Efficacy and safety of the Clearum dialyzer

Most recently developed polyester polymer alloy dialyzer: A new medium cut-off membrane?

BACKGROUND

New versions of the polyester polymer alloy (PEPA) membrane have appeared over the years, with increases in both the pore size and the amount of polyvinylpyrrolidone (PVP) to optimize hydrophilicity performance. This study aimed to assess the efficacy of the most recently developed PEPA dialyzer, the FDY series, in hemodialysis (HD) modality in terms of uremic toxin removal and albumin loss and to compare it with that of several high-flux dialyzers currently used in HD and post-dilution hemodiafiltration (HDF) treatments.

METHODS

A prospective study was carried out in 21 patients. All patients underwent six dialysis sessions with the same routine dialysis parameters; only the dialyzer and/or the dialysis modality varied: FX80 in HD, FDY 180 in HD, Clearum HS17 in HDF, Elisio 19H in HDF, Vitapes 180 in HDF, and FX80 in post-dilution HDF. The reduction ratios (RR) of urea, creatinine, ß2-microglobulin, myoglobin, κFLC, prolactin, α1-microglobulin, α1-acid glycoprotein, λFLC, and albumin were compared intraindividually. Dialysate albumin loss was also measured.

RESULTS

Both membranes FDY and FX80 are high-flux dialyzers and are applied here in high-flux HD. The average RR of β2-microglobulin was slightly lower in the two HD treatments than in the HDF treatments. Comparison of dialysis treatments revealed that the PEPA FDY dialyzer in the HD modality was more effective than the FX80 dialyzer in high-flux HD and was as effective as post-dilution HDF, especially in terms of myoglobin, κFLC, prolactin, α1-microglobulin, and λFLC RRs. The FDY treatments obtained similar albumin RR in blood and slightly higher dialysate albumin loss, although the values were clinically acceptable.

CONCLUSIONS

The most recently developed PEPA dialyzers in the HD modality were as effective as all treatments in the HDF modality and were clearly superior to high-flux helixone HD treatment. These results confirm that this dialyzer should be categorized within the medium cut-off (MCO) membrane classification.

Comparison of efficacy and safety of the new generation helixone dialyzers

INTRODUCTION

New generation helixone dialyzers has recently been developed as part of the ongoing effort to improve dialyzer hemocompatibility and avoid adverse reactions to synthetic dialyzers. This study aimed to assess the performance and albumin loss of this new dialyzer series in hemodiafiltration and compare it with the previous generation helixone series.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A prospective study was conducted in 19 patients. Each patient underwent eight dialysis sessions with the same routine dialysis parameters; only the dialyzer varied: FX60 CorDiax, FX CorAL 60, FX600 CorDiax, FX CorAL 600, FX80 CorDiax, FX CorAL 80, FX800 CorDiax, and FX CorAL 800. The reduction ratios (RR) of urea, creatinine, ß2-microglobulin, myoglobin, kappa-free immunoglobulin light chains (κFLC), prolactin, α1-microglobulin, α1-acid glycoprotein, lambda immunoglobulin light chains (λFLC), and albumin were compared intra-individually. Dialysate albumin loss was also measured.

RESULTS

All treatments were well tolerated. The mean amount of replacement fluid ranged from 31 to 34 L. Comparison of dialysis treatments showed no differences between small molecules and even up to those the size of β2-microglobulins. Little differences were found between myoglobin, κFLC, prolactin, α1-microglobulin, and λFLC RRs, and only FX80 CorDiax was slightly superior to the others. Mean dialysate albumin losses were similar, with less than 2.5 g lost in each dialyzer. The FX80 CorDiax showed slightly higher global removal scores than the other dialyzers evaluated, except for FX CorAL 800.

CONCLUSION

The new generation helixone dialyzers series has been updated to minimise the risk of adverse reactions, while maintaining the effectiveness and albumin loss achieved by the previous most advanced helixone generation.

Safety and performance of the Clearum™ high flux hemodialyzer

BACKGROUND

Clearum™ is a high flux steam sterilized dialyzer for patients with hemodialysis or hemodiafiltration. This study evaluated the safety and performance of the Clearum high flux steam sterilized hemodialyzer in the removal of small and middle-sized toxins.

METHODS

A prospective, interventional, nonrandomized study enrolled twenty end-stage renal disease patients undergoing hemodialysis. The Clearum high flux steam sterilized dialyzer was compared to Fresenius FX dialyzers for baseline comparison. The duration of the trial was 2 weeks for the FX dialyzer and 6 weeks with the Clearum high flux steam sterilized dialyzer. In vitro studies with dextrans of varying sizes were performed to compare the membrane characteristics and sieving coefficient curves for the two dialyzers.

RESULTS

The primary objective of a mean urea reduction ratio >65% was met, with no significant difference in mean urea reduction ratio between the Clearum high flux steam sterilized and Fresenius FX-series of dialyzers (p = 0.86). No dialyzer-related adverse events were reported in the study. β-2-microglobulin reduction with the Clearum high flux steam sterilized dialyzer was statistically higher than the FX-series dialyzer (66.5% vs. 53.6%; p < 0.0001). Predialysis interleukin-6 and C-reactive protein concentrations, blood-rest scores (residual blood after blood restitution), and thrombin-anti-thrombin values were comparable. Albumin remained stable during the 6 weeks of Clearum high flux steam sterilized dialyzer use, with no appreciable differences compared to the Fresenius FX-series.

CONCLUSION

The Clearum high flux steam sterilized dialyzer showed good mid-term effectivity for small and middle molecule removal with no reported dialyzer-related adverse events.

Hemodiafiltration (HDF) versus expanded hemodialysis (HDx)

Medium cutoff (MCO) membranes have resulted in a novel dialyzer class designed to improve membrane permeability and have been postulated as an alternative to online hemodiafiltration since MCO membranes may achieve similar solute clearances. These membranes have been incorporated into clinical practice, and the term expanded HD (HDx) has been proposed to differentiate from high-flux hemodialysis. Efficacy, safety, and quality of life comparison of HDF versus HDx have been reviewed in this article.