A review of the impact of L-carnitine therapy on patient functionality in maintenance hemodialysis

Neurocirculatory regulation and adaptations to exercise in chronic kidney disease

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is characterized by pronounced exercise intolerance and exaggerated blood pressure reactivity during exercise. Classic mechanisms of exercise intolerance in CKD have been extensively described previously and include uremic myopathy, chronic inflammation, malnutrition, and anemia. We contend that these classic mechanisms only partially explain the exercise intolerance experienced in CKD and that alterations in cardiovascular and autonomic regulation also play a key contributing role. The purpose of this review is to examine the physiological factors that contribute to neurocirculatory dysregulation during exercise and discuss the adaptations that result from regular exercise training in CKD. Key neurocirculatory mechanisms contributing to exercise intolerance in CKD include augmentation of the exercise pressor reflex, aberrations in neurocirculatory control, and increased neurovascular transduction. In addition, we highlight how some contributing factors may be improved through exercise training, with a specific focus on the sympathetic nervous system. Important areas for future work include understanding how the exercise prescription may best be optimized in CKD and how the beneficial effects of exercise training may extend to the brain.

Impact of Glucose in Peritoneal Dialysis: Saint or Sinner?

Peritoneal dialysis (PD) solutions using glucose as osmotic agent have been used for more than two decades as effective treatment for patients with end-stage renal disease. Although alternative osmotic agents such as amino acids and macromolecular solutions, including polypeptides and glucose polymers, are now available, glucose is still the most widely used osmotic agent in PD. It has been shown to be safe, effective, readily metabolized, and inexpensive. On the other hand, it is widely assumed that exposure of the peritoneal membrane to high glucose concentrations contributes to both structural and functional changes in the dialyzed peritoneal membrane. As in diabetes, glucose, either directly or indirectly through the generation of glucose degradation products or the formation of advanced glycation end products, may contribute to peritoneal membrane failure. Although efforts to reduce glucose toxicity have been made for years, only a few suggestions, such as dual-bag systems with bicarbonate as buffer system, have found broader acceptance. Recently, some interesting new approaches to the problem of glucose-related toxicity have been made, but further investigations will be necessary before they can be used clinically. This review will focus on adverse effects of glucose in PD solutions and summarize different aspects of glucotoxicity and potential therapeutic interventions.

Comparison of the AN69ST Membrane versus Citrate-Enriched Dialysate on Clotting Events during Hemodialysis without Systemic Anticoagulation

BACKGROUND

The optimal management of anticoagulation in hemodialyzed patients with a high risk of bleeding is controversial.

METHODS

We compared premature termination of dialysis caused by clotting events between AN69ST membranes (G1) and 0.8 mmol/L citrate-enriched dialysate (G2). The number of sessions that had increased venous pressure (VP) and variations in urea-reduction ratio (URR) were analyzed.

RESULTS

Six hundred and two sessions were analyzed in 259 patients: 22.4% had sessions that ended prematurely (25% in G1 and 19.1% in G2, p = ns, OR 0.60 [0.34-1.08], p = 0.08). The increase in VP was lower in G2 (23 vs. 70, p < 0.001). URR was higher in G2 (0.56 vs. 0.60, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Clotting events that led to the termination of dialysis were comparable in the 2 groups. However, UUR was better in G2, and the number of patients with increased VP in the sessions was lower in G2.

SHORT SUMMARY

Our study compared the effects of the AN69ST membrane and citrate-enriched dialysate on clotting events during the dialysis of 259 patients with a high risk of bleeding. URR was significantly better and fewer cases of increased VP occurred in the citrate group compared to the AN69 ST group. No significant difference was observed regarding the need to prematurely terminate a dialysis session.

Effect of L-carnitine therapy on patients in maintenance hemodialysis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

L-Carnitine has been used as adjuvant therapy in hemodialysis (HD) patients for many years. However, there is controversy whether L-carnitine supplementation is beneficial. Therefore we performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to assess the effect of L-carnitine on HD patients.

METHODS

RCTs of L-carnitine versus placebo for HD patients were searched from Medline, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. We screened relevant studies according to predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria, and performed meta-analyses using Revman 5.1 software.

RESULTS

Meta-analysis showed L-carnitine could not increase the total score of 36-item Short-Form Health Survey Questionnaire (SF-36) (SMD 0.76, 95 % CI -0.13 to 1.65, P = 0.09), and L-carnitine therapy did not improve serum C-reactive protein (SMD -0.37, 95 % CI -0.88 to 0.14, P = 0.16), oxidized low-density lipoprotein (SMD 0.04, 95 % CI -0.43 to 0.50, P = 0.87), albumin (SMD 0.25, 95 % CI -0.31 to 0.81, P = 0.38;), hemoglobin (SMD 0.23, 95 % CI -0.23 to 0.68, P = 0.33), cholesterol (SMD -0.24, 95 % CI -0.71 to 0.24, P = 0.33), triglycerides (SMD 0.02, 95 % CI -0.4 to 0.44, P = 0.91) or parathyroid hormone (SMD 0.21, 95 % CI -0.35 to 0.76, P = 0.46) levels.

CONCLUSIONS

There is no evidence that L-carnitine can improve the inflammation, oxidative stress, nutrition, anemia, dyslipidemia, hyperparathyroidism status or quality of life in HD patients. However, given methodological limitations and lack of hard endpoints, high-quality, long-term randomized trials are required to fully elucidate the clinical value of L-carnitine administration in hemodialysis patients.

Effects of L-carnitine on dialysis-related hypotension and muscle cramps: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

L-Carnitine is an endogenous compound thought to be helpful in treating patients with dialysis-related hypotension and muscle cramps; however, sufficient evidence for these indications is lacking.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

SETTING & POPULATION

Adult patients with end-stage renal disease receiving long-term hemodialysis.

SELECTION CRITERIA FOR STUDIES

All published English-language reports of randomized placebo-controlled trials of L-carnitine supplementation in adult long-term hemodialysis patients.

INTERVENTION

Supplemental L-carnitine (or placebo) for at least 8 weeks.

OUTCOME

Random-effects pooled odds ratio for intradialytic cramping or hypotension in L-carnitine-treated participants.

RESULTS

Of 317 potentially relevant articles, 7 (total enrollment of 193 patients) met criteria for inclusion. Four articles reported results for both hypotension and cramps, 1 had results for only hypotension, and 2 reported results for only cramps. Using data from all 6 relevant trials, the pooled odds ratio for cramping after L-carnitine supplementation was 0.30 (95% confidence interval, 0.09 to 1.00; P = 0.05). Analysis of the 5 studies examining the response of intradialytic hypotension to l-carnitine supplementation yielded a pooled odds ratio of 0.28 (95% confidence interval, 0.04 to 2.23; P = 0.2).

LIMITATIONS

The small number of available studies yielded limited statistical power. In addition, there was considerable interstudy heterogeneity.

CONCLUSIONS

Although suggestive in the case of muscle cramping, the available evidence does not confirm a beneficial effect of L-carnitine supplementation on dialysis-related muscle cramping or intradialytic hypotension. Additional study in the form of large rigorous randomized trials is needed in both cases.

Propionyl-L-Carnitine Therapy: Effects on Endothelin-1 and Homocysteine Levels in Patients with Peripheral Arterial Disease and End-Stage Renal Disease

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Recent data have addressed the issue of higher levels of homocysteine (Hcy) and endothelin-1 (ET-1) in end-stage renal disease (ESRD) that may be considered an independent predictor for cardiovascular disease. The prevalence of peripheral arterial disease (PAD) in patients with ESRD has been reported to be relevant, highlighting its clinical importance. We aimed to explore the therapeutic role of propionyl-L-carnitine (PLC) in hemodialysis patients with PAD by measuring ankle/brachial index (ABI), ET-1 and Hcy.

DESIGN

Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

METHODS

Sixty-four patients on hemodialysis with chronic renal insufficiency and PAD were assigned to receive either intravenous PLC (600 mg) or placebo 3 times weekly for 12 months. The ABI and plasma levels of ET-1 and Hcy were measured at baseline, 6 and 12 months.

RESULTS

In the PLC-treated group, progressive increases in ABI were observed, while in the placebo group the reverse trend was seen. Highly significant and progressive reductions in plasma levels of ET-1 and Hcy, compared to baseline, were also seen in the PLC-treated group.

CONCLUSIONS

Hemodynamic flow, endothelial profile and Hcy levels were ameliorated by the administration of PLC in hemodialysis patients with ESRD and PAD.

Carnitine and Sports Medicine: Use or Abuse?

Carnitine has important roles in skeletal muscle bioenergetics. Skeletal muscle carnitine deficiency is associated with profound impairment of muscle function. It has thus been natural to ask if carnitine supplementation can improve skeletal muscle function and athletic performance in healthy individuals. Oral carnitine doses of several grams cause no significant clinical toxicity, further encouraging the use of carnitine as a supplement. Despite this strong foundation and 20 years of research, no compelling evidence exists that carnitine supplementation can improve physical performance in healthy subjects. The available data have been reviewed in recent publications. Several key issues are relevant to a potential therapeutic benefit of carnitine supplementation, and addressing these may provide insight into trials of carnitine therapy in healthy subjects: (1) Can carnitine supplementation increase skeletal muscle carnitine content in healthy subjects? Muscle carnitine content is not easily increased with carnitine supplementation. This reflects both the systemic pharmacokinetics of carnitine and the systems controlling transmembrane transport of carnitine in skeletal muscle. (2) How much carnitine is required to support optimal metabolism in skeletal muscle? Data are not available to definitively define the relationship between muscle carnitine content and muscle metabolic function. Extrapolation of data from several models suggests that very low amounts of carnitine are required to support muscle function. (3) Does carnitine supplementation alter energy homeostasis in healthy subjects? Several, but not all, studies suggest that subjects on carnitine supplementation have altered regulation of fuel homeostasis. However, the mechanisms of these changes, the tissues affected, and the relevance of these phenomena to exercise performance are all ill defined. (4) How can changes in performance be assessed in healthy subjects? Most studies have failed to demonstrate an objective performance improvement in healthy subjects taking carnitine. However, these negative studies must be interpreted with caution. Performance studies in athletes are conducted against a background of aggressive training regimens and nutritional interventions. Small changes, which may be very important to the athlete, may be very hard to objectify in the laboratory. Assessments must differentiate between changes in maximal aerobic capacity, ability to sustain effort at varied workloads, and the subject's perception of exertion. The interaction of carnitine supplementation with exercise training may be particularly important on theoretical and experimental bases. Systematic research in each of these areas is required to better understand the physiology, biochemistry, and pharmacology of carnitine supplementation. While data do not allow a conclusion to be drawn that carnitine is beneficial, the negative has not been proven either.