UFR (11.00 ± 3.89 vs. 8.30 ± 2.66 mL/Kg/h, P = 0.039) and lower albumin (37.83 ± 4.48 vs. 38.38 ± 2.53 g/L, P = 0.050) were found in patients with severe RWMAs (RWMAs in more than 50% segments). After univariate and multivariate analysis, interdialytic weight gain (IDWG) was found as independent risk factor of severe RWMAs (OR = 1.047, 95%CI 1.155-4.732, P = 0.038). Discussion LV systolic dysfunction induced by HD is prevalent in conventional HD patients and should be paid attention to. Patients would benefit from better weight control during interdialytic period to reduce ultrafiltration rate.

Cooling dialysate during in-center hemodialysis: Beneficial and deleterious effects

The use of cooled dialysate temperatures first came about in the early 1980s as a way to curb the incidence of intradialytic hypotension (IDH). IDH was then, and it remains today, the most common complication affecting chronic hemodialysis patients. It decreases quality of life on dialysis and is an independent risk factor for mortality. Cooling dialysate was first employed as a technique to incite peripheral vasoconstriction on dialysis and in turn reduce the incidence of intradialytic hypotension. Although it has become a common practice amongst in-center hemodialysis units, cooled dialysate results in up to 70% of patients feeling cold while on dialysis and some even experience shivering. Over the years, various studies have been performed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of cooled dialysate in comparison to a standard, more thermoneutral dialysate temperature of 37 °C. Although these studies are limited by small sample size, they are promising in many aspects. They demonstrated that cooled dialysis is safe and equally efficacious as thermoneutral dialysis. Although patients report feeling cold on dialysis, they also report increased energy and an improvement in their overall health following cooled dialysis. They established that cooling dialysate temperatures improves hemodynamic tolerability during and after hemodialysis, even in patients prone to IDH, and does so without adversely affecting dialysis adequacy. Cooled dialysis also reduces the incidence of IDH and has a protective effect over major organs including the heart and brain. Finally, it is an inexpensive measure that decreases economic burden by reducing necessary nursing intervention for issues that arise on hemodialysis such as IDH. Before cooled dialysate becomes standard of care for patients on chronic hemodialysis, larger studies with longer follow-up periods will need to take place to confirm the encouraging outcomes mentioned here.