Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Observational Study
. 2018 Mar 8;8(3):e019900.
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-019900.

Long-term clinical parameters after switching to nocturnal haemodialysis: a Dutch propensity-score-matched cohort study comparing patients on nocturnal haemodialysis with patients on three-times-a-week haemodialysis/haemodiafiltration

Affiliations
Observational Study

Long-term clinical parameters after switching to nocturnal haemodialysis: a Dutch propensity-score-matched cohort study comparing patients on nocturnal haemodialysis with patients on three-times-a-week haemodialysis/haemodiafiltration

Thijs Thomas Jansz et al. BMJ Open. .

Abstract

Objectives: Nocturnal haemodialysis (NHD), characterised by 8-hour sessions ≥3 times a week, is known to improve clinical parameters in the short term compared with conventional-schedule haemodialysis (HD), generally 3×3.5-4 hours a week. We studied long-term effects of NHD and used patients on conventional HD/haemodiafiltration (HDF) as controls.

Design: Four-year prospective follow-up of patients who switched to NHD; we compared patients with patients on HD/HDF using propensity score matching.

Setting: 28 Dutch dialysis centres.

Participants: We included 159 patients starting with NHD any time since 2004, aged 56.7±12.9 years, with median dialysis vintage 2.3 (0.9-5.1) years. We propensity-score matched 100 patients on NHD to 100 on HD/HDF.

Primary and secondary outcome measures: Control of hypertension (predialysis blood pressure, number of antihypertensives), phosphate (phosphate, number of phosphate binders), nutritional status and inflammation (albumin, C reactive protein and postdialysis weight) and anaemia (erythropoiesis-stimulating agent (ESA) resistance).

Results: Switching to NHD was associated with a non-significant reduction of antihypertensives compared with HD/HDF (OR <2 types 2.17, 95% CI 0.86 to 5.50, P=0.11); and a prolonged lower need for phosphate binders (OR <2 types 1.83, 95% CI 1.10 to 3.03, P=0.02). NHD was not associated with significant changes in blood pressure or phosphate. NHD was associated with significantly higher albumin over time compared with HD/HDF (0.70 g/L/year, 95% CI 0.10 to 1.30, P=0.02). ESA resistance decreased significantly in NHD compared with HD/HDF, resulting in a 33% lower ESA dose in the long term.

Conclusions: After switching to NHD, the lower need for antihypertensives, phosphate binders and ESA persists for at least 4 years. These sustained improvements in NHD contrast significantly with the course of these parameters during continued treatment with conventional-schedule HD and HDF. NHD provides an optimal form of dialysis, also suitable for patients expected to have a long waiting time for transplantation or those convicted to indefinite dialysis.

Keywords: albumin; erythropoietin; haemodialysis; nocturnal haemodialysis; phosphate binders; propensity score matching.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: MPCG reports personal fees and non-financial support from Baxter Healthcare and personal fees from Fresenius Medical Care Netherlands, outside the submitted work.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Hypertension control in nocturnal haemodialysis versus haemodialysis/haemodiafiltration. Left: systolic (upper two lines) and diastolic (lower two lines) blood pressure (mm Hg) in propensity-score-matched nocturnal haemodialysis (NHD, dark lines) and haemodialysis/haemodiafiltration (HD/HDF, light lines) patients over the course of 48 months. Right: number of different antihypertensive agents in propensity-score-matched NHD (dark line) and HD/HDF (light line) patients over the course of 48 months. OR <2 types NHD compared with baseline P=0.02; OR <2 types NHD vs HD/HDF P=0.11. 95% CIs are shown. Number of NHD/HD/HDF patients available for analysis at 0 months: 100/100; 12 months: 57/74; 24 months: 35/51; 36 months: 20/34; 48 months: 11/22.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Phosphate control in nocturnal haemodialysis (NHD) versus haemodialysis/haemodiafiltration (HD/HDF). Phosphate (lines, mmol/L) and number of different phosphate-binding agents (bars, same axis) in propensity-score-matched NHD (dark lines/bars) and HD/HDF (light lines/bars) patients over the course of 48 months. OR <2 types NHD compared with baseline P=0.01; OR <2 types NHD vs HD/HDF P=0.02. 95% CIs are shown. Number of NHD/HD/HDF patients available for analysis at 0 months: 100/100; 12 months: 57/74; 24 months: 35/51; 36 months: 20/34; 48 months: 11/22.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Albumin in nocturnal haemodialysis (NHD) versus haemodialysis/haemodiafiltration (HD/HDF). Albumin (g/L) in propensity-score-matched NHD (dark line) and HD/HDF (light line) patients over the course of 48 months. NHD compared with baseline P=0.19; NHD vs HD/HDF P=0.02. 95% CIs are shown. Number of NHD/HD/HDF patients available for analysis at 0 months: 100/100; 12 months: 57/74; 24 months: 35/51; 36 months: 20/34; 48 months: 11/22.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Erythropoiesis-stimulating agent (ESA) resistance in nocturnal haemodialysis (NHD) versus haemodialysis/haemodiafiltration (HD/HDF). ESA resistance (DDD/Hb/kg/week) in propensity-score-matched NHD (dark line) and HD/HDF (light line) patients over the course of 48 months. NHD compared with baseline P<0.01; NHD vs HD/HDF P<0.001. 95% CI are shown. Number of NHD/HD/HDF patients available for analysis at 0 months: 100/100; 12 months: 57/74; 24 months: 35/0; 36 months: 20/0; 48 months: 11/0. DDD, defined daily dose; Hb, haemoglobin.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Saran R, Li Y, Robinson B, et al. . US Renal Data System 2015 Annual Data Report: Epidemiology of Kidney Disease in the United States. Am J Kidney Dis 2016;67:A7–8. 10.1053/j.ajkd.2015.12.014 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Pippias M, Jager KJ, Kramer A, et al. . The changing trends and outcomes in renal replacement therapy: data from the ERA-EDTA Registry. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2016;31:831–41. 10.1093/ndt/gfv327 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Go AS, Chertow GM, Fan D, et al. . Chronic kidney disease and the risks of death, cardiovascular events, and hospitalization. N Engl J Med 2004;351:1296–305. 10.1056/NEJMoa041031 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Burton JO, Jefferies HJ, Selby NM, et al. . Hemodialysis-induced repetitive myocardial injury results in global and segmental reduction in systolic cardiac function. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2009;4:1925–31. 10.2215/CJN.04470709 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Flythe JE, Kimmel SE, Brunelli SM. Rapid fluid removal during dialysis is associated with cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Kidney Int 2011;79:250–7. 10.1038/ki.2010.383 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms