Over-dialysis plasma RANTES increase depends on heparin dose and cardiovascular disease status

Anticoagulation for people receiving long-term haemodialysis

BACKGROUND

Haemodialysis (HD) requires safe and effective anticoagulation to prevent clot formation within the extracorporeal circuit during dialysis treatments to enable adequate dialysis and minimise adverse events, including major bleeding. Low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) may provide a more predictable dose, reliable anticoagulant effects and be simpler to administer than unfractionated heparin (UFH) for HD anticoagulation, but may accumulate in the kidneys and lead to bleeding.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of anticoagulation strategies (including both heparin and non-heparin drugs) for long-term HD in people with kidney failure. Any intervention preventing clotting within the extracorporeal circuit without establishing anticoagulation within the patient, such as regional citrate, citrate enriched dialysate, heparin-coated dialysers, pre-dilution haemodiafiltration (HDF), and saline flushes were also included.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to November 2023 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomised controlled studies (quasi-RCTs) evaluating anticoagulant agents administered during HD treatment in adults and children with kidney failure.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane tool and extracted data. Treatment effects were estimated using random effects meta-analysis and expressed as relative risk (RR) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Evidence certainty was assessed using the Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach (GRADE).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 113 studies randomising 4535 participants. The risk of bias in each study was adjudicated as high or unclear for most risk domains. Compared to UFH, LMWH had uncertain effects on extracorporeal circuit thrombosis (3 studies, 91 participants: RR 1.58, 95% CI 0.46 to 5.42; I2 = 8%; low certainty evidence), while major bleeding and minor bleeding were not adequately reported. Regional citrate anticoagulation may lower the risk of minor bleeding compared to UFH (2 studies, 82 participants: RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.85; I2 = 0%; low certainty evidence). No studies reported data comparing regional citrate to UFH on risks of extracorporeal circuit thrombosis and major bleeding. The effects of very LMWH, danaparoid, prostacyclin, direct thrombin inhibitors, factor XI inhibitors or heparin-grafted membranes were uncertain due to insufficient data. The effects of different LMWH, different doses of LMWH, and the administration of LMWH anticoagulants using inlet versus outlet bloodline or bolus versus infusion were uncertain. Evidence to compare citrate to another citrate or control was scant. The effects of UFH compared to no anticoagulant therapy or different doses of UFH were uncertain. Death, dialysis vascular access outcomes, blood transfusions, measures of anticoagulation effect, and costs of interventions were rarely reported. No studies evaluated the effects of treatment on non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke and hospital admissions. Adverse events were inconsistently and rarely reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Anticoagulant strategies, including UFH and LMWH, have uncertain comparative risks on extracorporeal circuit thrombosis, while major bleeding and minor bleeding were not adequately reported. Regional citrate may decrease minor bleeding, but the effects on major bleeding and extracorporeal circuit thrombosis were not reported. Evidence supporting clinical decision-making for different forms of anticoagulant strategies for HD is of low and very low certainty, as available studies have not been designed to measure treatment effects on important clinical outcomes.

Uncovering the molecular mechanisms between heart failure and end-stage renal disease via a bioinformatics study

Background: Heart failure (HF) is not only a common complication in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) but also a major cause of death. Although clinical studies have shown that there is a close relationship between them, the mechanism of its occurrence is unclear. The aim of this study is to explore the molecular mechanisms between HF and ESRD through comprehensive bioinformatics analysis, providing a new perspective on the crosstalk between these two diseases. Methods: The HF and ESRD datasets were downloaded from the Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) database; we identified and analyzed common differentially expressed genes (DEGs). First, Gene Ontology (GO), Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG), and gene set variation analyses (GSVA) were applied to explore the potential biological functions and construct protein-protein interaction (PPI) networks. Also, four algorithms, namely, random forest (RF), Boruta algorithm, logical regression of the selection operator (LASSO), and support vector machine-recursive feature elimination (SVM-RFE), were used to identify the candidate genes. Subsequently, the diagnostic efficacy of hub genes for HF and ESRD was evaluated using eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) algorithm. CIBERSORT was used to analyze the infiltration of immune cells. Thereafter, we predicted target microRNAs (miRNAs) using databases (miRTarBase, TarBase, and ENOCRI), and transcription factors (TFs) were identified using the ChEA3 database. Cytoscape software was applied to construct mRNA-miRNA-TF regulatory networks. Finally, the Drug Signatures Database (DSigDB) was used to identify potential drug candidates. Results: A total of 68 common DEGs were identified. The enrichment analysis results suggest that immune response and inflammatory factors may be common features of the pathophysiology of HF and ESRD. A total of four hub genes (BCL6, CCL5, CNN1, and PCNT) were validated using RF, LASSO, Boruta, and SVM-RFE algorithms. Their AUC values were all greater than 0.8. Immune infiltration analysis showed that immune cells such as macrophages, neutrophils, and NK cells were altered in HF myocardial tissue, while neutrophils were significantly correlated with all four hub genes. Finally, 11 target miRNAs and 10 TFs were obtained, and miRNA-mRNA-TF regulatory network construction was performed. In addition, 10 gene-targeted drugs were discovered. Conclusion: Our study revealed important crosstalk between HF and ESRD. These common pathways and pivotal genes may provide new ideas for further clinical treatment and experimental studies.

A randomized prospective cross over study on the effects of medium cut-off membranes on T cellular and serologic immune phenotypes in hemodialysis

Extended cut-off filtration by medium cut-off membranes (MCO) has been shown to be safe in maintenance hemodialysis (HD). The notion of using them for the control of chronic low-grade inflammation and positively influencing cellular immune aberrations seems tempting. We conducted an open label, multicenter, randomized, 90 day 2-phase cross over clinical trial (MCO- vs. high flux-HD). 46 patients underwent randomization of which 34 completed the study. Dialysate- or pre- and post-dialysis serum inflammatory mediators were assayed for each study visit. Ex vivo T cell activation was assessed from cryopreserved leucocytes by flow cytometry. Linear mixed models were used to compare treatment modalities, with difference in pre-dialysis serum MCP-1 levels after 3 months as the predefined primary endpoint. Filtration/dialysate concentrations of most mediators, including MCP-1 (mean ± SD: 10.5 ± 5.9 vs. 5.1 ± 3.8 pg/ml, P < 0.001) were significantly increased during MCO- versus high flux-HD. However, except for the largest mediator studied, i.e., YKL-40, this did not confer any advantages for single session elimination kinetics (post-HD mean ± SD: 360 ± 334 vs. 564 ± 422 pg/ml, P < 0.001). No sustained reduction of any of the studied mediators was found neither. Still, the long-term reduction of CD69+ (P = 0.01) and PD1+ (P = 0.02) activated CD4+ T cells was striking. Thus, MCO-HD does not induce reduction of a broad range of inflammatory mediators studied here. Long-term reduction over a 3-month period was not possible. Increased single session filtration, as evidenced by increased dialysate concentrations of inflammatory mediators during MCO-HD, might eventually be compensated for by compartment redistribution or increased production during dialysis session. Nevertheless, lasting effects on the T-cell phenotype were seen, which deserves further investigation.

Unexpected and striking effect of heparin-free dialysis on cytokine release

Heparin (both unfractionated and low molecular weight) is not only a potent anticoagulant but also has many pleiotropic effects, some of which are mediated by cytokine release. We compared the effect of hemodialysis (HD) with enoxaparin as an anticoagulant and without systemic anticoagulation (heparin-grafted membrane—Evodial) on the release of monocyte chemoattractant protein 1 (MCP-1), endostatin (ES) and activin A (Act-A). Nineteen stable HD patients were dialyzed with or without heparin, and plasma levels of MCP-1, ES and Act-A were measured after such a dialysis. During HD with Evodial, the intradialytic levels of all three cytokines were 2–3 folds lower. The between-anticoagulant differences were significant over time for all three cytokines: MCP-1 (P < 0.001), ES (P < 0.001) and Act-A (P < 0.001). This striking effect of heparin-free dialysis with Evodial membrane may be beneficial not only because it reduces the possibility of bleeding complications but also because it might reduce proinflammatory cytokine concentration and therefore contribute to the improvement in endothelial function. Further studies are needed to determine whether it has a positive effect on morbidity and mortality of maintenance HD patients.