Warning of high-flux hemodialysis

Assessment of subjective and hemodynamic tolerance of different high- and low-flux dialysis membranes in patients undergoing chronic intermittent hemodialysis: a randomized controlled trial

Clinical experience and experimental data suggest that intradialytic hemodynamic profiles could be influenced by the characteristics of the dialysis membranes. Even within the worldwide used polysulfone family, intolerance to specific membranes was occasionally evoked. The aim of this study was to compare hemodynamically some of the commonly used polysulfone dialyzers in Switzerland. We performed an open-label, randomized, cross-over trial, including 25 hemodialysis patients. Four polysulfone dialyzers, A (Revaclear high-flux, Gambro, Stockholm, Sweden), B (Helixone high-flux, Fresenius), C (Xevonta high-flux, BBraun, Melsungen, Germany), and D (Helixone low-flux, Fresenius, Bad Homburg vor der Höhe, Germany), were compared. The hemodynamic profile was assessed and patients were asked to provide tolerance feedback. The mean score (±SD) subjectively assigned to dialysis quality on a 1-10 scale was A 8.4 ± 1.3, B 8.6 ± 1.3, C 8.5 ± 1.6, D 8.5 ± 1.5. Kt/V was A 1.58 ± 0.30, B 1.67 ± 0.33, C 1.62 ± 0.32, D 1.45 ± 0.31. The low- compared with the high-flux membranes, correlated to higher systolic (128.1 ± 13.1 vs. 125.6 ± 12.1 mmHg, P < 0.01) and diastolic (76.8 ± 8.7 vs. 75.3 ± 9.0 mmHg; P < 0.05) pressures, higher peripheral resistance (1.44 ± 0.19 vs. 1.40 ± 0.18 s × mmHg/mL; P < 0.05) and lower cardiac output (3.76 ± 0.62 vs. 3.82 ± 0.59 L/min; P < 0.05). Hypotension events (decrease in systolic blood pressure by >20 mmHg) were 70 with A, 87 with B, 73 with C, and 75 with D (P < 0.01 B vs. A, 0.05 B vs. C and 0.07 B vs. D). The low-flux membrane correlated to higher blood pressure levels compared with the high-flux ones. The Helixone high-flux membrane ensured the best efficiency. Unfortunately, the very same dialyzer correlated to a higher incidence of hypotensive episodes.

High-flux versus low-flux membranes for end-stage kidney disease

BACKGROUND

Clinical practice guidelines regarding the use of high-flux haemodialysis membranes vary widely.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to analyse the current evidence reported for the benefits and harms of high-flux and low-flux haemodialysis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched Cochrane Renal Group's specialised register (July 2012), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (1948 to March 2011), and EMBASE (1947 to March 2011) without language restriction.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared high-flux haemodialysis with low-flux haemodialysis in people with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) who required long-term haemodialysis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted independently by two authors for study characteristics (participants and interventions), risks of bias, and outcomes (all-cause mortality and cause-specific mortality, hospitalisation, health-related quality of life, carpal tunnel syndrome, dialysis-related arthropathy, kidney function, and symptoms) among people on haemodialysis. Treatment effects were expressed as a risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD), with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using the random-effects model.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 33 studies that involved 3820 participants with ESKD. High-flux membranes reduced cardiovascular mortality (5 studies, 2612 participants: RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.99) but not all-cause mortality (10 studies, 2915 participants: RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.04) or infection-related mortality (3 studies, 2547 participants: RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.14). In absolute terms, high-flux membranes may prevent three cardiovascular deaths in 100 people treated with haemodialysis for two years. While high-flux membranes reduced predialysis beta-2 microglobulin levels (MD -12.17 mg/L, 95% CI -15.83 to -8.51 mg/L), insufficient data were available to reliably estimate the effects of membrane flux on hospitalisation, carpal tunnel syndrome, or amyloid-related arthropathy. Evidence for effects of high-flux membranes was limited by selective reporting in a few studies. Insufficient numbers of studies limited our ability to conduct subgroup analyses for membrane type, biocompatibility, or reuse. In general, the risk of bias was either high or unclear in the majority of studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

High-flux haemodialysis may reduce cardiovascular mortality in people requiring haemodialysis by about 15%. A large well-designed RCT is now required to confirm this finding.

Pulse wave velocity as an indicator of arteriosclerosis in hemodialysis patients

Studies were performed to examine whether pulse wave velocity (PWV) is a useful indicator of arteriosclerosis in hemodialysis (HD) patients. In total, 72 patients were enrolled. Annual changes in PWV were compared to clinical parameters and therapeutic maneuvers. PWV increased in diabetic patients faster than non-diabetics (35 +/- 10 cm/s/month versus 10 +/- 4 cm/s/month, P < 0.05). Changes in PWV showed strong correlations to triglyceride level exposed during observation period (r = 0.50, P < 0.05) and HD duration (r = 0.46, P < 0.05). In addition, we found that PWV of some patients decreased (regressors), while the others increased (non-regressors). Regressors more frequently received combined treatment with angiotensin blockade and lipid-lowering drugs or vitamin E-coated dialyzers than non-regressors (P < 0.05). Our data demonstrate that PWV is useful as a marker of arteriosclerosis in HD patients. Furthermore, the present results suggest that combined treatment with both angiotensin inhibition and lipid-lowering drugs or vitamin E-coated membrane would slow the progression of arteriosclerosis in HD patients.