Improved cardiovascular variables during acetate free biofiltration. Online hemodiafiltration versus acetate-free biofiltration: a prospective crossover study. Preservation of residual renal function in dialysis patients: effects of dialysis-technique-related factors. Cardiovascular response during hemodialysis and hemofiltration: thermal, membrane, and catecholamine influences. A prospective comparison of bicarbonate dialysis, hemodiafiltration, and acetate-free biofiltration in the elderly. Acetate-free biofiltration versus bicarbonate haemodialysis in the treatment of patients with diabetic nephropathy: a cross-over multicentric study. Clinical improvement by increased frequency of on-line hemodialfiltration. A randomized cross-over comparison of the hemodynamic response to intermittent hemodialysis and continuous hemofiltration in ICU patients with acute renal failure. Comparison between hemofiltration and hemodiafiltration in a long-term prospective cross-over study.
Acetate free biofiltration (AFB) provides a well-tolerated and efficient renal replacement therapy. Replacement of most of the acetate by bicarbonate in standard hemodialysis has resulted in a decrease in intradialytic hypotensive episodes. This has been attributed to a decrease in the acetate-induced impairment of myocardial contractility. The aim of the present study was to investigate whether the total absence of acetate in AFB would further enhance dialysis stability and improve cardiovascular status.
                In a long-term, randomized trial we included 11 patients on AFB and 9 patients on bicarbonate hemodialysis (HD) for one year. Patients were matched for age, sex and urea reduction rate, but not for the presence of hypertension or cardiovascular history. During each dialysis session blood pressure was measured automatically and the presence of significant hypotension was recorded. Antihypertensive medication was registered every three months. Before and at the end of the study M-mode echocardiography was performed and left ventricular mass index (LVMi) was calculated. Every six months serum lipids were measured.
                At baseline, mean arterial pressure (MAP) before and after dialysis, the percentage of hypotensive dialyses, LVMi and serum lipids did not differ between AFB and HD. Pre-dialysis MAP decreased in AFB (from 112.5 to 107 mmHg) and increased in HD (from 101.7 to 105.3 mmHg; p = 0.01, HD versus AFB). Postdialysis MAP remained stable in both groups (AFB 91.6 mmHg at 0 months and 90.6 mmHg at 12 months, for HD respectively 83.9 and 86.5 mmHg, NS). The percentage of hypotensive dialyses did not differ significantly between the groups during the study. LVMi decreased in AFB from 195.4 to 162.1 gr/m2 and increased in HD patients from 153.8 to 182.5 gr/m2 (p = 0.03 HD versus AFB). The number of antihypertensive medications per patient did not differ between groups. Serum lipids remained unchanged during the trial.
                In conclusion, AFB provided better control of pre-dialysis MAP compared to HD, and stable postdialysis MAP. The percentage of dialysis sessions with hypotension did not differ. LVMi decreased significantly in AFB, but rose in HD. Online hemodiafiltration (online HDF) and acetate-free biofiltration (AFB) are 2 innovative renal replacement therapies. Convincing evidence has shown that both techniques are superior to conventional hemodialysis in many aspects. The aim of the present investigation was to compare online HDF and AFB in 12 stable maintenance hemodialysis patients in a prospective, randomized crossover trial. Twelve stable dialysis patients, age 49.7 +/- 11.3 years and on dialysis for 83.5 +/- 76.7 months, were treated prospectively and randomly by either AFB, predilution HDF (pre-HDF), or postdilution HDF (post-HDF) for a total of 36 weeks using exclusively F60S high-flux dialyzers. Routine blood biochemical tests, bone metabolism parameters, and clearance for both small and larger molecular weight substances were measured at defined intervals. During the trial period inter- and intradialysis symptoms, e.g., hypotensive episodes and intradialysis arterial blood gas analyses, were recorded. Both online HDF and AFB were well accepted by the overwhelming majority of patients and also by the dialysis staff. Pretreatment sodium, total and ionized calcium, chloride, bicarbonate, and urea did not differ within or between the 3 treatment groups. Potassium increased slightly in HDF patients while phosphate and beta2-microglobulin (beta2-M) decreased in all groups. After dialysis, AFB patients exhibited a significantly higher bicarbonate concentration and lower potassium level when identical potassium concentrations in dialysate were used. Patients receiving AFB manifested less intradialysis partial pressure of oxygen drop and partial pressure of carbon dioxide rise than those on HDF treatments. HDF treatments could afford higher single-pool and double-pool Kt/V, higher effective urea and beta2M clearance, and lower total interdialysis symptom scores than the AFB treatment method. While bone metabolism parameters did not differ between the 3 dialysis modalities, some parameters such as deoxypyridinoline in HDF and osteocalcin, pyridinoline, and deoxypyridinoline in AFB deteriorated at the end of the crossover study. Aluminum concentration decreased progressively to about one-third of prestudy values at the end of the study with all 3 treatments. AFB was associated with a lower predialysis mean arterial pressure (MAP), a smaller drop in MAP during treatment, and similar hypotension episodes compared with the 2 HDF treatments. Albumin concentration showed a trend to decrease during the first 2 months of the trial period followed by a slight increase thereafter but still significantly lower than initial value at the end of crossover. Both online HDF and AFB share most of the features of optimal renal replacement therapy. Online HDF is superior to AFB in such aspects as increased delivered dialysis dose both for small and larger molecular weight toxins and less interdialysis symptoms. On the other hand, AFB is associated with a smaller effect on arterial blood gas values and improved intradialysis hemodynamic tolerance. Some dialysis-related symptoms and complications in the case of our AFB practice could be attributable, at least in part, to low dialysate calcium level. Residual renal function (RRF) is of paramount importance to dialysis adequacy, morbidity, and mortality, particularly for long-term continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) patients. Residual renal function seems to be better preserved in patients on CAPD than in hemodialysis (HD) patients. We analyzed RRF in 45 patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD), commencing either CAPD or HD, to prospectively define the time course of the decline in RRF, and to evaluate dialysis-technique-related factors such as cardiovascular stability and bioincompatibility.
                Single-center prospective investigation in parallel design with matched pairs.
                Fifteen patients starting CAPD and 15 matched pairs of patients commencing HD were matched according to cause of renal failure and RRF. Hemodialysis patients were assigned to two dialyzer membranes differing markedly in their potential to activate complement and cells (bioincompatibility). Fifteen patients were treated exclusively with the cuprophane membrane (bioincompatible) and the other 15 patients received HD with the high-flux polysulfone membrane (biocompatible).
                Residual renal function was determined at initiation of dialytic therapy and after 6, 12, and 24 months. Dry weight (by chest x ray and diameter of the vena cava) was closely recorded throughout the study, and the number of hypotensive episodes counted.
                Residual renal function declined in both CAPD and HD patients, although this decline was faster in HD patients (2.8 mL/minute after 6 months and 3.7 mL/min after 12 months) than in CAPD patients (0.6 mL/min and 1.4 mL/min after 6 and 12 months respectively). It declined faster in patients with bioincompatible than with biocompatible HD membranes (3.6 mL/min vs 1.9 mL/min after 6 months). Eleven percent of the HD sessions were complicated by clinically relevant blood pressure reductions, but there were no differences between the two dialyzer membrane groups. None of the CAPD patients had documented hypotensive episodes. None of the study patients suffered severe illness or received nephrotoxic antibiotics or radiocontrast media.
                The better preservation of RRF in stable CAPD patients corresponded with greater cardiovascular stability compared to HD patients, independently of the membrane used. Furthermore, there was a significantly higher preservation of RRF in HD patients on polysulfone versus cuprophane membranes, indicating an additional effect of biocompatibility, such as less generation of nephrotoxic substances by the membrane. Thus, starting ESRD patients on HD prior to elective CAPD should be avoided for better preservation of RRF. Nine patients on regular dialysis were studied, in a cross-over format comparing hemodialysis (HD) and hemofiltration (HF), to identify potential mechanisms of the disparate hemodynamic responses. Dialysis and substitution fluid composition (high sodium, acetate), treatment time, fluid loss rate, and membrane type (AN 69) were matched. Cardiac output was determined by changes in thoracic electrical bioimpedance. Cardiac output remained stable during HF but increased during HD (p < 0.001, HD vs. HF), despite a parallel reduction in stroke volume. The heart rate response was significantly greater during HD relative to HF (p < 0.01). Systemic vascular resistance remained stable during HF but decreased significantly during HD (p < 0.05). Although there was a modest fall during HD, the difference in blood pressure at the end of treatment between HD and HF was not significant. Comparable increases in body temperature were observed during both treatments. Plasma catecholamines increased in parallel during HD and HF and following orthostatic stimulation at the end of treatment, and extracorporeal catecholamine clearances were similar. The values for serum sodium, total CO2, anion gap, potassium, and hematocrit at the end of treatment were similar, whereas total serum calcium was significantly greater following HD. There were no significant differences in indices of myocardial contractility or central blood volume. These results suggest that the disparate hemodynamic responses to fluid and solute removal during HD and HF can be dissociated from changes in osmolality or venous tone, membrane bioincompatibility, thermal stress, or differences in acetate delivery or catecholamine release. The explanation for the disparate hemodynamic responses between these two treatment modalities remains unclear. A role for an as yet unidentified vasodilatory substance generated during dialysate exposure, or convectively removed during hemofiltration, remain intriguing possibilities. Hemodiafiltration (HDF) and more recently acetate-free biofiltration (AFB) have shown good blood purification and cardiovascular stability in young and middle-aged hemodialysis patients. It is not clear if this is also valid for elderly patients. Twelve patients aged more than 70 years (mean age +/- SD, 76 +/- 4 years) on regular dialysis for at least 5 months were treated with bicarbonate dialysis (BD), HDF, or AFB in a randomized sequence and prospectively followed for 6 months (72 dialysis sessions/patient) for each procedure. The dialysis solution (containing bicarbonate), blood flow rate, and dialysate flow rate were the same with all the methods. During HDF and AFB solutions containing bicarbonate at a concentration of 27 to 30 mEq/L and 145 mEq/L, respectively, were infused postdilution at a rate of 66 +/- 7 mL/min and 2.81 +/- 0.12 L/hr, respectively. During the period of observation we evaluated the number of intradialytic hypotensions, the episodes of nausea, vomiting, headache (dialysis intolerance), body weight, the interdialysis weight gain, the duration of the dialysis session, the number of hospitalizations/patient, and the length of hospitalization/patient. At the end of each observation period we determined: Kt/V, protein catabolic rate, acid base balance, serum creatinine, serum calcium, serum phosphorus, alkaline phosphatases, and serum intact parathyroid hormone. After the switch from BD to either HDF or AFB, the results have shown a significant reduction of dialysis hypotension episodes (18 percent on BD, 14 percent on HDF, and 13 percent on AFB; BD v HDF, P = 0.001; BD v AFB, P = 0.0001; and HDF v AFB, P = NS) and of dialysis intolerance (3.3 percent on BD, 1.3 percent on HDF, and 1.1 percent on AFB; BD v HDF, P = 0.021; BD v AFB, P = 0.019; and HDF v AFB, P = NS). Kt/V improved significantly after the switch from BD to either HDF or AFB (1.17 +/- 0.06 on BD, 1.32 +/- 0.12 on HDF, and 1.32 +/- 0.13 on AFB; BD v HDF, P = 0.021; BD v AFB, P = 0.003; HDF v AFB, P = NS). Protein catabolic rate also improved in HDF and AFB compared with BD (0.90 +/- 0.12 on BD, 1.03 +/- 0.15 on HDF, and 1.04 +/- 0.14 on AFB; BD v HDF, P = 0.001; BD v AFB, P = 0.009; and HDF v AFB, P = NS). AFB showed a better correction of acidosis compared either with BD or HDF (serum bicarbonate, 20.3 +/- 1.1 mEq/L on BD, 20.8 +/- 2.2 mEqL on HDF, and 22.2 +/- 2.4 mEq/L on AFB; BD v HDF, P = NS; BD v AFB, P = 0.01; and HDF v AFB, P = 0.030). The other parameters observed did not differ. In conclusion HDF and AFB show a better dialysis efficiency and a better hemodynamic tolerance compared with BD. This fact is associated with an improvement in protein intake as assessed by kinetic criteria. Acetate-free biofiltration has the further advantage of a better control of the acid-base balance compared with BD and HDF. HDF and AFB are useful dialytic options to traditional BD hemodialysis even in patients older than 70 years. Morbidity and mortality rates in diabetic patients on regular dialysis treatment (RDT) are higher than in non-diabetic-subjects on RDT. Moreover, diabetic patients experience an intradialitic morbidity unacceptably higher than in patients with other causes of terminal renal failure. The aim of the present investigation was to compare standard bicarbonate haemodialysis (BHD) with acetate-free biofiltration (AFB) in a group of 41 diabetic patients stable on dialysis treatment for 25 +/- 22 months.
                Twenty-four type II and 17 type I diabetic patients, all requiring insulin therapy, were included and were followed for 1 year in a 6-month cross-over randomized study for both methods. The analysis was carried out on dialysis symptoms, interdialysis symptoms, and nutritional status, and the multivariate analysis of variance for repeated measures on the same subjects in the two techniques was used.
                AFB significantly reduced dialytic and extradialytic symptoms (P=0.003 and 0.001 respectively). Cardiovascular collapses decreased by 43%, and other dialysis symptoms showed a similar trend (-35%). The interdialysis symptoms decreased by 28% and were accompanied by an increase in subjective wellbeing (39%) when patients were switched from traditional haemodialysis to AFB. Acid base control was better with AFB (P=0.01), both at the beginning and during the session. Slightly significant differences were also obtained for Kt/V (AFB 1.48 +/- 0.29 vs BHD 1.38 +/- 0.30), while no significant difference was noted with respect to sodium mass balance, nutritional status, calorie-protein intake, nPCR, blood glucose profile, and insulin requirements. The number of hospital admissions and the mortality rate, which were much lower during the AFB than the BHD period, were not analysed statistically.
                AFB allows better control of some metabolic aspects, reduces intra- and extradialysis symptoms, and improves patient quality of life. Whether the long-term prognosis can be improved by AFB remains to be established with further studies. In spite of the better efficiency of on-line hemodiafiltration (HDF) compared with conventional hemodialysis (HD), it is relatively expensive. The aim of this study was to assess the advantages in the biochemical, hemodynamic and clinical effects in uremic patients treated with on-line HDF and with different frequencies of combination high-flux HD.
                One hundred eleven patients were divided into four groups receiving different frequencies of on-line HDF (thrice, twice, once per week) and high-flux HD.
                Hemodynamic parameters including maximum drop of systolic blood pressure, episodes of symptomatic hypotension and mean saline infusion volumes during dialysis were reduced when frequencies of on-line HDF were increased. Significant improvements in urea kinetic were observed when frequencies of on-line HDF were increased. On-line HDF significantly reduced the amount of erythropoietin needed and improved intra- and inter-dialysis symptoms, physical well-being, menstruation and skin pigmentation when frequency of HDF is increased to three time per week.
                On-line HDF offers a better cardiovascular stability and clinical improvement. Thrice weekly on-line HDF offers a significant benefit when compared with lower frequencies of HDF per week and high-flux HD. To compare the hemodynamic response of ICU patients with acute renal failure of a 24-h continuous arteriovenous hemofiltration (CAVH) and that of patients with a 4-h intermittent hemodialysis (HD).
                Cross-over randomized clinical trial. The two periods to be compared were a 24-h CAVH and the 24-h encompassing a 4-h HD. These two periods were separated by a 24-h wash-out period.
                Ten bed medicosurgical ICU of a tertiary care center in Paris, France.
                Inclusion criterion was the requirement of replacement therapy for acute renal failure in patients already submitted to mechanical ventilation.
                CAVH was performed with Ringers' lactate used for restitution and infused before the hemofilter. The ultrafiltrate output was maintained at around 15 ml/min. HD was performed with a bicarbonate-buffered dialysate.
                Mean arterial pressure (MAP), use of adrenergic drugs, and change in body weight during each period.
                Twenty-seven consecutive patients were included, 15 CAVH-HD and 12HD-CAVH. CAVH and HD allowed the same metabolic efficacy. No hemodynamic parameter (MAP, amount of adrenergic drugs, change in body weight) differed between the two methods.
                CAVH is equivalent to HD in terms of MAP and the use of vasopressive drugs and fluids. Establishing the superiority of CAVH would require carefully controlled studies assessing either outcome or changes in tissue oxygenation. The objective of the study was to compare the convective treatment modes, on-line hemofiltration (HF) and on-line hemodiafiltration (HDF), regarding cardiovascular tolerance and effects on blood pressure, when applied under similar conditions in stable dialysis patients.
                39 clinically stable dialysis patients were treated with HD for 6 months (run-in period), followed by HF and HDF in random order for 2x6 months. Similar biocompatibility (same membrane and fluid quality), similar treatment time and urea Kt/V were achieved using AK100/200 ULTRA machines, polyamide membranes in low-flux and high-flux versions and appropriate adjustment of blood flow rate (Qb) and dilution ratio (Qb/Qinf). Predilution was used for HDF (target dilution ratio = 2/1 ) as well as for HF (target dilution ratio = 1/1).
                30 patients completed the study; 5 dropped out for non-study related reasons and 4 for non-compliance. Treatment with HF in comparison to HDF showed fewer hypotension episodes during the sessions per patient and month (HF: 0.5, HDF 1.1; p = 0.017), less plasma expander administration per patient and month (HF: 35.9 ml, HDF: 103.1 ml; p = 0.035), fewer episodes of intra-session headache (HF: 0.1, HDF: 0.4; p = 0.06), and higher pre-session MAP (HF: 98.4 mmHg, HDF: 93.8 mmHg; p = 0.037). No significant difference was found in inter-treatment weight gain, post-session MAP, or pre-session plasma sodium.
                HF and HDF provide good control of intra-session symptoms and blood pressure in stable patients. Treatment with HF resulted in a significant reduction in intra-session hypotension and a slight but significant increase in pre-session MAP, caused by an increase in systolic BP without any effect on the prevalence of hypertension or the dose of antihypertensive drugs, all compared to HDF.
We were unable to demonstrate whether convective modalities (either HF, HDF or AFB) have significant advantages over HD with regard to clinically important outcomes of mortality, dialysis-related hypotension and hospitalisation. More adequately-powered good quality RCTs assessing clinically important outcomes (mortality, hospitalisation, quality of life) are needed.