Comparison of intradialytic plasma volume change between online hemodiafiltration and standard hemodialysis

Prevention of Intradialytic Hypotension in Hemodialysis Patients: Current Challenges and Future Prospects

Intradialytic hypotension, defined as rapid decrease in systolic blood pressure of greater than or equal to 20 mmHg or in mean arterial pressure of greater than or equal to 10 mmHg that results in end-organ ischemia and requires countermeasures such as ultrafiltration reduction or saline infusion to increase blood pressure to improve patient's symptoms, is a known complication of hemodialysis and is associated with several potential adverse outcomes. Its pathogenesis is complex and involves both patient-related factors such as age and comorbidities, as well as factors related to the dialysis prescription itself. Key factors include the need for volume removal during hemodialysis and a suboptimal vascular response which compromises the ability to compensate for acute intravascular volume loss. Inadequate vascular refill, incorrect assessment or unaccounted changes of target weight, acute illnesses and medication interference are further potential contributors. Intradialytic hypotension can lead to compromised tissue perfusion and end-organ damage, both acutely and over time, resulting in repetitive injuries. To address these problems, a careful assessment of subjective symptoms, minimizing interdialytic weight gains, individualizing dialysis prescription and adjusting the dialysis procedure based on patients' risk factors can mitigate negative outcomes.

Influence of Hemofiltration on Intradialytic Plasma Volume Decrease

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Compared with hemodialysis (HD), hemodiafiltration (HDF) reduces the frequency of episodes of intradialytic hypotension. Intradialytic plasma volume decrease (IPVD) induced by ultrafiltration is a leading cause of the episodes, and hemofiltration might have a preventive effect on IPVD. This study examined whether online HDF (ol-HDF) prevented IPVD compared with HD.

METHODS

Online HDF of pre-dilution mode (pre-ol-HDF) and post-dilution mode (post-ol-HDF) and HD were performed in 22 patients on maintenance dialysis. In each session, IPVD was calculated by using an intradialytic change in hematocrit, and IPVD in pre-ol-HDF and post-ol-HDF was compared with that in HD in a crossover manner.

RESULTS

While the ratios of intradialytic body weight loss to post-dialysis BW (IBWL/BW) in ol-HDF were generally smaller than those in HD, the levels of IPVD and IPVD/IBWL/BW were generally larger than those in HD; the IPVD levels were 0.108 ± 0.058, 0.113 ± 0.053, and 0.101 ± 0.057 (P = 0.67), and those of IPVD/IWL/BW were 2.21 ± 0.97, 2.32 ± 0.91, and 1.98 ± 1.14 (P = 0.21) in pre-ol-HDF, post-ol-HDF, and HD, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Online mode hemofiltration, in either pre-dilution mode or post-dilution mode, performed in combination with hemodialysis has no preventive effect on IPVD.