Reduced lipid concentrations during four years of dialysis with low molecular weight heparin

Effect of Low Molecular Weight Heparin on Bone Metabolism and Hyperlipidemia in Patients on Maintenance Hemodialysis

The effect of low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) on serum lipid profile in hemodialysis remains controversial and its effect on bone metabolism has not been studied. A crossover study was conducted in 40 patients on stable hemodialysis using unfractionated heparin (UFH) for more than 24 months. These patients were then treated with a LMWH (nadroparin-Ca) for 8 months during hemodialysis and subsequently switched back to UFH for 12 months. Serum lipid profile, biochemical markers for bone metabolism, and bone densitometry (BMD) were monitored at four-month intervals while all medications remained unchanged.

Cholesterol (TC), triglyceride (TG), low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C), lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)), apolipoprotein B (Apo B) were raised in 35%, 29%, 12%, 24% and 24% of patients respectively. High-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (HDL-C) and apolipoprotein A1 (Apo A-1) were reduced in 47% and 9% of patients. Bone-specific alkaline phosphatase (BALP) and intact osteocalcin (OSC), both reflecting osteoblastic activity, were raised in 65% and 94% of patients. Tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase (TRACP) reflecting osteoclastic activity and parathyroid hormone (PTH) were elevated in 35% and 88% of patients. Following LMWH treatment, TC, Tg, Lp(a) and Apo B were reduced by 7%, 30%, 21% and 10% respectively (p<0.05 or <0.01) while Apo A-1 were raised by 7% (p<0.01). Simultaneously, TRACP was reduced by 13% (p<0.05). These biochemical changes were detected soon after 4 months of LMWH administration. Although BMD values in our patients were lower than those of age-matched normal subjects, significant changes were not observed with LMWH treatment. After switching back to UFH for hemodialysis, these biochemical indices reverted to previous values during UFH treatment with a significant higher level in TC and Apo B while serum Apo A-1 remained elevated. Our study suggests LMWH may partially alleviate hyperlipidemia and, perhaps, osteoporosis associated with UFH administration in patients on maintenance hemodialysis.

Use of Single Dose Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin in Long Hemodialysis

Low-molecular-weight (LMW) heparin has recently been used for anti-coagulation in maintenance hemodialysis. The LMW heparin was administered as a single bolus in hemodialysis that usually lasted for four hours or less. The regimen for administering LMW heparin in hemodialysis of longer duration (5 hours or more) is not well documented and manufacturers recommend a supplementary dose equivalent to one-quarter of the initial dose to be given at 4 hours after the commencement of hemodialysis. In this study, we explored whether administering a single dose of LMW heparin is feasible in hemodialysis of longer duration. Maintenance five-hour hemodialysis sessions were performed in nine uremic patients with two different heparin regimens: single dose of LMW heparin (nadroparin) 12,500 ICU AXa at the beginning of dialysis or a priming dose of nadroparin 10,000 ICU AXa at the beginning of dialysis followed by a supplementary dose of nadroparin 2,500 ICU AXa at the beginning of the fifth hour of dialysis. Clots in the airtraps or clotting of the dialyser were not observed in hemodialysis with the single dose heparin regimen. The anti-Xa activities at different time intervals during dialysis were above the therapeutic range of 0.5 U/ml except towards the end of the hemodialysis treatment. There was no difference between anti-Xa activities determined in dialysis sessions using two different regimens of LMW heparin at any individual time interval. The anti-throm-botic effect determined by the area under the time response curve for anti-Xa activity was comparable in the two LMW heparin regimens. Hence, our findings suggest a single bolus dose of LMW heparin (nadroparin) at 12,500 ICU AXa provides adequate, safe, and effective anti-coagulation for five-hour hemodialysis. This practice is convenient and avoids the necessity of administering a double dose of LMW heparin.

Safety of low-molecular-weight heparin compared to unfractionated heparin in hemodialysis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Low molecular weight heparins (LMWH) have been extensively studied and became the treatment of choice for several indications including pulmonary embolism. While their efficacy in hemodialysis is considered similar to unfractionated heparin (UFH), their safety remains controversial mainly due to a risk of bioaccumulation in patients with renal impairment. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the safety of LMWH when compared to UFH for extracorporeal circuit (ECC) anticoagulation.

METHODS

We used Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane central register of controlled trials, Trip database and NICE to retrieve relevant studies with no language restriction. We looked for controlled experimental trials comparing LMWH to UFH for ECC anticoagulation among end-stage renal disease patients undergoing chronic hemodialysis. Studies were kept if they reported at least one of the following outcomes: bleeding, lipid profile, cardiovascular events, osteoporosis or heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. Two independent reviewers conducted studies selection, quality assessment and data extraction with discrepancies solved by a third reviewer. Relative risk and 95% CI was calculated for dichotomous outcomes and mean weighted difference (MWD) with 95% CI was used to pool continuous variables.

RESULTS

Seventeen studies were selected as part of the systematic. The relative risk for total bleeding was 0.76 (95% CI 0.26-2.22). The WMD calculated for total cholesterol was -28.70 mg/dl (95% CI -51.43 to -5.98), a WMD for triglycerides of -55.57 mg/dl (95% CI -94.49 to -16.66) was estimated, and finally LDL-cholesterol had a WMD of -14.88 mg/dl (95% CI -36.27 to 6.51).

CONCLUSIONS

LMWH showed to be at least as safe as UFH for ECC anticoagulation in chronic hemodialysis. The limited number of studies reporting on osteoporosis and HIT does not allow any conclusion for these outcomes. Larger studies are needed to evaluate properly the safety of LMWH in chronic hemodialysis.

Clinical study on low-molecular weight heparin infusion as anticoagulation for nocturnal home haemodialysis

AIM

This study was conducted to evaluate low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH) as anticoagulation for nocturnal home haemodialysis (NHHD). While its longer half-life may cause drug accumulation in frequent dialysis, the essential need of a supplementary intra-dialytic bolus for the sleeping patients also renders LMWH's use impractical.

METHODS

The recruited patients, who were on alternate-day 8 h haemodialysis, were randomized to receive either nadroparin or unfractionated heparin (UFH) for a week. They underwent crossover to receive the alternate anticoagulant in the next week. A nadroparin infusion regimen was adopted to enhance its practicability, which consisted of a loading dose of 35 IU/kg and a continuous infusion of 10 IU/kg per hour for 6 h.

RESULTS

A total of 12 NHHD patients were recruited. With nadroparin infusion, the mean anti-Xa levels at the 2^nd , 4^th , 6^th and 8^th hours of dialysis were 0.46 ± 0.11, 0.55 ± 0.14, 0.61 ± 0.15 and 0.45 ± 0.15 IU/mL respectively. Comparing to UFH, which offered satisfactory anticoagulation according to the activated partial thromboplastin time, nadroparin-treated dialysis achieved similar thrombus scores and dialyser urea/creatinine clearances at the end of haemodialysis. During the post-dialysis period, one patient demonstrated residual LMWH effect (anti-Xa level 0.09 IU/mL) on the next day, whereas none had detectable anti-Xa activities 2 days afterwards upon next dialysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Low-molecular weight heparin infusion is practical and effective as anticoagulation for NHHD. It can be safely used in an alternate-day haemodialysis schedule. A close monitoring for LMWH accumulation is recommended if long dialysis is performed daily.

Low-molecular weight heparin infusion as anticoagulation for haemodialysis

Background

Low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH) is commonly used as an anticoagulant for haemodialysis by a single-bolus injection. However, its application in extended haemodialysis has been infrequently studied. In particular, for nocturnal home haemodialysis patients sleeping throughout treatment, the need for additional intradialytic bolus might render the use of LMWH impractical. To overcome this limitation, we changed traditional bolus injections to continuous infusion. We first tested our method among in-centre 4-h haemodialysis patients to establish a feasible and safe infusion regimen before utilizing it in extended dialyses at home.

Methods

Recruited patients were given nadroparin (standardized at 65 IU/kg) as an anticoagulant for haemodialysis. They were first randomized to receive nadroparin either by bolus injection or infusion. Afterwards, the patients underwent crossover to receive the alternate method of LMWH anticoagulation. The degrees of anticoagulation and bleeding complications were compared.

Results

Sixteen haemodialysis patients were recruited. After nadroparin administration, anti-Xa levels at the first hour were significantly higher by the bolus than the infusion methods (0.68 ± 0.10 versus 0.49 ± 0.10 IU/mL, P < 0.001) and were similar by the second hour (0.56 ± 0.10 versus 0.55 ± 0.11 IU/mL, P = 0.64). At the sixth hour, anti-Xa levels by the infusion method were significantly higher (0.35 ± 0.13 versus 0.25 ± 0.10 IU/mL, P < 0.001), suggesting the infusion approach required a dosage reduction. There were no bleeding events reported in either method.

Conclusions

LMWH infusion is feasible and safe. The method avoids early excessive anticoagulation caused by bolus injection and reduces the LMWH dose. Future studies should be conducted to evaluate LMWH infusion in extended haemodialysis treatment.

Use and safety of unfractionated heparin for anticoagulation during maintenance hemodialysis

Anticoagulation is essential to hemodialysis, and unfractionated heparin (UFH) is the most commonly used anticoagulant in the United States. However, there is no universally accepted standard for its administration in long-term hemodialysis. Dosage schedules vary and include weight-based protocols and low-dose protocols for those at high risk of bleeding, as well as regional anticoagulation with heparin and heparin-coated dialyzers. Adjustments are based largely on clinical signs of under- and overanticoagulation. Risks of UFH use include bleeding, heparin-induced thrombocytopenia, hypertriglyceridemia, anaphylaxis, and possibly bone mineral disease, hyperkalemia, and catheter-associated sepsis. Alternative anticoagulants include low-molecular-weight heparin, direct thrombin inhibitors, heparinoids, and citrate. Anticoagulant-free hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis also are potential substitutes. However, some of these alternative treatments are not as available as or are more costly than UFH, are dependent on country and health care system, and present dosing challenges. When properly monitored, UFH is a relatively safe and economical choice for anticoagulation in long-term hemodialysis for most patients.

Enhancement of the blood compatibility of dialyzer membranes by the physical adsorption of human thrombomodulin (ART-123)

ART-123 is a recombinant soluble human thrombomodulin (hTM) with excellent anticoagulant activity. We focused on improving the blood compatibility of the polysulfone-polyvinylpyrrolidone dialyzer surface by the physical adsorption of ART-123 onto the surface. The blood compatibility of the dialyzer with the hTM adsorbed membrane was evaluated by measuring the differential pressure between the arterial and the venous pressures and by blood parameters during blood circulation. The hTM adsorbed dialyzer membrane inhibited blood clot formation without heparin administration due to the anticoagulant activity of hTM for over 4 h. The physically adsorbed hTM was stable during blood circulation, and it did not affect activated clotting time, which is significant drawback of heparin administration, and blood cell counts of RBC, WBC, or platelets. The physical adsorption of hTM onto the dialyzer membrane will be a simple and safe method to prevent blood coagulation during dialysis instead of heparin administration.

Enoxaparin vs. unfractionated heparin for anticoagulation during continuous veno-venous hemofiltration: a randomized controlled crossover study

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the low molecular weight heparin enoxaparin as anticoagulant in continuous veno-venous hemofiltration (CVVH) compared with unfractionated heparin.

DESIGN

Prospective randomized controlled crossover study.

SETTING

Medical and Surgical Intensive Care Unit of a University Hospital.

PATIENTS

Forty consecutive adult medical and surgical ICU patients with normal anticoagulation parameters requiring CVVH.

INTERVENTION

CVVH was performed with pre-filter fluid replacement at 2500 ml/h and blood flow rates of 180 ml/min. Heparin-treated patients received an initial pre-filter bolus of 30 IU/kg and a maintenance infusion at 7 units/kg h(-1), titrated to achieve a systemic activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) of 40-45 s. Enoxaparin-treated patients received an initial pre-filter bolus of 0.15 mg/kg and a maintenance infusion starting at 0.05 mg/kg h(-1), which was subsequently adjusted to maintain systemic anti-factor Xa activity (anti-Xa) at 0.25-0.30 IU/ml. Each patient received both regimens in a crossover design. Maximum treatment duration for each set was 72 h.

RESULTS

Patients included had a mean APACHE II score of 22 (10-35). Thirty-seven patients completed both study arms. Mean filter life span was 21.7 h (+/- 16.9 h) for heparin and 30.6 h (+/- 25.3) for enoxaparin (p = 0.017, ANOVA for repeated measures). One major bleeding episode occurred during heparin as well as during enoxaparin treatment. Cost analysis showed average daily costs of 270 and 240 euro for heparin and enoxaparin, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Enoxaparin can be safely used for anticoagulation during CVVH resulting in higher filter lifespan compared with unfractionated heparin.

Endocrinology and Dialysis: Management of Lipid Abnormalities Associated with End-Stage Renal Disease

The management of lipid abnormalities in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) remains controversial. Large, well-designed studies investigating the effects of dyslipidemia on cardiovascular (CV) morbidity and mortality and the role of cholesterol lowering drugs in reducing mortality in ESRD patients are lacking. While it seems reasonable to suspect that dyslipidemia and its treatment in ESRD patients will affect CV morbidity and mortality similar to that in the general population, recent studies have suggested that this may not be the case. Furthermore, the pharmacokinetics of lipid lowering drugs are altered in patients with ESRD and must be considered when treating this group of patients. This article reviews the major classes of drugs used to treat dyslipidemia, emphasizing their role in patients with ESRD.

Plasma Lipoprotein Abnormalities in Hemodialysis Patients—Clinical Implications and Therapeutic Guidelines

Patients with advanced stages of chronic kidney disease (CKD) have an increased risk of death from cardiovascular disease (CVD). Dyslipidemias are associated with atherosclerotic vascular changes and the risk of occurrence of acute myocardial infarction in hemodialysis patients. However, management of dyslipidemia in hemodialysis patients does not appear to be actively carried out in routine practice. Presumably, there are three reasons for this reluctance to lipid-lowering in hemodialysis patients. First, there are epidemiological data showing the inverse relationship between cholesterol and mortality rate; a high cholesterol predicts a better survival. Second, lipids are not usually measured using standard fasting serum, but a non-fasting specimen. Third, although hypertriglyceridemia is the most common abnormality, fibrates are contraindicated in patients with renal failure because of a high risk of rhabdomyolysis. These issues are discussed in the current review article. Based on published work, lipid lowering would not increase the death rate if carried out without worsening malnutrition. The National Kidney Foundation K/DOQI Clinical Practice Guidelines recommend a reduction in fasting LDL-C below 100 mg/dL for the prevention of CVD in dialysis patients. Practically, however, the use of non-HDL-C measured by casual blood samples might be sufficient for the risk assessment in many hemodialysis patients. Statins are a good choice for lipid-lowering in dialysis patients. Furthermore, lipoprotein profile might be improved by an inventive use of dialyzer membranes, dialysate solutions, and other dialysis-related medications. For severe hypercholesterolemia, LDL-apheresis is another choice for consideration. Further studies are needed to clearly prove the benefit of lipid reduction in hemodialysis patients and those with CKD at earlier stages.

Activation of Coagulation During Hemodialysis: Effect of Blood Lines Alone and Whole Extracorporeal Circuit

Activation of coagulation during hemodialysis (HD) is a relevant clinical problem, especially when patients at risk of bleeding are treated. However, little is known about the relative contribution of the various components of the circuit to the thrombotic process. Thus, an experimental model was developed that is aimed at evaluating biochemical markers of coagulation activation at different times and sites throughout the HD circuit. A HD blood-tubing set with integrated arterial and venous chambers (cartridge-line set) was used, which was added with the following sampling points: at the beginning of the arterial line (P1), before the blood pump (P2), after the blood pump (P3), and at the end of the venous line (P4). A bypass system allowed us to circulate the blood only into the blood lines for the first 20 min of the extracorporeal circulation. The extracorporeal circuit was rinsed with 1.7 L of heparinized saline (2,500 IU/L) that was completely discarded before patient connection. A continuous administration of unfractionated heparin (500-800 IU/h) without a starting bolus was adopted as a low heparin extracorporeal treatment. Samples were collected before the start of the extracorporeal circulation from the fistula needle (T0P0), after 5 (T1), 10 (T2), and 20 min (T3) from P1, P2, P3, and P4. After 20 min, the blood was returned to the patient using only saline and HD was then started, circulating the blood through the dialyzer. Further samples were obtained from P1 and P4 after 5 (T4) and 210 min (T5). Plasma levels of coagulation activation markers-thrombin-antithrombin complex (TAT) and prothrombin fragment 1 + 2 (F1 + 2)-were evaluated in all the samples in 12 stable HD patients. In each patient, the activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT) was measured at T0P0 and T1-T5 from P1. No significant changes were found at any time as far as F1 + 2 is concerned. However, TAT levels increased over time only after the start of HD, suggesting that the latter test could be more useful in order to detect coagulation activation during HD. The same experiments performed with nonheparin-primed extracorporeal circuit showed similar results. The blood lines used did not significantly activate coagulation during the first 20 min, whereas only 5 min of blood circulation throughout the whole circuit increased TAT values, which still remained lower than previous reports, even after 210 min of treatment.

Factor Xa-activated whole blood clotting time (Xa-ACT) for bedside monitoring of dalteparin anticoagulation during haemodialysis

BACKGROUND

Low molecular weight heparins (LMWH) like dalteparin are increasingly used for anticoagulation during haemodialysis (HD). The available laboratory tests for monitoring LMWH anticoagulation are time-consuming and expensive, and the suitability of the conventional activated clotting time (ACT) is controversial. A simple and cheap bedside test would be useful.

METHODS

We studied the factor Xa-activated whole blood clotting time (Xa-ACT) in vitro and in vivo in nine patients undergoing chronic HD with i.v. dalteparin bolus anticoagulation and compared it with the conventional ACT. Plasma anti-factor Xa (antiXa) activity was determined with a chromogenic assay. Thrombin-antithrombin complexes were measured to detect coagulation activation.

RESULTS

Xa-ACT and ACT were prolonged with rising dalteparin concentration. In vitro, both clotting times were strongly correlated with the antiXa levels (r = 0.94 and 0.89, respectively). Nevertheless, compared with the ACT, the Xa-ACT was considerably more sensitive to the LMWH in vitro (healthy blood: Xa-ACT 90 s/U vs ACT 26 s/U; uraemic blood: Xa-ACT 96 s/U vs ACT 31 s/U) as well as in vivo (Xa-ACT 81 s/U vs ACT 22 s/U) and reflected different intensities of anticoagulation. An initial dalteparin bolus of 80+/-11 U/kg body weight was able to prevent coagulation activation for up to 4 h of HD.

CONCLUSION

For monitoring LMWH anticoagulation the Xa-ACT was superior to the conventional ACT in vitro as well as in vivo during HD. The Xa-ACT can be useful as a LMWH bedside test. The ACT was not sensitive enough to serve as a LMWH monitoring tool.

Pharmacokinetic studies of dalteparin (Fragmin), enoxaparin (Clexane), and danaparoid sodium (Orgaran) in stable chronic hemodialysis patients

BACKGROUND

Low molecular weight heparins (LMWHs) and danaparoid are an alternative to unfractionated heparin (UH) for anticoagulation during hemodialysis. Few data are available concerning their duration of action and whether drug accumulation occurs with continued use. We performed a prospective randomized study of the pharmacokinetics of dalteparin and enoxaparin plus danaparoid in 21 hemodialysis patients.

METHODS

Patients were randomly assigned to administration of enoxaparin, 40 mg; dalteparin, 2,500 U; or danaparoid, 34 U/kg, for 4 weeks. Antifactor Xa levels were measured at the end of weeks 1 and 4 immediately before the injection and at prescribed intervals up to 48 hours postinjection.

RESULTS

No bleeding or thrombotic episodes occurred during the study. Mean antifactor Xa activities 4 hours postinjection were 0.2 +/- 0.035 (SEM), 0.38 +/- 0.028, and 0.54 +/- 0.051 U/mL week 1 and 0.26 +/- 0.038, 0.40 +/- 0.055, and 0.64 +/- 0.050 U/mL week 4 for dalteparin, enoxaparin, and danaparoid, respectively. Both weeks 1 and 4, antifactor Xa activity 3 hours postdose was significantly greater for danaparoid sodium compared with enoxaparin and dalteparin. There were no significant differences between antifactor Xa activity week 4 versus week 1 for enoxaparin and dalteparin; however, danaparoid sodium levels during dialysis were significantly greater after 4 weeks of treatment (P = 0.0328, 1 hour; P = 0.003, 2 hours; P = 0.0128, 3 and 4 hours).

CONCLUSION

Dalteparin and enoxaparin provide adequate anticoagulation for hemodialysis using single bolus injections at relatively low doses. Danaparoid sodium at the current recommended dosage resulted in greater anticoagulation than enoxaparin or dalteparin and may have an

Anticoagulation intensity sufficient for haemodialysis does not prevent activation of coagulation and platelets

BACKGROUND

A single bolus of dalteparin at the start of haemodialysis (HD) may prevent clot formation, but subclinical activation of platelets and coagulation may still occur. Consequently, the relationship between clinical clotting events and activation markers of platelets and coagulation before and during HD is of interest.

METHODS

The effect of tapered doses of dalteparin during 84 HD sessions (4-4.5 h) was prospectively examined in 12 patients. Six of the patients were treated with warfarin. The initial dalteparin dose was reduced to 50% if no clotting was observed. Clinical clotting was evaluated by inspection of the air trap every hour and by inspection of the dialyser after each session. Anti-FXa activity was measured for assessment of dalteparin activity. Markers of activated plasma coagulation, (thrombin-antithrombin (TAT) and prothrombin fragment 1+2 (PF1+2)) and a marker of platelet activation (beta-thromboglobulin, beta-TG), were measured before the start of and after 3 and 4 h of dialysis. Ten pre-dialytic patients with chronic renal failure served as a control group. A total of 230 measurements of each parameter were performed.

RESULTS

An anti-FXa activity above 0.4 IU/ml at the end of HD inhibits overt clot formation for 4 h. This was obtained by an intravenous dalteparin dose of about 5000 IU. TAT and PF1+2 correlated to clinical clotting episodes (r=0.50 and 0.47, P<0.001). beta-TG was not significantly correlated to clinical clotting. All parameters increased during the sessions (TAT, PF1+2, beta-TG, P<0.001). When measurements during clinical clotting episodes were disregarded, all parameters were still markedly increased. Warfarin-treated patients had lower TAT and PF1+2. Dialysis patients had higher beta-TG values than pre-dialytic patients.

CONCLUSION

Despite clinically effective anticoagulation, obtained by dalteparin administration, platelets and coagulation are activated by HD, resulting in a potentially thrombophilic state. Warfarin treatment reduces clinical clot formation and subclinical activation of coagulation.

Dalteparin: an update of its pharmacological properties and clinical efficacy in the prophylaxis and treatment of thromboembolic disease

Dalteparin is a low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) with a mean molecular weight of 5000. Compared with unfractionated heparin (UFH), the drug has markedly improved bioavailability and increased plasma elimination half-life, and exerts a greater inhibitory effect on plasma activity of coagulation factor Xa relative to its effects on other coagulation parameters. Dalteparin also has less lipolytic activity than UFH. Dalteparin 2500U once daily subcutaneously is of similar antithrombotic efficacy to UFH 5000IU twice daily, and 2 studies have shown superiority over UFH 2 or 3 times daily of dalteparin 5000U once daily in patients requiring surgical thromboprophylaxis. After total hip arthroplasty, dalteparin was superior to adjusted-dosage warfarin and was of greater thromboprophylactic efficacy when given for 35 than for 7 days. Intravenous or subcutaneous dalteparin is as effective as intravenous UFH when given once or twice daily in the initial management of established deep vein thrombosis (DVT). The drug is also effective in long term home treatment. Dalteparin has been shown to be effective in combination with aspirin in the management of unstable coronary artery disease (CAD), with composite end-point data from 1 study suggesting benefit for up to 3 months. Current data indicate potential of the drug in the management of acute myocardial infarction (MI). Dalteparin is also of similar efficacy to UFH, with a single bolus dose being sufficient in some patients, in the prevention of clotting in haemodialysis and haemofiltration circuits. Pharmacoeconomic data indicate that overall costs relative to UFH from a hospital perspective can be reduced through the use of dalteparin in patients receiving treatment for venous thromboembolism. Dalteparin has also been shown to be cost effective when used for surgical thromboprophylaxis. Overall, rates of haemorrhagic complications in patients receiving dalteparin are low and are similar to those seen with UFH.

CONCLUSIONS

Dalteparin is effective and well tolerated when given subcutaneously once daily in the prophylaxis and treatment of thromboembolic disease. The simplicity of the administration regimens used and the lack of necessity for laboratory monitoring facilitate home or outpatient treatment and appear to translate into cost advantages from a hospital perspective over UFH or warfarin. Dalteparin also maintains the patency of haemodialysis and haemofiltration circuits, with beneficial effects on blood lipid profiles and the potential for prophylaxis with a single bolus injection in some patients. Data are also accumulating to show dalteparin to be an effective and easily administered alternative to UFH in patients with CAD.

Comparison of low-molecular-weight heparin (enoxaparin sodium) and standard unfractionated heparin for haemodialysis anticoagulation

BACKGROUND

Low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) has been suggested as providing safe, efficient, convenient and possibly more cost-effective anticoagulation for haemodialysis (HD) than unfractionated heparin, with fewer side-effects and possible benefits on uraemic dyslipidaemia.

METHODS

In this prospective, randomized, cross-over study we compared the safety, clinical efficacy and cost effectiveness of Clexane (enoxaparin sodium; Rhône-Poulenc Rorer) with unfractionated heparin in 36 chronic HD patients. They were randomly assigned to either Clexane (1 mg/kg body weight, equivalent to 100 IU) or standard heparin, and followed prospectively for 12 weeks (36 dialyses) before crossing over to the alternate therapy for a further 12 weeks. Heparin anticoagulation was monitored using activated coagulation times.

RESULTS

Dialysis with Clexane resulted in less frequent minor fibrin/clot formation in the dialyser and lines than with heparin (P<0.001), but was accompanied by increased frequency of minor haemorrhage between dialyses (P<0.001). Clexane dose reduction (to a mean of 0.69 mg/kg) eliminated excess minor haemorrhage without increasing clotting frequencies. Mean vascular compression times were similar in both groups. Over 24 weeks, no changes in standard serum lipid profiles were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that a single-dose protocol of Clexane is an effective and very convenient alternative to sodium heparin, but currently direct costs are about 16% more. We recommend an initial dose of 0.70 mg/kg.

A controlled trial of low-molecular-weight heparin (dalteparin) versus unfractionated heparin as anticoagulant during continuous venovenous hemodialysis with filtration

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy, safety, and cost of fixed-dose low-molecular-weight heparin (dalteparin) with adjusted-dose unfractionated heparin as anticoagulant for continuous hemofiltration.

DESIGN

Prospective, randomized, controlled clinical trial.

SETTING

University-affiliated adult intensive care unit

PATIENTS

All patients requiring continuous hemofiltration for acute renal failure or systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) were eligible. Fifty-seven patients were enrolled. Eleven were excluded, seven because of major protocol violations and four died before hemofiltration.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients received continuous venovenous hemodialysis with filtration with prefilter replacement at 500 mL/hr and countercurrent dialysate at 1000 mL/hr. Filters were primed with normal saline containing anticoagulant. Dalteparin-treated patients received a commencement bolus of 20 units/kg and a maintenance infusion at 10 units/kg/hr. Heparin-treated patients received a commencement bolus of 2000-5000 units and a maintenance infusion at 10 units/kg/hr, titrated to achieve an activated partial thromboplastin time in the patient of 70-80 secs.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The primary outcome measure--time to failure of the hemofilter--was compared using survival analysis. Twenty-two patients (13 with acute renal failure and nine with SIRS; total, 41 filters) were randomized to heparin. Twenty-five patients (16 with acute renal failure and nine with SIRS; total, 41 filters) were randomized to dalteparin. Mean (SE) activated partial thromboplastin time in the heparin group was 79 (4.3) secs. Mean (SE) anti-factor-Xa activity in the six patients given dalteparin who were assayed was 0.49 (0.07). Mean (SE) prehemofiltration platelet count was 225 (35.5) x 10(9) for heparin and 178 (18.1) x 10(9) for dalteparin (p = .24, unpaired Student's t-test). Mean (SE) prehemofiltration hemoglobin was 11.4 (0.61) g/dL for heparin and 10.6 (0.38) g/dL for dalteparin (p = .31, unpaired Student's t-test).

PRIMARY OUTCOME

There was no significant difference in the time to failure between the two groups (p = .75, log rank test). For dalteparin, Kaplan-Meier (K-M) mean (SE) time to failure of the hemofilter was 46.8 (5.03) hrs. For heparin, K-M mean (SE) time to failure was 51.7 (7.51) hrs. The 95% CI for difference in mean time to failure was -13 to 23 hrs. The power of this study to detect a 50% change in filter life was >90%.

SECONDARY OUTCOMES

Mean (SE) reduction in platelet count during hemofiltration was 63 (25.8) x 10(9) for heparin and 41.8 (26.6) x 10(9) for dalteparin (p = .57, unpaired Student's t-test). Eight patients given dalteparin and four patients given heparin had screening for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia; three of the dalteparin patients and one of the heparin patients were positive (p = 1.0, Fisher's exact test). There were three episodes of trivial bleeding and two episodes of significant bleeding for dalteparin, and there were three episodes of trivial bleeding and four episodes of significant bleeding for heparin (p = .53, chi-square test). The mean (SE) decrease in hemoglobin concentration during hemofiltration was 0.51 (0.54) g/dL for heparin and 0.28 (0.49) g/dL for dalteparin (p = .75, unpaired Student's t-test). The mean (SE) packed-cell transfusion volume during hemofiltration was 309 (128) mL for heparin and 290 (87) mL for dalteparin (p = .90, unpaired Student's t-test). Daily costs, including coagulation assays, of hemofiltration were approximately 10% higher using dalteparin than with heparin.

CONCLUSIONS

Fixed-dose dalteparin provided identical filter life, comparable safety, but increased total daily cost compared with adjusted-dose heparin. Unfractionated heparin remains our anticoagulant of choice for continuous hemofiltration in intensive care.

A single dose of dalteparin effectively prevents clotting during haemodialysis

BACKGROUND

A single bolus dose of LMW heparin at the start of haemodialysis effectively prevents clot formation in the dialyser and bubble trap. However, there are few studies on the appropriate dosage of LMW heparins in haemodialysis. Therefore we examined the relationship between the anticoagulant effect of dalteparin and clinical clotting during haemodialysis.

METHODS

We performed an open, prospective study on the effect of decreasing doses of dalteparin in 12 haemodialysis patients during a total of 84 sessions (4-4.5 h). The normally applied dose of dalteparin in each patient was reduced by 25% for each session down to 50% of initial dose if no clotting was observed. Clinical clotting (grade 1-4) was evaluated by visual inspection after blood draining of the air trap every hour and by inspection of the dialyser after each session and compared to corresponding values for anti-FXa activity and dialysis time. Blood flow and ultrafiltration rate were kept within narrow limits throughout the study.

RESULTS

No episodes of grade 4 clotting occurred, and no session was interrupted. Eighteen episodes of grade 3 clinical clotting (11%) were observed in patients without warfarin treatment, none with an anti-FXa activity >0.43 IU/ml. Oral warfarin treatment reduced the clinical clotting, and only one grade 3 episode was observed in patients on warfarin therapy. Anti-FXa activity and haemodialysis time were the only factors independently correlated to clotting in a logistic regression model.

CONCLUSION

An anti-FXa activity above 0.4 IU/ml after 4 h of dialysis inhibits significant clotting during haemodialysis. A bolus dose of dalteparin of 70 IU/kg usually seems appropriate, but may be reduced in patients on warfarin treatment. Dialysis time is an independent risk factor for clinical clotting.

Dose titration study of tinzaparin, a low molecular weight heparin, in patients on chronic hemodialysis

The minimal necessary dose of Innohep (IH) (MNDI) (Innohep [tinzaparin], Leo Pharmaceutical Corp., Ballerup, Denmark) was examined in 40 patients switched from conventional heparin ([CH], Leo Pharmaceutical Corp.) to IH and in 13 patients already treated with IH. Clotting in the venous chamber and in the dialyzer was evaluated on a 4 point scale by visual inspection. IH was administrated as a bolus injection into the arterial side of the dialyzer at the beginning of dialysis sessions. The initial dose of IH was 50% of the total dose of CH used before the study (in respective IU). According to clotting in the venous chamber or dialyzer, the dose of IH was titrated by stepwise changes of 500 IU to the lowest possible dose until 3 subsequent dialysis sessions without clotting were obtained. The total dose of CH (bolus and infusion) before switching was 6,162 +/- 2,100 IU. The bleeding time from the cannulation site after dialysis, in 24 patients with A-V fistulas, was 7.1 +/- 2.8 min(triplicates). Eight patients were excluded before achieving the MNDI, 3 due to bleeding not clearly related to heparinization (1 due to gingival bleeding, 1 to epistaxis, and 1 to sugillations), 1 due to alopecia, 2 due to a need of more than 10,000 IU of IH, and 2 patients due to cessation of treatment resulting from anxiety. After switching over, the MNDI amounted to 66 +/- 26% in respective IU. The conversion IH/CH ratio correlated significantly to the blood flow rate and the type of dialyzer. When compared on 3 subsequent sessions before and after switching to IH, no differences were found in the bleeding time after decannulation and in clotting in the venous chamber while dialyzer clotting fell on the visual scale from an average of 0.36 to 0.19 (p < 0.01). No total clot formation was observed during the study. The MNDI correlated positively to the body weight, blood flow rate, and time on dialysis (with the respective coefficients of correlation of r being 0.58, 0.44, and 0.30, p < 0.05) and was also influenced by the type of dialyzer. The average MNDIs for the Hemoflow-FS hollow-fiber (Fresenius, Bad Homburg, Germany), Lundia PRO plate (Gambro, Lund, Sweden), and Polyflux hollow fiber (Gambro) were 2,571, 3,727, and 5,020 IU (p < 0.01, ANOVA). In patients on chronic hemodialysis, IH given as a bolus of 4,250 IU effectively prevented extracorporeal clotting during dialysis, similarly to CH. However, a considerable individual variation in MNDIs not related to the need for CH was observed, and this necessitates individual dosage adjustments to obtain the optimal prevention of clotting with minimal bleeding risk.

Pathogenesis of dyslipoproteinemia in renal insufficiency: the role of lipoprotein lipase and hepatic lipase

The lipoprotein pattern, observed in patients with renal failure, suggests impaired catabolism of triglyceride-rich lipoproteins. This is supported by the findings of numerous studies addressing the pathogenesis of the dyslipoproteinemia of uremia. Aberrant lipoprotein composition, resulting in disturbed substrate characteristics for lipoprotein lipase and unfavourable receptor ligand function, probably constitutes the primary pathology. The structural details of the lipoproteins that are responsible for this dysfunction are not yet established. In this regard, abnormal apolipoprotein pattern and, possibly more important, biological modifications must be taken into consideration. Low activity of lipoprotein lipase does not seem to be a primary pathogenetic factor. However, there is little doubt that it plays a contributory part. The role of hepatic lipase is controversial.

Use of low-dose low molecular weight heparin in hemodialysis

We investigated the lowest effective dosage of low molecular weight (LMW) heparin for hemodialysis in comparison to unfractionated (UF) heparin. Initial hemodialysis sessions were undertaken in 10 uremic patients with UF heparin of the dose habitually required for each patient. Four-hour hemodialysis sessions were then undertaken with LMW heparin (nadroparin) in a single bolus (200 anti-Xa unit Institut Choay/kg [aXaU IC/kg], 175 aXaU IC/kg, 150 aXaU IC/kg, or 125 aXaU IC/kg; two sessions for each dosage). Anti-Xa levels and activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT) were monitored hourly during dialysis. Fiber bundle volume of dialyzer was measured before and after dialysis. Urea clearance was determined at the onset and completion of dialysis. There were no episodes of excessive bleeding, clotting of dialyzers, or clots in air traps with UF heparin or LMW heparin. A 35% increase in APTT above baseline was observed in all dialysis sessions 1 hour after LMW heparin bolus, but the APTT decreased rapidly thereafter. The anti-Xa levels exceeded 0.5 U/mL for all sessions using LMW heparin irrespective of the dosage. No significant reduction of urea clearance was found in dialysis with either UF or LMW heparin. No reduction of fiber bundle volume of dialyzer was observed in dialysis with either UF or LMW heparin, although a small reduction (3%) was observed in dialysis with LMW heparin at 125 aXaU IC/kg. We concluded that the use of LMW heparin for hemodialysis is safe and effective as compared with UF heparin. The lowest effective dosage can be reduced to 125 aXaU IC/kg in high-risk patients to reduce hemorrhagic complications.

A cross-over study of a new low molecular weight heparin (Logiparin) in hemodialysis

The safety and effectiveness of a low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) of 4500 +/- 1500 Daltons were evaluated in eight hemodialysis (HD) patients, in comparison with unfractionated heparin (UFH). In phase A of the study 3000 +/- 500 anti-factor Xa (AFXa) IU of LMWH were administered in bolus for the three consecutive HD sessions of a week. In phase B, 10000 +/- 2500 IU of UFH were administered to the same patients for the same time. Were observed no significant differences in hematocrit (Ht), platelets (Pt), fibronogen (FG) and prothrombin time (PT). Whole blood activated coagulation time (WBACT) was more prolonged with LMWH, 24 and 48 hours (start of next session) after administration (p < 0.05), and less prolonged at 5, 60, 120, 180, 240 min compared to UFH (p < 0.001). The activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT) and AFXa activity were more prolonged with UFH at 60 and 240 min (p < 0.001). The clinical effectiveness of the two preparations was similar as judged by thrombus formation and compression time. In conclusion, the present study found no real differences between LMWH and UFH, except for prolongation of WBACT 24 and 48 hours after the administration of LWMH. This probably indicates a cumulative effect of the LMWH and needs further investigation.

Lipid-lowering therapy in patients with renal disease

A growing number of clinical trials have examined the effects of different lipid lowering strategies in patients with renal disease. We carried out a meta-analysis to compare and contrast the relative efficacy of various antilipemic therapies in different renal disease settings. Studies that investigated one or more therapies designed to lower serum lipids were combined using weighted multiple linear regression. The analysis adjusted treatment effects for differences in baseline lipid levels and possible placebo effects. The results showed that antilipemic therapies generally had similar effects on lipids in different renal disease settings. In nephrotic syndrome the greatest and most consistent reductions in low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL) were seen with 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl co-enzyme A (HMG-CoA) reductase inhibitors (regression coefficient with 95% confidence interval in mg/dl = -63, -79 to -46). Similar results were seen for LDL in renal transplant (-51, -57 to -45), renal insufficiency (-62, -82 to -42), hemodialysis (-65, -80 to -50) and continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) patients (-84, -104 to -64). Fibric acid analogues had less effect on LDL, but caused greater reductions in triglycerides: -132, -178 to -87, in nephrotic syndrome; -69, -93 to -45 in transplant: -107, -169 to -45 in renal insufficiency; -72, -120 to -24 in hemodialysis; and -96, -162 to -30 in CAPD. In general, the effects of diet and other therapies were less consistent. Despite possible limitations of this meta-analysis, the results provide a useful framework for choosing antilipemic therapy, and point to areas for future long-term studies examining the safety and efficacy of lipid lowering strategies in patients with renal disease.

Advantageous effect of low-molecular-weight heparin administration on hepatic mitochondrial redox state

The effect of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) on hepatic mithocondrial metabolism was compared with that of unfractionated heparin (UH) after the intravenous administration of these two kinds of heparin to normal rabbits. The magnitude of decrease in blood triglyceride levels 5 min after administration of UH (200 U/kg) was significantly greater than after LMWH (200 U/kg). Free fatty acid levels in the blood were significantly higher after this dose of UH than after LMWH. Blood total ketone body levels (acetoacetate + 3-hydroxybutyrate) 15 min after injection of 50 U/kg of UH were significantly higher than those after a dose of 50 U/kg of LMWH, and levels after 200 U/kg of UH were significantly higher than those after 200 U/kg of LMWH at 15, 30, 45 and 60 min. Enhanced ketogenesis was not noted after LMWH at any of the doses, or after UH at 3 U/kg. Arterial ketone body ratio (AKBR; acetoacetate/3-hydroxybutyrate), which reflects the hepatic mitochondrial oxidation-reduction state (NAD+/NADH), was maintained above 1.0 in all groups except in the U-200 group, while AKBR in that group was significantly decreased to 0.99 +/- 0.14 at 30 min, and further decreased to 0.80 +/- 0.08 at 60 min. These results indicate that LMWH has less effect on lipolysis than UH and does not enhance ketogenesis, resulting in less deterioration of mitochondrial redox state.

Different types of heparin in haemodialysis: long-term effects on post-heparin lipases

Several long-term studies of haemodialysis patients have shown improved serum lipid profile associated with treatment with low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) as compared with unfractionated heparin (UH). This has been attributed to the fact that LMWH produces a less marked acute lipolytic response than UH. However, the information on the differences in long-term effects on tissue releasable lipases is limited. Post-heparin plasma lipase activities were measured at 6, 24 and 48 h after pre-dialysis heparin injections in seven patients on chronic haemodialysis during treatment with UH; these measurements were then repeated 2 and 6 months after treatment was switched to LMWH. The curves plotted from the results can be assumed to reflect the interdialytic lipolytic potential. In the case of lipoprotein lipase this was unchanged 2 months after treatment was switched from UH to LMWH but increased by a mean of 47% after 6 months. In the case of hepatic lipase there was no change in the interdialytic lipolytic potential. Thus, there was a slow increase in tissue releasable lipoprotein lipase stores after treatment was switched from UH to LMWH, probably reflecting a smaller loss of lipoprotein lipase after each LMWH injection. Hepatic lipase, in contrast, was not affected by the type of anticoagulation.

The adequacy of fragmin as a single bolus dose with reused dialyzers

Thirty-four hemodialysis patients were studied in a crossover fashion to compare the effectiveness of bolus-dose Fragmin (a low molecular weight heparin) with regular heparin usage in hemodialysis. For each anticoagulant, 3 dialyzes were studied for each patient; the first sessions involved a new dialyzer, and the subsequent sessions involved dialyzers reprocessed with peracetic acid. To assess the effectiveness of the anticoagulation regimens, the following were measured: the dialyzer fiber bundle volume and the instantaneous dialyzer clearances for urea (1 h into the second session). In addition, factor Xa levels were measured in 5 patients during the first and second sessions at 0 min, 30 min, and 4 h. Fiber bundle volumes were (in ml) 75.4 +/- 8.8, 73.0 +/- 8.9, and 73.5 +/- 7.6 on first, second, and third uses with Fragmin (p = ns); and 77.8 +/- 9.0, 73.4 +/- 8.1, and 73.8 +/- 8.1 with heparin (p < 0.001 second and third vs. first). Thus, there were no significant differences between Fragmin and heparin. Instantaneous dialyzer clearances were 165.8 +/- 12.6 ml/min with Fragmin and 163.8 +/- 9.8 with heparin (p = ns). Factor Xa levels were 0 predialysis, 0.81 +/- 0.17 U/ml at 30 min on first use, and 0.92 +/- 0.09 U/ml on second use (p = ns); they were 0.51 +/- 0.21 U/ml at 4 h on first use and 0.61 +/- 0.16 U/ml on second use (p = ns). Thus, bolus-dose Fragmin provided similar results to constant infusion heparin and is not deleteriously influenced by reprocessing dialyzers with peracetic acid.