Comparison of the hemodynamic tolerance and the biological parameters of four acetate-free hemodialysis methods

Why is Intradialytic Hypotension the Commonest Complication of Outpatient Dialysis Treatments?

Intradialytic hypotension (IDH) is the most frequent complication of hemodialysis (HD) treatments with a frequency of 10% to 12% for patients with chronic kidney disease attending for outpatient treatments and is associated with both temporary ischemic stress to vital organs, including the heart and brain, and increased patient mortality. Although there have been many different definitions of IDH over the years, an absolute nadir systolic blood pressure (SBP) has the strongest association with patient outcomes. The unifying pathophysiology is one of reduced effective blood volume, resulting in lower plasma tonicity, and if this cannot be adequately compensated for by activation of neurohumeral systems, then arteriolar tone and blood pressure fall. The risk factors for developing IDH are numerous, ranging from patient-related factors, including age and comorbidity with reduced cardiac reserve, to patient compliance with dietary and lifestyle advice, to reactions with the extracorporeal circuit and medications, choice of dialysate composition and temperature, setting of postdialysis target weight, ultrafiltration rate, and profiling. Advances in dialysis machine technology by providing real time estimates of the effective circulating volume and adjusting dialysate composition to maintain vascular tonicity are being developed, but currently require more sophisticated biofeedback loops to be clinically effective in preventing IDH. While awaiting advances in artificial intelligence, the clinician continues to rely on patient education to limit interdialytic weight gains, frequent assessment of the postdialysis target weight, adjusting dialysate composition and temperature, introducing convective therapies to increase thermal losses, and altering dialysis session duration and frequency to reduce ultrafiltration rate requirements.

Updates on hemodialysis techniques with a common denominator: The personalization of the dialytic therapy

Hemodialysis (HD) is a life-saving therapy for patients with end-stage renal disease. In dialyzed patients, the prevalence of multi-morbidity is rising driven by various factors, such as the population aging, the incomplete correction of uremia, and the side effects of the dialysis therapy itself. Each dialyzed patient has their own specific clinical and biochemical problems. It is therefore unthinkable that the same dialysis procedure can be able to meet the needs of every patient on chronic dialysis. We have very sophisticated dialysis machines and different dialysis techniques and procedures beyond conventional HD, such as hemodiafiltration (HDF) with pre- and post-dilution, acetate-free biofiltration (AFB), hemofiltration (HF), and expanded HD. Each of these techniques has its own specific characteristics. To solve some intradialytic clinical issues, such as arterial hypotension and arrhythmias, we have biofeedback systems with automatic regulation of the blood volume, body temperature, arterial pressure, as well as potassium profiling techniques in the dialysis bath. New technical innovations, such as citrate-containing dialysate or heparin-coated membranes, could reduce the risk of bleeding. To better address to patient needs, the strengths and weaknesses of each of these systems must be well-known, in order to have a personalized dialysis prescription for each patient.

Reducing the risk of intradialytic hypotension by altering the composition of the dialysate

Hypotension is the most common complication of outpatient hemodialysis sessions, with a reported prevalence of 4% to 31%, depending on which definition has been used and whether patients are symptomatic and nursing interventions were required. Dialysis centers which mix the dialysate in the dialysis machine have the opportunity to individualize the composition of the dialysate for patients. This permits a choice of dialysate sodium, potassium, calcium, magnesium, bicarbonate, acetate, and citrate concentrations and temperature. Studies have reported a higher intradialytic systolic blood pressure and fewer episodes of intradialytic hypotension when using a higher dialysate sodium, calcium, magnesium concentrations and lower temperature, but no clinical advantage for changing the potassium, bicarbonate, or citrate for acetate concentrations. The introduction of newer technology allowing real time measurements of plasma electrolyte concentrations will potentially allow changing the dialysate composition to reduce the risk of intradialytic hypotension without increasing the risk of positive electrolyte balances.

Techniques to improve intradialytic haemodynamic stability

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Intra-dialytic hypotension (IDH) remains a significant problem for patients undergoing chronic haemodialysis. IDH causes symptoms that degrade patients' experience, compromises dialysis delivery and is strongly associated with adverse patient outcomes. Greater understanding of the link between IDH and dialysis-induced ischaemia in heart and brain has characterized mechanistic pathways, with repeated episodes of ischaemia resulting in organ dysfunction. This review provides updates from published evidence over the last 2 years across the range of potential interventions for IDH.

RECENT FINDINGS

A literature search was undertaken to identify articles published in peer review journals between January 2016 and April 2018 using terms 'intradialytic hypotension,' 'haemodynamic instability,' 'ESRF,' 'renal replacement therapy,' 'dialysis' in Medline and EMBASE and identified 58 references from which 15 articles were included in this review. Interventions included: cooling the dialysate; sodium profiling; convective therapies; strategies to minimize inter-dialytic weight gain (IDWG) and improve accuracy of target weight assessment; prescribing of antihypertensive medications; and carnitine supplementation.

SUMMARY

IDH remains a significant clinical problem. Recent evidence from the last 2 years does not support any major changes to current practice, with cooling of the dialysate and reduction of IDWG remaining cornerstones of management.