Long-Term Peridialytic Blood Pressure Patterns in Patients Treated by Hemodialysis and Hemodiafiltration

Long-term peridialytic blood pressure changes are related to mortality

BACKGROUND

In chronic haemodialysis (HD) patients, the relationship between long-term peridialytic blood pressure (BP) changes and mortality has not been investigated.

METHODS

To evaluate whether long-term changes in peridialytic BP are related to mortality and whether treatment with HD or haemodiafiltration (HDF) differs in this respect, the combined individual participant data of three randomized controlled trials comparing HD with HDF were used. Time-varying Cox regression and joint models were applied.

RESULTS

During a median follow-up of 2.94 years, 609 of 2011 patients died. As for pre-dialytic systolic BP (pre-SBP), a severe decline (≥21 mmHg) in the preceding 6 months was independently related to increased mortality [hazard ratio (HR) 1.61, P = .01] when compared with a moderate increase. Likewise, a severe decline in post-dialytic diastolic BP (DBP) was associated with increased mortality (adjusted HR 1.96, P < .0005). In contrast, joint models showed that every 5-mmHg increase in pre-SBP and post-DBP during total follow-up was related to reduced mortality (adjusted HR 0.97, P = .01 and 0.94, P = .03, respectively). No interaction was observed between BP changes and treatment modality.

CONCLUSION

Severe declines in pre-SBP and post-DBP in the preceding 6 months were independently related to mortality. Therefore peridialytic BP values should be interpreted in the context of their changes and not solely as an absolute value.

Clinical performance, intermediate and long-term outcomes of high-volume hemodiafiltration in patients with kidney failure

Hemodiafiltration (HDF), in which both convective and diffusion methods are combined, yields an increased overall solute clearance compared with hemodialysis (HD), specifically for medium and larger molecular weight uremic toxins. Due to uncertainty in the treatment effects, the nephrology community still perceives the implementation of HDF and the achievement of high convective volume as complex. In this article, we review practical aspects of the implementation of HDF that can effectively deliver a high-volume HDF therapy and assure clinical performance to most patients. We also present an overview of the impact of high-volume HDF (compared to HD) on a series of relevant biochemical, patient-reported, and clinical outcomes, including uremic toxin removal, phosphate, Inflammation and oxidative stress, hemodynamic stability, cardiac outcomes, nutritional effects, health-related quality of life, morbidity, and mortality.

Why and how high volume hemodiafiltration may reduce cardiovascular mortality in stage 5 chronic kidney disease dialysis patients? A comprehensive literature review on mechanisms involved

Online hemodiafiltration (HDF) is an established renal replacement modality for patients with end stage chronic kidney disease that is now gaining rapid clinical acceptance worldwide. Currently, there is a growing body of evidence indicating that treatment with HDF is associated with better outcomes and reduced cardiovascular mortality for dialysis patients. In this comprehensive review, we provide an update on the potential mechanisms which may improve survival in HDF treated patients. The strongest evidence is for better hemodynamic stability and reduced endothelial dysfunction associated with HDF treatments. Clinically, this is marked by a reduced incidence of intradialytic hypotensive episodes, with a better hemodynamic response to ultrafiltration, mediated by an increase in total peripheral vascular resistance and extra-vascular fluid recruitment, most likely driven by the negative thermal balance associated with online HDF therapy. In addition, endothelial function appears to be improved due to a combination of a reduction of the inflammatory and oxidative stress complex syndrome and exposure to circulating cardiovascular uremic toxins. Reports of reversed cardiovascular remodeling effects with HDF may be confounded by volume and blood pressure management, which are strongly linked to center clinical practices. Currently, treatment with HDF appears to improve the survival of dialysis patients predominantly due to a reduction in their cardiovascular burden, and this reduction is linked to the sessional convection volume exchanged.

Reconsidering adsorption in hemodialysis: is it just an epiphenomenon? A narrative review

Since the first attempt at extracorporeal renal replacement therapy, renal replacement therapy has been constantly improved. In the field of hemodialysis, substantial efforts have been made to improve toxin removal and biocompatibility. The advent of hemodiafiltration (HDF) and, more recently, of mid cut-off membranes have contributed to management of patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). Although several uremic toxins have been discovered, we know little about the clinical impact of their clearance in hemodialysis patients. In addition, a great deal of progress has been made in the areas of filtration and diffusion, but the adsorptive properties of hemodialysis membranes remain under-studied. The mechanism of action of adsorption is based on the attraction between the polymer of the dialysis membrane and the solutes, through hydrophobic interactions, ionic or electrostatic forces, hydrogen bonds or van der Waals forces. Adsorption on the dialysis membrane depends on the membrane surface, pore size, structure and electric load. Its involvement in toxin removal and biocompatibility is significant, and is not just an epiphenomenon. Diffusive and convective properties cannot be improved indefinitely and high permeability membranes, despite their high performance in the clearance of many toxins, have several limitations for long-term use in hemodialysis. This review will discuss why adsorption should be reconsidered and better characterized to improve efficiency and adequacy of dialysis.

Intradialytic systolic blood pressure variation can predict long-term mortality in patients on maintenance hemodialysis

PURPOSE

It is unclear which time-points of intradialytic blood pressure (BP) best predict prognosis. Thus, it is important to assess the association between different time-points of intradialytic BP and prognosis in clinical practice.

METHODS

We recruited patients who underwent hemodialysis from January 2014 to June 2014. Data about dialysis were collected, including intradialytic BP. Cox regression analysis was performed to examine the association between different time-points of intradialytic BP and clinical events, with a follow-up through December 31, 2019. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 216 patients were recruited and 62 (30.7%) patients died (6.1 per 100-person year) during the follow-up. Intradialytic SBP varied greatly in fatalities. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression models indicated that the adjusted hazard ratio for death was 1.80 and 5.06 when intradialytic systolic blood pressure (SBP) variation was analyzed in increments of 20 mmHg. Furthermore, we divided intradialytic SBP variation into three categories: < 15 mmHg, 15 ~ 30 mmHg,  ≥ 30 mmHg. Kaplan-Meier analysis indicated that both all-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality increased significantly for patients with intradialytic SBP variation over 30 mmHg (P = 0.006 and 0.021). Univariate and multivariate Cox regression models indicated that the adjusted hazard ratio for death was 3.78 and 12.62 as intradialytic SBP variation ≥ 30 mmHg vs. intradialytic SBP variation < 15 mmHg.

CONCLUSION

Intradialytic SBP variation, rather than BP of specific intradialytic time-points, has the potential to predict long-term mortality in hemodialysis patients. BP stability is crucial for patients' prognosis.