Current state of intensive hemodialysis: a comparative review of benefits and barriers

Two Years' Experience of Intensive Home Hemodialysis with the Physidia S3 System: Results from the RECAP Study

The RECAP study reports results and outcomes (clinical performances, patient acceptance, cardiac outcomes, and technical survival) achieved with the S³ system used as an intensive home hemodialysis (HHD) platform over a three-year French multicenter study. Ninety-four dialysis patients issued from ten dialysis centers and treated more than 6 months (mean follow-up: 24 months) with S³ were included. A two-hour treatment time was maintained in 2/3 of patients to deliver 25 L of dialysis fluid, while 1/3 required up to 3 h to achieve 30 L. The additional convection volume produced by means of the SeCoHD tool (internal filtration backfiltration) was 3 L/session, and the net ultrafiltration produced to achieve dry weight was 1.4 L/session. On a weekly basis, an average 156 L of dialysate corresponding to 94 L of urea clearance when considering 85% dialysate saturation under low flow conditions was delivered. Such urea clearance was equivalent to 9.2 [8.0-13.0] mL/min weekly urea clearance and a standardized Kt/V of 2.5 [1.1-4.5]. The predialysis concentration of selected uremic markers remained remarkably stable over time. Fluid volume status and blood pressure were adequately controlled by means of a relatively low ultrafiltration rate (7.9 mL/h/kg). Technical survival on S³ was 72% and 58% at 1 and 2 years, respectively. The S³ system was easily handled and kept by patients at home, as indicated by technical survival. Patient perception was improved, while treatment burden was reduced. Cardiac features (assessed in a subset of patients) tended to improve over time. Intensive hemodialysis relying on the S³ system offers a very appealing option for home treatment with quite satisfactory results, as shown in the RECAP study throughout a two-year follow-up time, and offers the best bridging solution to kidney transplantation.

The Use of a Multidimensional Measure of Dialysis Adequacy-Moving beyond Small Solute Kinetics

Urea removal has become a key measure of the intensity of dialysis treatment for kidney failure. Small solute removal, exemplified by Kt/Vurea, has been broadly applied as a means to quantify the dose of thrice weekly hemodialysis. Yet, the reliance on small solute clearances alone as a measure of dialysis adequacy fails fully to quantify the intended clinical effects of dialysis therapy. This review aims to (1) understand the strengths and limitations of small solute kinetics as a surrogate marker of dialysis dose, and (2) present the prospect of a more comprehensive construct for dialysis dose, one that considers more broadly the goals of ESRD care to maximize both quality of life and survival. On behalf of the American Society of Nephrology Dialysis Advisory Group, we propose the need to ascertain the validity and utility of a multidimensional measure that moves beyond small solute kinetics alone to quantify optimal dialysis derived from both patient-reported and comprehensive clinical and dialysis-related measures.

Nutritional status after conversion from conventional to in-centre nocturnal hemodialysis

INTRODUCTION

Recipients of conventional hemodialysis (CHD; 3-4 h/session, 3 times/week) experience volume expansion and nutritional impairment which may contribute to high mortality. Prolongation of sessions with in-centre nocturnal hemodialysis (INHD; 7-8 h/session, 3 times/week) may improve clinical outcomes by enhancement of ultrafiltration and uremic toxin removal.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this prospective cohort study, 56 adult patients who were receiving maintenance CHD for at least 90 days were assigned to CHD (patients who remained in CHD) and INHD (patients who switched to INHD) groups. Both groups were followed for 1 year divided into four 13-week quarters; post-dialysis weight and interdialytic weight gain (IDWG) were captured in each quarter. Repeated measures analysis of variance was used to calculate group main effect, time main effect or time-group interaction effect.

RESULTS

Conversion to INHD was associated with a mean (95% confidence interval) change in IDWG of 0.5 (0.08, 1.2) kg as compared to -0.3 (-0.9, 0.1) kg in the CHD group (p < 0.01). In the INHD group, post-dialysis weight (% of baseline pre-dialysis weight) decreased after conversion, reaching a nadir during the first 3 months (0.7%) and subsequently it gradually increased and returned to its baseline at the end of follow-up. A similar temporal trend was seen for serum creatinine but not serum N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) which is a marker of extracellular volume. The changes in serum albumin, prealbumin and hs-CRP were not different between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Conversion to INHD was associated with greater IDWG and relatively stable body mass. We speculate that this gain in weight reflects an increase in lean body mass following the change in dialysis modality, which can be concluded from the parallel increase in serum creatinine and the lack of increase in NT-proBNP.

Technology innovation for patients with kidney disease

The loss of kidney function is a life-changing event leading to life-long dependence on healthcare. Around 5000 people are diagnosed with kidney failure every year. Historically, technology in renal medicine has been employed for replacement therapies. Recently, a lot of emphasis has been placed on technologies that aid early identification and prevent progression of kidney disease, while at the same time empowering affected individuals to gain control over their chronic illness. There is a shift in diversity of technology development, driven by collaborative innovation initiatives such the National Institute's for Health Research Healthcare Technology Co-operative for Devices for Dignity. This has seen the emergence of the patient as a key figure in designing technologies that are fit for purpose, while business involvement has ensured uptake and sustainability of these developments. An embodiment of this approach is the first successful Small Business Research Initiative in the field of renal medicine in the UK.

The Association Between Conversion to In-centre Nocturnal Hemodialysis and Left Ventricular Mass Regression in Patients With End-Stage Renal Disease

BACKGROUND

In-centre nocturnal hemodialysis (INHD, 7-8 hours/session, 3 times/week) is an increasingly utilized form of dialysis intensification, though data on the cardiovascular benefits of this modality are limited.

METHODS

In this prospective cohort study, we enrolled 67 prevalent conventional hemodialysis (CHD, 4 hours/session, 3 times/week) recipients at 2 medical centres in Canada, of whom 37 converted to INHD and 30 remained on CHD. The primary outcome was the change in left ventricular mass (LVM) after 1 year as assessed by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. Secondary outcomes included changes in serum phosphate concentration, phosphate binder burden, haemoglobin, erythropoiesis stimulating agent usage, and blood pressure.

RESULTS

Conversion to INHD was associated with a 14.2 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.2-27.2) g reduction in LVM as compared with continuation on CHD. This result was maintained after adjustment for baseline imbalances between the groups and in ancillary analyses. There was a trend toward a larger drop in systolic blood pressure (9.8 [95% CI, -1.4-20.9] mm Hg) among INHD recipients with a significant reduction in the number of prescribed antihypertensive agents (0.7 [95% CI, 0.3-1.1] agents). Serum phosphate declined by 0.40 (95% CI, 0.16-0.63) mmol/L among INHD recipients without any difference in calcium-based phosphate binder requirements, as compared with those who remained on CHD.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with continuation of CHD, conversion to INHD was associated with significant LVM regression and reduction in serum phosphate concentration at 1 year.

Dialysis frequency versus dialysis time, that is the question

We reviewed a number of prospective randomized and multiple retrospective cohort studies of different dialysis prescriptions: longer dialysis time, at a frequency of at least three times a week, or a frequency of daily hemodialysis with a shorter dialysis time. Interestingly, the retrospective analyses have generally found significant survival benefits in the intensive dialysis groups, whereas more modest effects were observed in the prospective randomized controlled trials. The reason for this discrepancy may be related to the retrospective nature of the studies and possible selection bias; for example, the patients who were prescribed more frequent dialysis may have had more difficulties with volume control or high blood pressure. In contrast, the randomized controlled trials of increased dialysis frequency, which have shown indirect and modest benefits in complex coprimary end points, have small sample sizes and are plagued with difficulties in recruitment and compliance with the randomly allocated more frequent dialysis. This review, which attempts to balance the potential benefits of more frequent dialysis with the burden on the patient's lifestyle, an increased risk of access malfunction, as well as societal costs of such intensive dialysis prescriptions, concludes in favor of the conventional three times per week dialysis (at a minimum) but at longer dialysis times than is currently prescribed based on the Kt/Vurea metric alone.