Total body water and failure to control blood pressure by medication in hemodialysis patients

Multifrequency bioimpedance by spectroscopy vs. routine methods in the management of hydration status in peritoneal dialysis patients: A randomized control trial

Background

Overhydration (OH) is common in peritoneal dialysis (PD) and increases the cardiovascular risk. Multifrequency bioimpedance spectroscopy (BIS) has been proposed to estimate the hydration in dialysis. Our objective was to evaluate if BIS is superior than control based on clinical assessment plus single-frequency bioimpedance (SF-BIA) on the fluid control and intermediate cardiovascular outcomes.

Methods

Randomized controlled study in adult PD patients, with a 9-month follow-up, allocated into two groups: control and BIS. Data were collected from medical records. SF-BIA and BIS, laboratory exams, ambulatory blood pressure monitoring, echocardiography (ECHO), and pulse wave velocity (PWV) were evaluated. The BIS data were available to the medical team only in BIS group.

Results

34 patients completed the study, 17 in each group. At the endpoint the BIS group had a significant (p < 0.05) greater proportion of patients with OH/extracellular water (OH/ECW%) ≤ 15% than the control (94.1% vs. 52.9%), and a lower OH mean (2.1 ± 1.6 vs. 0.9 ± 1.1 L). The control group has a significant increase in the tumor necrosis factor alpha median concentration from baseline to six [11.9 (6.0–24.1) vs. 44.7 (9.4–70.6) pg/ml] and 9 months [11.9 (6.0–24.1) vs. 39.4 (27.9–62.6) pg/ml], and in the N-terminal fragment of pro-B-type natriuretic peptide median [239 (171.5–360.5) vs. 356 (219–1,555) pg/ml]. For cardiovascular parameters, BIS group presented a significant reduction in radial PWV [7.7 (6.9–9.2) vs. 6.5 (5.5–8.4) m/s] at 9 month, while in the control presented a significant increase in mean central systolic blood pressure (BP) (106.8 ± 11.2 vs. 117.6 ± 16.5 mmHg) and in central diastolic BP (90.4 ± 9.8 vs. 103.3 ± 12.5 mmHg) at 9 months. The left ventricular mass (LVM)/body surface presented a significant reduction in the control (109.6 ± 30.8 vs. 101.2 ± 28.9 g/m²) and BIS group (107.7 ± 24.9 vs. 96.1 ± 27.0 g/m²) at 9 months.

Conclusion

The results suggest BIS is superior than the clinical evaluation plus SF-BIA for the fluid control of PD patients.

Clinical trial registration

[https://www.ClinicalTrials.gov], identifier [RBR-10k8j3bx].

Pomegranate juice improves cardiometabolic risk factors, biomarkers of oxidative stress and inflammation in hemodialysis patients: a randomized crossover trial

BACKGROUND

Pomegranate has antioxidant, cardioprotective and anti-inflammatory properties. We designed a crossover study aimed at determining if consumption of pomegranate juice (PJ) improves lipid profile and oxidative and inflammatory biomarkers of hemodialysis patients. Forty-one hemodialysis patients were randomly assigned to one of two groups: PJ-treated group receiving 100 mL of natural PJ immediately after their dialysis session three times a week and the control group receiving the usual care. After 8 weeks, a 4-week washout period was established and then the role of the groups was exchanged. Lipid profile, blood pressure and oxidative and inflammatory biomarkers were measured before and after each sequence.

RESULTS

Based on the results of intention-to-treat analysis, triglycerides were decreased in PJ condition and increased in the controls. Conversely, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol was increased in PJ and decreased in the control group. Total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol did not significantly change in either condition. Systolic and diastolic blood pressure significantly decreased in PJ condition. Total antioxidant capacity increased in PJ condition (P < 0.001) and decreased in the controls (P < 0.001). Conversely, malondialdehyde and interleukin-6 decreased in PJ (P < 0.001) and increased in the control group (P ≤ 0.001). The changes of these biomarkers were significantly different between the two conditions.

CONCLUSIONS

Eight-week PJ consumption showed beneficial effects on blood pressure, serum triglycerides, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, oxidative stress and inflammation in hemodialysis patients. © 2019 Society of Chemical Industry.

Blood pressure targets for hemodialysis patients: Aspirational or practical?

Whereas there is strong relationship between high blood pressure and increased overall and cardiovascular mortality for the general population, observational studies in hemodialysis patients have reported a "U" shaped relationship between pre-hemodialysis blood pressure recordings and patient survival. Previous attempts to introduce pre and post-hemodialysis blood pressure targets were associated with an increased frequency of intra-dialytic hypotension, itself an independent risk factor for mortality. Conversely, meta-analyses of trials of antihypertensive medications in hemodialysis patients, reported survival benefit for those prescribed medication. More recently, further meta-analyses have suggested a reduced risk for cardiovascular mortality benefit with a systolic blood pressures (SBPs) of less than 140 mmHg, the absolute benefit, in terms of risk reduction was greatest in those with the highest vascular disease burden. Even though data from current observational studies and studies of antihypertensive medications would suggest that patient survival would be greater with pre-dialysis SBP should be less than 160 mmHg, there is no current data to propose specific blood pressure targets. Defining blood pressure targets can only be answered by adequately powered prospective randomized controlled trials comparing different targets. As the benefits of lowering blood pressure appear to be greatest for those with most vascular disease, then blood pressure targets may have to be adjusted on an individual risk basis, and future trials should therefore stratify patients according to vascular morbidity and have different targets for patients with differing degrees of pre-existing cardiovascular disease.

[Hemodynamic effects of succinate-containing dialyzing solution]

AIM

To assess the results of using an acetate-free succinate-containing dialyzing solution (SDS) against natremia and blood pressure (BP) in patients on chronic hemodialysis (HD).

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

Ninety-two patients were transferred from 3 Saint Petersburg HD centers to 3-month HD treatment using SDS. The investigators measured blood biochemical indicators immediately before and 1 and 3 months after the investigation, BP before and after a successive HD session, and the patients' weight and its gain in the period between HD sessions. Hypotensive and hypertensive episodes were recorded during HD sessions throughout the investigation.

RESULTS

Following 3-month treatment using SDS, there were statistically significant decreases in blood sodium levels and systolic BP (SBP) prior to a HD session. At the same time, patients with a baseline pre-HD SBP of less than 100 mm Hg were observed to have a statistically significant increase in this indicator by the end of the investigation. Pre-dialysis diastolic BP (DBP) and post- dialysis SBP and DBP substantially unchanged. After 3 months of SDS use, there was a statistically significant reduction in weight gain in the period between HD sessions. When SDS was administered, the frequency of hypertensive episodes tended to decline after a HD session.

CONCLUSION

The use of SDS causes a drop in pre-dialysis blood sodium levels, ensuring adequate dehydration in patients and improving hypertension control. In doing so, SDS prevents hypotension during a HD session.