Clinical case-based approach to understanding intradialytic hypotension

Low dialysate sodium levels for chronic haemodialysis

BACKGROUND

Cardiovascular (CV) disease is the leading cause of death in dialysis patients, and strongly associated with fluid overload and hypertension. It is plausible that low dialysate [Na+] may decrease total body sodium content, thereby reducing fluid overload and hypertension, and ultimately reducing CV morbidity and mortality.

OBJECTIVES

This review evaluated harms and benefits of using a low (< 138 mM) dialysate [Na+] for maintenance haemodialysis (HD) patients.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 7 August 2018 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), both parallel and cross-over, of low (< 138 mM) versus neutral (138 to 140 mM) or high (> 140 mM) dialysate [Na+] for maintenance HD patients were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two investigators independently screened studies for inclusion and extracted data. Statistical analyses were performed using random effects models, and results expressed as risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous outcomes, and mean differences (MD) or standardised MD (SMD) for continuous outcomes, with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Confidence in the evidence was assessed using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 12 studies randomising 310 patients, with data available for 266 patients after dropout. All but one study evaluated a fixed concentration of low dialysate [Na+], and one profiled dialysate [Na+]. Three studies were parallel group, and the remaining nine cross-over. Of the latter, only two used a washout between intervention and control periods. Most studies were short-term with a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 3 (3, 8.5) weeks. Two were of a single HD session, and two of a single week's HD. Half of the studies were conducted prior to 2000, and five reported use of obsolete HD practices. Risks of bias in the included studies were often high or unclear, lowering confidence in the results.Compared to neutral or high dialysate [Na+], low dialysate [Na+] had the following effects on "efficacy" endpoints: reduced interdialytic weight gain (10 studies: MD -0.35 kg, 95% CI -0.18 to -0.51; high certainty evidence); probably reduced predialysis mean arterial blood pressure (BP) (4 studies: MD -3.58 mmHg, 95% CI -5.46 to -1.69; moderate certainty evidence); probably reduced postdialysis mean arterial BP (MAP) (4 studies: MD -3.26 mmHg, 95% CI -1.70 to -4.82; moderate certainty evidence); probably reduced predialysis serum [Na+] (7 studies: MD -1.69 mM, 95% CI -2.36 to -1.02; moderate certainty evidence); may have reduced antihypertensive medication (2 studies: SMD -0.67 SD, 95% CI -1.07 to -0.28; low certainty evidence). Compared to neutral or high dialysate [Na+], low dialysate [Na+] had the following effects on "safety" endpoints: probably increased intradialytic hypotension events (9 studies: RR 1.56, 95% 1.17 to 2.07; moderate certainty evidence); probably increased intradialytic cramps (6 studies: RR 1.77, 95% 1.15 to 2.73; moderate certainty evidence).Compared to neutral or high dialysate [Na+], low dialysate [Na+] may make little or no difference to: intradialytic BP (2 studies: MD for systolic BP -3.99 mmHg, 95% CI -17.96 to 9.99; diastolic BP 1.33 mmHg, 95% CI -6.29 to 8.95; low certainty evidence); interdialytic BP (2 studies:, MD for systolic BP 0.17 mmHg, 95% CI -5.42 to 5.08; diastolic BP -2.00 mmHg, 95% CI -4.84 to 0.84; low certainty evidence); dietary salt intake (2 studies: MD -0.21g/d, 95% CI -0.48 to 0.06; low certainty evidence).Due to very low quality of evidence, it is uncertain whether low dialysate [Na+] changed extracellular fluid status, venous tone, arterial vascular resistance, left ventricular mass or volumes, thirst or fatigue. Studies did not examine cardiovascular or all-cause mortality, cardiovascular events, or hospitalisation.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

It is likely that low dialysate [Na+] reduces intradialytic weight gain and BP, which are effects directionally associated with improved outcomes. However, the intervention probably also increases intradialytic hypotension and reduces serum [Na+], effects that are associated with increased mortality risk. The effect of the intervention on overall patient health and well-being is unknown. Further evidence is needed in the form of longer-term studies in contemporary settings, evaluating end-organ effects in small-scale mechanistic studies using optimal methods, and clinical outcomes in large-scale multicentre RCTs.

Vascular calcification and left ventricular hypertrophy in hemodialysis patients: interrelationship and clinical impacts

Background: We examined the relationship and combined effect of vascular calcification (VC) and left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) on deaths and cardiovascular events (CVEs) in hemodialysis (HD) patients. Methods: Maintenance HD patients (n=341) were included. Echocardiography data and plain chest radiographs were used to assess LVH and aortic arch VC. Results: VC was found in 100 patients (29.3%). LVH was more prevalent in patients with VC compared with those without VC (70% vs. 50.2%, P=0.001). VC was independently associated with a 2.42-fold increased risk of LVH (95% CI, 1.26-4.65). In multivariate analysis, compared with patients with neither VC nor LVH, the coexistence of VC and LVH was independently associated with CVE (HR, 2.01; 95% CI, 1.09-3.72), whereas VC or LVH alone was not. Patients with both VC and LVH had the highest risk for a composite event of deaths or CVE (HR, 1.88; 95% CI, 1.15-3.06). Significant synergistic interaction was observed between VC and LVH (P for interaction=0.039). Conclusions: VC was independently associated with LVH. The coexistence of VC and LVH was associated with higher risk of deaths and CVEs than either factor alone. VC and LVH showed a synergistic interaction for the risk of deaths and CVEs.

Choice of dialysis modality

Few medical decisions have as profound an impact on every aspect of a patient's life as the selection of dialysis modality by a patient with end-stage renal disease. It remains uncertain whether the outcome differences seen between hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis patients, if any, in observational studies are attributable to the dialysis modality. Such studies, thus, are insufficient to deny patients a choice in selecting their dialysis modality.

Treatment of post-dialytic orthostatic hypotension with an inflatable abdominal band in hemodialysis patients

The purpose of this study was to ascertain whether abdominal compression with an inflatable abdominal band, a device we developed, improved post-dialytic orthostatic hypotension (OH) in hemodialysis (HD) patients. Twenty-five chronic HD patients with intractable post-dialytic OH were recruited. Post-HD changes in systolic blood pressure (DeltaSBP) in the supine and standing positions were compared in the patients, measured with or without the use of the band. The study showed DeltaSBP after HD without the band was significantly greater than that measured before HD (-36.1+/-18.2 vs -13.1+/-16.8 mm Hg; P<0.0001). DeltaSBP after HD with the band was reduced significantly in comparison to DeltaSBP after HD without the band (-19.4+/-21.2 vs -36.1+/-18.2 mm Hg; P<0.002). Use of the band did not cause an elevation in SBP in the supine position (149.0+/-29.6 vs 155.4+/-25.7 mm Hg); however, it did increase SBP upon standing (129.6+/-27.3 vs 117.2+/-22.6 mm Hg; P<0.05). Eight patients in whom an increase in SBP of 25 mm Hg or more was achieved with the band were classified as responders. Ejection fraction was significantly higher (76.4+/-11.1 vs 61.9+/-13.6%; P<0.02) and atrial natriuretic peptide concentration significantly lower (27.9+/-22.0 vs 68.9+/-47.5 pg/ml; P<0.02) in responders than in non-responders. We conclude that the abdominal band was effective for overcoming post-dialytic OH, without elevating supine SBP in some patients.

Can predialysis hypertension prevent intradialytic hypotension in hemodialysis patients?

BACKGROUND/AIM

Intradialytic hypotension is the most common complication associated with hemodialysis, and its cause is multifactorial. However, the relationship between hypertension and intradialytic hypotension is not clear. We investigated the influence of predialysis blood pressure and antihypertensive drugs on intradialytic hypotension.

METHODS

Risk factors for intradialytic hypotension were analyzed in 111 patients undergoing regular hemodialysis treatment and had annual echocardiography performed. The correlation between the addition of antihypertensive medications and the incidence of intradialytic hypotensive episodes was studied in 21 hypertensive patients.

RESULTS

Based on multivariate logistic regression analysis, diabetes (odds ratio OR 8.18, 95% confidence interval CI 1.47-45.5; p = 0.016), interdialytic weight gain (OR 2.45, 95% CI 1.24-4.82; p = 0.010), ejection fraction (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.81-0.95; p = 0.001), and left ventricular volume (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.94-0.99; p = 0.013) were determined as risk factors for intradialytic hypotension. However, there was no association between predialysis blood pressure and intradialytic hypotension. After additional antihypertensive medications, the predialysis blood pressure fell from 175/85 mm Hg to 154/78 mm Hg (p < 0.0001/p < 0.0001). The mean 24-hour interdialytic blood pressure fell from 165/87 mm Hg to 147/80 mm Hg (p < 0.0001/p = 0.006). However, the frequency of hypotensive episodes was not increased (p = 0.77).

CONCLUSIONS

Diabetes, excessive interdialytic weight gain, low ejection fraction, and low left ventricular volume are independent risk factors for intradialytic hypotension. However, no correlation was found between predialysis blood pressure values or addition of antihypertensive medications and the incidence of intradialytic hypotension. Thus, hypertension may be controlled without aggravating intradialytic hypotension in hemodialysis patients.

Discordance of influence of hypertension on mortality and cardiovascular risk in hemodialysis patients

BACKGROUND

Hemodialysis patients are at significantly increased risk for both morbidity and mortality from cardiovascular disease. However, most recent reports have indicated elevated mortality risk associated with low blood pressure, rather than high blood pressure. We added nonfatal cardiovascular events as an outcome in addition to cardiovascular and all-cause mortality to analyze the risk of hypertension.

METHODS

One hundred sixty-four patients receiving regular hemodialysis between January and December 1998 were examined and prospectively followed up until the end of 2003. The primary end point was hospital admission or death from cardiovascular disease. Secondary end points were cardiovascular and all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

During the 5-year follow-up period, 52 patients experienced cardiovascular events and 45 patients died (18 patients, from cardiovascular disease). Based on Cox analysis, high systolic blood pressure (relative risk [RR], 1.23; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.07 to 1.43; P = 0.004) and older age were independently associated with cardiovascular events. Elevated systolic blood pressure (RR, 1.25; 95% CI, 0.99 to 1.59; P = 0.063) was a marginal predictor for cardiovascular mortality. Age, serum albumin level, malignant neoplasm, and diabetes were independent risk factors for all-cause mortality, whereas there was no association between blood pressure and all-cause mortality. The hazard ratio for cardiovascular events after adjustment for age, sex, and diabetes was lowest in patients with systolic blood pressure of 140.1 mm Hg or less and progressively increased with the increase in systolic blood pressure.

CONCLUSION

Hypertension is a potent risk factor for cardiovascular disease in hemodialysis patients, as in the general population, whereas there is no association of hypertension with mortality. Active reduction in systolic blood pressure is important to minimize the occurrence of cardiovascular events.

Dialysis therapies for end-stage renal disease

End-stage renal disease (ESRD) has various causes that may differ according to country and racial group. Whatever the cause, unless the water, salt, electrolytes, and waste products excreted by normal kidneys are removed, their accumulation will result in death. Removal of these products can be variably achieved by either hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis. The principles and outcomes of these techniques are described, as are their complications. It is important that these two different methods of treatment are not regarded as competitive, but are integrated, together with renal transplantation where appropriate, into the management of patients with ESRD to optimize both outcome and quality of life.