Improving Dialysis Techniques for Patients?

Hydrophilic Modification of Dialysis Membranes Sustains Middle Molecule Removal and Filtration Characteristics

While efficient removal of uremic toxins and accumulated water is pivotal for the well-being of dialysis patients, protein adsorption to the dialyzer membrane reduces the performance of a dialyzer. Hydrophilic membrane modification with polyvinylpyrrolidone (PVP) has been shown to reduce protein adsorption and to stabilize membrane permeability. In this study we compared middle molecule clearance and filtration performance of nine polysulfone-, polyethersulfone-, and cellulose-based dialyzers over time. Protein adsorption was simulated in recirculation experiments, while β2-microglobulin clearance as well as transmembrane pressure (TMP) and filtrate flow were determined over time. The results of this study showed that β2-microglobulin clearance (-7.2 mL/min/m2) and filtrate flow (-54.4 mL/min) decreased strongly during the first 30 min and slowly afterwards (-0.7 mL/min/m2 and -6.8 mL/min, respectively, for the next 30 min); the TMP increase (+37.2 mmHg and +8.6 mmHg, respectively) showed comparable kinetics. Across all tested dialyzers, the dialyzer with a hydrophilic modified membrane (FX CorAL) had the highest β2-microglobulin clearance after protein fouling and the most stable filtration characteristics. In conclusion, hydrophilic membrane modification with PVP stabilizes the removal capacity of middle molecules and filtration performance over time. Such dialyzers may have benefits during hemodiafiltration treatments which aim to achieve high exchange volumes.

Controversy on the CONVINCE study findings: the PRO take

The CONVINCE study, recently published in the New England Journal of Medicine, reveals a groundbreaking 23% reduction in the relative risk of all-cause mortality among end-stage kidney patients undergoing high convective volume hemodiafiltration. This significant finding challenges the conventional use of high-flux hemodialysis and offers hope for improving outcomes in chronic kidney disease patients. While some controversies surround the study's findings, including concerns about generalizability and the causes of death, it is essential to acknowledge the study's design and its main outcomes. The CONVINCE study, part of the HORIZON 2020 project, enrolled 1360 patients and demonstrated the superiority of hemodiafiltration in reducing all-cause mortality overall, as well as in specific patient subgroups (elderly, short vintage, non-diabetic, and those without cardiac issues). Interestingly, it was shown that hemodiafiltration had a protective effect against infection, including COVID-19. Future research will address sustainability, dose scaling effects, identification of subgroups especially likely to benefit and cost-effectiveness. However, for now, the findings strongly support a broader adoption of hemodiafiltration in renal replacement therapy, marking a significant advancement in the field.

Advances in Human-Centered Care to Address Contemporary Unmet Needs in Chronic Dialysis

Advances in the treatment of kidney failure with chronic dialysis have stagnated over the past three decades, with over 50% of patients still managed by conventional in-hospital haemodialysis. In parallel, the demands of chronic dialysis medical care have changed and evolved due to a growing population that has higher frailty and multimorbidity. Thus, the gap between the needs of kidney failure patients and the healthcare capability to provide effective overall management has widened. To address this problem, healthcare policy has increasingly aligned towards a human-centred approach. The paradigm shift of human-centred approach places patients at the forefront of decision-making processes, ensuring that specific needs are understood and prioritised. Integration of human-centred approaches with patient care has been shown to improve satisfaction and quality of life. The aim of this narrative is to evaluate the current clinical challenges for managing kidney failure for dialysis providers; summarise current experiences and unmet needs of chronic dialysis patients; and finally emphasise how human-centred care has advanced chronic dialysis care. Specific incremental advances include implementation of renal supportive care; home-assisted dialysis; hybrid dialysis; refinements to dialysis methods; whereas emerging advances include portable and wearable dialysis devices and the potential for the integration of artificial intelligence in clinical practice.

Actioning the findings of hard endpoint clinical trials as they emerge in the realm of chronic kidney disease care: a review and a call to action

Fewer than half of patients treated with hemodialysis survive 5 years. Multiple therapeutics are used to address the complications of advanced chronic kidney disease but most have not been found to improve clinical outcomes. Clinical trials of treatment innovations for chronic kidney diseases and dialysis care have been suboptimal in number and quality. Recent trials are changing this trend. Practice and policy change when new evidence emerges remains frequently impeded by resource and organizational constraints and accordingly, clinical practice guidelines are updated years or decades after definitive evidence is produced. Ultimately, practice change in health systems is slow, leading to impaired uptake of effective medical interventions and lower value healthcare, although innovations in rapid guideline production are emerging. What can be done to ensure that conclusive evidence is taken up in practice, policy and healthcare funding? We use the example of the recently published hard endpoint study "Comparison of high-dose HDF with high-flux HD" (CONVINCE) (hemodiafiltration versus hemodialysis), to explain how a new trial can impact on medical knowledge and change in practices. We (i) assess how the trial can be placed in the context of the totality of the evidence, (ii) define whether or not further trials of convective dialysis therapies are still needed and (iii) examine whether the evidence for convective therapies is now ready to inform practice, policy and funding change. When looking at CONVINCE in the context of the totality of evidence, we show that it addresses dialysis quality improvement priorities and is consistent with other trials evaluating convective dialysis therapies, and that the evidence for convective dialysis therapies is now definitive. Once updated evidence for cost-effectiveness in specific healthcare settings and patient-reported outcomes become available, we should therefore determine whether or not clinical practice guidelines should recommend uptake of convective dialysis therapies routinely, and move on to evaluating other treatments.