Measurement of the effective dialyzer Na diffusion gradient in vitro and in vivo.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Some of the morbidity associated with chronic hemodialysis is thought to result from retention of large molecular weight solutes that are poorly removed by diffusion in conventional hemodialysis. Hemodiafiltration combines convective and diffusive solute removal in a single therapy. The hypothesis that hemodiafiltration provides better solute removal than high-flux hemodialysis was tested in a prospective, randomized clinical trial. Patients were randomized to either on-line postdilution hemodiafiltration or high-flux hemodialysis. The groups did not differ in body size, treatment time, blood flow rate, or net fluid removal. The filtration volume in hemodiafiltration was 21 +/-1 L. Therapy prescriptions were unchanged for a 12-mo study period. Removal of both small (urea and creatinine) and large (ss(2)-microglobulin and complement factor D) solutes was significantly greater for hemodiafiltration than for high-flux hemodialysis. The increased urea and creatinine removal did not result in lower pretreatment serum concentrations in the hemodiafiltration group. Pretreatment plasma beta(2)-microglobulin concentrations decreased with time (P< 0.001); however, the decrease was similar for both therapies (P = 0.317). Pretreatment plasma complement factor D concentrations also decreased with time (P<0.001), and the decrease was significantly greater with hemodiafiltration than with high-flux hemodialysis (P = 0.010). The conclusion is that on-line hemodiafiltration provides superior solute removal to high-flux hemodialysis over a wide molecular weight range. The improved removal may not result in lower pretreatment plasma concentrations, however, possibly because of limitations in mass transfer rates within the body.
    Journal of the American Society of Nephrology 12/2000; 11(12):2344-50. · 9.47 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Universal lower dialysate [Na+] is often advocated as a means of improving the dire cardiovascular plight of our dialysis patients. However, there is evidence associating lower dialysate [Na+] and increased morbidity and mortality especially in frailer patients, probably as a result of more frequent intra-dialytic hypotension. In this editorial, we summarize arguments for and against lower dialysate [Na+], and provide recommendations around selecting the most appropriate dialysate [Na+] for specific clinical subsets that may benefit from manipulation of salt and water balance. The lack of overall clarity on relative benefits and risks of lower dialysate [Na+] does not support the case for empirical "across the board" change, and experimental testing in clinical trials is required to determine safe and effective use.
    Seminars in Dialysis 04/2012; 25(3):277-83. · 2.25 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Dialysate [Na+] is often overlooked as a contributor to hypertension in patients on haemodialysis (HD). We report observational experience with a facility level decrease in dialysate [Na+] from 141 mmol/l to 138 mmol/l, in the absence of concurrent change with respect to dietary sodium regulation. The sample comprised all patients (n=52) dialysing at a single HD facility over an 8-month period flanking the change in dialysate [Na+]. Outcomes included repeated observations of blood pressure (BP), interdialytic weight gain (IDWG), pre-dialysis plasma [Na+] and adverse events. Predictors other than dialysate [Na+] included patient demographics, clinical characteristics and number of antihypertensive medications. The study used a longitudinal unbalanced panel design, and hierarchical linear and Poisson mixed models. In multivariate analyses, the change in dialysate [Na+] was associated with a statistically significant small to medium-sized decrease in pre- and post-dialysis systolic and diastolic BP, pre-dialysis plasma [Na+], but not IDWG. Change was greatest in the patient tertile with the highest initial BP. There was no change in the frequency of adverse events. Modelling dialysate [Na+] exposure as the diffusion gradient from dialysate to blood water did not improve the strength of associations. A facility level decrease in dialysate [Na+] from 141 mmol/l to 138 mmol/l appears to be safe and well tolerated, and a useful means of improving BP control. The lack of change in IDWG probably reflects lack of dietary salt restriction, and but does raise the issue of volume-independent effects of sodium exposure on BP.
    Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 10/2007; 22(9):2630-9. · 3.49 Impact Factor