Why and how high volume hemodiafiltration may reduce cardiovascular mortality in stage 5 chronic kidney disease dialysis patients? A comprehensive literature review on mechanisms involved

Hemodiafiltration versus Hemodialysis in End-Stage Kidney Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Rationale & Objective

The use of hemodiafiltration (HDF) as a kidney replacement therapy (KRT) in patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) has sparked a debate regarding its advantages over conventional hemodialysis (HD). The present study aims to shed light on this controversy by comparing mortality rates and cause-specific deaths between ESKD patients receiving HDF and those undergoing HD.

Study Design

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The search was conducted using PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central on July 1, 2023.

Setting & Participants

Adult patients with ESKD on regular KRT.

Exposure

Studies with participants undergoing HDF.

Outcomes

Primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, cardiovascular (CV) mortality, deaths related to infections, and kidney transplant. We also evaluated the endpoints for deaths related to malignancy, myocardial infarction, stroke, arrhythmias, and sudden death.

Analytical Approach

We included RCTs evaluating HDF versus HD. Crossover trials and studies with overlapping populations were excluded. Two authors independently extracted the data following predefined search criteria and quality assessment. The risk of bias was assessed with Cochrane's RoB2 tool.

Results

We included 5 RCTs with 4,143 patients, of which 2,078 (50.1%) underwent HDF, whereas 2,065 (49.8%) were receiving HD. Overall, HDF was associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality (risk ratio [RR], 0.81; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73-0.91; P < 0.001; I2 = 7%) and a lower risk of CV-related deaths (RR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.61-0.92; P = 0.007; I2 = 0%). The incidence of infection-related deaths was also significantly different between therapies (RR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.50-0.95; P = 0.02; I2 = 26%).

Limitations

In individual studies, the HDF groups achieved varying levels of convection volume.

Conclusions

Compared with those undergoing HD, patients receiving HDF experienced a reduction in all-cause mortality, CV mortality, and infection-related mortality. These results provide compelling evidence supporting the use of HDF as a beneficial intervention in ESKD patients undergoing KRT.

Registration

Registered at PROSPERO: CRD42023438362.

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.

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.

Decision-making experiences regarding kidney transplant among older adults in South Korea: A qualitative descriptive study

OBJECTIVES

To explore the decision-making experiences of older patients with end-stage renal disease who chose to undergo kidney transplantation.

METHODS

This was a qualitative descriptive study.Twelve participants aged over 60 years who underwent kidney transplantation were recruited from a kidney transplant clinic in a hospital in South Korea. Individual in-depth interviews were conducted from March to April 2021. The data were analysed using inductive thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Four main themes were identified: 1) hesitation towards complex and risky kidney transplant, 2) internal suffering due to social prejudice and limits, 3) taking a step back from the decision-making process, and 4) being rushed into a decision on the brink of death.

CONCLUSION

Older patients with end-stage renal disease experience hesitation and difficulties and are passive in the decision-making process for a kidney transplant. They lacked sufficient relevant information and decided to receive transplant surgery, feeling pressured by the recommendations of family and healthcare providers.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Healthcare professionals should help older patients with end-stage renal disease make proactive decisions by providing tailored education programs and improving communication between the patients and their family members. Changing negative social perceptions and implementing supportive policies are necessary to resolve the difficulties experienced by such patients.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Patients were involved in the data collection as interview participants in this study.

Comparing Survival Outcomes between Hemodialysis and Hemodiafiltration Using Real-World Data from Brazil

The CONVINCE trial demonstrates that high-dose hemodiafiltration offers a survival advantage for patients in the high-flux hemodiafiltration group compared to hemodialysis. We compared the outcomes of hemodialysis and hemodiafiltration using real-world data. We conducted an analysis on a cohort of patients who underwent hemodiafiltration therapy (HDF) at a single center, NefroStar Clinics. The results obtained were then compared with data from patients receiving hemodialysis (HD) therapy within the Brazilian Public Health System (SUS). The primary outcome was mortality from any cause. Results: A total of 85 patients undergoing hemodiafiltration were compared with 149,372 patients receiving hemodialysis through the Brazilian Public Health System (SUS). Using a 2:1 propensity score, we compared the 170 best-match HD patients with 85 HDF patients. In the Cox analysis, HDF therapy showed a reduced risk of mortality with an HR of 0.29 [0.11-0.77]. The propensity score analysis showed a HR of 0.32 [95% CI: 0.11-0.91]. This analysis was adjusted for age, type of access, KT/v, hemoglobin, and phosphorus. The Kaplan-Meier analysis showed respective survival rates for HDF and HD at the end of one year, 92.1% and 79.9%, p < 0.001. These results suggest high-flux hemodiafiltration has survival advantages over hemodialysis in a real-world scenario.

The role of intra- and interdialytic sodium balance and restriction in dialysis therapies

The relationship between sodium, blood pressure and extracellular volume could not be more pronounced or complex than in a dialysis patient. We review the patients' sources of sodium exposure in the form of dietary salt intake, medication administration, and the dialysis treatment itself. In addition, the roles dialysis modalities, hemodialysis types, and dialysis fluid sodium concentration have on blood pressure, intradialytic symptoms, and interdialytic weight gain affect patient outcomes are discussed. We review whether sodium restriction (reduced salt intake), alteration in dialysis fluid sodium concentration and the different dialysis types have any impact on blood pressure, intradialytic symptoms, and interdialytic weight gain.

Unveiling the Clinical Benefits of High-Volume Hemodiafiltration: Optimizing the Removal of Medium-Weight Uremic Toxins and Beyond

Dialysis treatment has improved the survival of patients with kidney failure. However, the hospitalization and mortality rates remain alarmingly high, primarily due to incomplete uremic toxin elimination. High-volume hemodiafiltration (HDF) has emerged as a promising approach that significantly improves patient outcomes by effectively eliminating medium and large uremic toxins, which explains its increasing adoption, particularly in Europe and Japan. Interest in this therapy has grown following the findings of the recently published CONVINCE study, as well as the need to understand the mechanisms behind the benefits. This comprehensive review aims to enhance the scientific understanding by explaining the underlying physiological mechanisms that contribute to the positive effects of HDF in terms of short-term benefits, like hemodynamic tolerance and cardiovascular disease. Additionally, it explores the rationale behind the medium-term clinical benefits, including phosphorus removal, the modulation of inflammation and oxidative stress, anemia management, immune response modulation, nutritional effects, the mitigation of bone disorders, neuropathy relief, and amyloidosis reduction. This review also analyzes the impact of HDF on patient-reported outcomes and mortality. Considering the importance of applying personalized uremic toxin removal strategies tailored to the unique needs of each patient, high-volume HDF appears to be the most effective treatment to date for patients with renal failure. This justifies the need to prioritize its application in clinical practice, initially focusing on the groups with the greatest potential benefits and subsequently extending its use to a larger number of patients.

Effect of Hemodiafiltration or Hemodialysis on Mortality in Kidney Failure

BACKGROUND

Several studies have suggested that patients with kidney failure may benefit from high-dose hemodiafiltration as compared with standard hemodialysis. However, given the limitations of the various published studies, additional data are needed.

METHODS

We conducted a pragmatic, multinational, randomized, controlled trial involving patients with kidney failure who had received high-flux hemodialysis for at least 3 months. All the patients were deemed to be candidates for a convection volume of at least 23 liters per session (as required for high-dose hemodiafiltration) and were able to complete patient-reported outcome assessments. The patients were assigned to receive high-dose hemodiafiltration or continuation of conventional high-flux hemodialysis. The primary outcome was death from any cause. Key secondary outcomes were cause-specific death, a composite of fatal or nonfatal cardiovascular events, kidney transplantation, and recurrent all-cause or infection-related hospitalizations.

RESULTS

A total of 1360 patients underwent randomization: 683 to receive high-dose hemodiafiltration and 677 to receive high-flux hemodialysis. The median follow-up was 30 months (interquartile range, 27 to 38). The mean convection volume during the trial in the hemodiafiltration group was 25.3 liters per session. Death from any cause occurred in 118 patients (17.3%) in the hemodiafiltration group and in 148 patients (21.9%) in the hemodialysis group (hazard ratio, 0.77; 95% confidence interval, 0.65 to 0.93).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with kidney failure resulting in kidney-replacement therapy, the use of high-dose hemodiafiltration resulted in a lower risk of death from any cause than conventional high-flux hemodialysis. (Funded by the European Commission Research and Innovation; CONVINCE Dutch Trial Register number, NTR7138.).

Hemodiafiltration: Technical and Medical Insights

Despite the significant medical and technical improvements in the field of dialytic renal replacement modalities, morbidity and mortality are excessively high among patients with end-stage kidney disease, and most interventional studies yielded disappointing results. Hemodiafiltration, a dialysis method that was implemented in clinics many years ago and that combines the two main principles of hemodialysis and hemofiltration-diffusion and convection-has had a positive impact on mortality rates, especially when delivered in a high-volume mode as a surrogate for a high convective dose. The achievement of high substitution volumes during dialysis treatments does not only depend on patient characteristics but also on the dialyzer (membrane) and the adequately equipped hemodiafiltration machine. The present review article summarizes the technical aspects of online hemodiafiltration and discusses present and ongoing clinical studies with regards to hard clinical and patient-reported outcomes.

How peritoneal dialysis transforms the peritoneum and vasculature in children with chronic kidney disease-what can we learn for future treatment?

Children with chronic kidney disease (CKD) suffer from inflammation and reactive metabolite-induced stress, which massively accelerates tissue and vascular aging. Peritoneal dialysis (PD) is the preferred dialysis mode in children, but currently used PD fluids contain far supraphysiological glucose concentrations for fluid and toxin removal and glucose degradation products (GDP). While the peritoneal membrane of children with CKD G5 exhibits only minor alterations, PD fluids trigger numerous molecular cascades resulting in major peritoneal membrane inflammation, hypervascularization, and fibrosis, with distinct molecular and morphological patterns depending on the GDP content of the PD fluid used. PD further aggravates systemic vascular disease. The systemic vascular aging process is particularly pronounced when PD fluids with high GDP concentrations are used. GDP induce endothelial junction disintegration, apoptosis, fibrosis, and intima thickening. This review gives an overview on the molecular mechanisms of peritoneal and vascular transformation and strategies to improve peritoneal and vascular health in patients on PD.

Hemodiafiltration in developing countries

Hemodiafiltration (HDF) is a promising kidney replacement therapy modality for patients with end-stage kidney disease. The principle of uremic toxin clearance by combining convection and diffusion can lead to greater benefits compared to conventional hemodialysis. Evidence is building that supports the advantages of HDF with short-term outcomes such as greater intradialytic hemodynamic stability, improved nutritional status, attenuation of anemia, and reduction of inflammatory cytokines which produce improved key long-term impacts including survival and cardiovascular outcomes. Very little is known about the prevalence of HDF treatments in developing countries due to a shortage of national kidney registries. HDF experience is limited in many countries due to the cost of dialysis treatments, availability of online HDF machines, and reimbursement policies. These obstacles have led to nephrologists developing innovations, for example, convective control HDF (CC-HDF), simple mid-dilution, and simple mixed-dilution methods, which may be as effective as commercially available HDF machines. In this article, we will focus on the experience of HDF practice and barriers to adoption in developing countries. Results can guide clinical practice recommendations for implementing HDF in resource-limited settings.

The rationale and clinical potential of on-line hemodiafiltration as renal replacement therapy

On-line hemodiafiltration (ol-HDF) was developed in the 1980s in response to the unmet medical needs observed with conventional low- and high-flux hemodialysis. Firstly, the limited overall efficacy of conventional HD treatment programs as compared to native kidney function has been consistently documented over the broad MW spectrum of uremic toxins as well as fluid volume and hemodynamic control. Secondly, the unphysiological profile of intermittent treatment leading to repetitive dialysis-induced hemodynamic stress is now a well-recognized component of cardiovascular disease and end organ damage. Thirdly, the bioincompatibility of patient-dialysis system leading to dialysis-induced biological reactions also identified as contributing to dialytic morbidity and mortality. To overcome these limitations and pitfalls, alternative convective-based therapies (hemofiltration and hemodiafiltration), using higher hemoincompatible membranes and ultrapure dialysis fluid, were proposed as a solution to enhance and enlarge MW spectrum of uremic compounds cleared and to reduce dialysis-patient biological interactions. In this context, online HDF appeared soon as the best viable and efficient renal replacement modality to cover these needs. Clinical development and implementation of ol-HDF showed also that dialytic convective dose matters with a threshold point (23 L/1.73 m² in postdilution mode) to observe clinical benefits and outcomes improvements.

Switching from high-flux dialysis to hemodiafiltration: Cost-consequences for patients, providers, and payers

Hemodiafiltration (HDF) achieves a more efficient reduction of the uremic toxic load compared to standard high-flux hemodialysis (HF-HD) by virtue of the combined diffusive and convective clearances of a broad spectrum of uremic retention solutes. Clinical trials and registry data suggest that HDF improves patient outcomes. Despite the acknowledged need to improve survival rates of dialysis patients and the survival benefit HDF offers, there is little to no utilization in some countries (such as the US) in prescribing HDF to their patients. In this analysis, we present the healthcare value-based case for HDF (relative to HF-HD) from the patient, provider, and payor perspectives. The improved survival and reduced morbidity observed in studies conducted outside the US, as well as the reduced hospitalization, are attractive for each stakeholder. We also consider the potential barriers to greater utilization of HDF therapies, including unfounded concerns regarding additional costs of HDF, e.g., for the preparation and microbial testing of quality of substitution fluids. Ultrapure fluids are easily attainable and prepared from dialysis fluids using established "online" (OL) technologies. OL-HDF has matured to a level whereby little additional effort is required to safely implement it as all modern machine systems are today equipped with the OL-HDF functionality. Countries already convinced of the advantages of HF-HD are thus well positioned to make the transition to OL-HDF to achieve further clinical and associated economic benefits. Healthcare systems struggling to cope with the increasing demand for HD therapies would therefore, like patients, be beneficiaries in the long term with increased usage of OL-HDF for end stage kidney disease patients.