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
. 2022 Jul 14;7(9):1980-1990.
doi: 10.1016/j.ekir.2022.06.021. eCollection 2022 Sep.

High-Volume Hemodiafiltration and Cool Hemodialysis Have a Beneficial Effect on Intradialytic Hemodynamics: A Randomized Cross-Over Trial of Four Intermittent Dialysis Strategies

Affiliations

High-Volume Hemodiafiltration and Cool Hemodialysis Have a Beneficial Effect on Intradialytic Hemodynamics: A Randomized Cross-Over Trial of Four Intermittent Dialysis Strategies

Paul A Rootjes et al. Kidney Int Rep. .

Abstract

Introduction: Compared to standard hemodialysis (S-HD), postdilution hemodiafiltration (HDF) has been associated with improved survival.

Methods: To assess whether intradialytic hemodynamics may play a role in this respect, 40 chronic dialysis patients were cross-over randomized to S-HD (dialysate temperature [Td] 36.5 °C), cooled HD (C-HD; Td 35.5 °C), and HDF (low-volume [LV-HDF)] and high-volume [HV-HDF], both Td 36.5 °C, convection volume 15 liters, and at least 23 liters per session, respectively), each for 2 weeks. Blood pressure (BP) was measured every 15 minutes. The primary endpoint was the number of intradialytic hypotensive (IDH) episodes per session. IDH was defined as systolic BP (SBP) less than 90 mmHg for predialysis SBP less than 160 mmHg and less than 100 mmHg for predialysis SBP greater than or equal to 160 mmHg, independent of symptoms and interventions. A post hoc analysis on early-onset IDH was performed as well. Secondary endpoints included intradialytic courses of SBP, diastolic BP (DBP) and mean arterial pressure (MAP).

Results: During S-HD, IDH occurred 0.68 episodes per session, which was 3.2 and 2.5 times higher than during C-HD (0.21 per session, P < 0.0005) and HV-HDF (0.27 per session, P < 0.0005), respectively. Whereas the latter 2 strategies showed similar frequencies, HV-HDF differed significantly from LV-HDF (P = 0.02). A comparable trend was observed for early-onset IDH: S-HD (0.32 per session), C-HD (0.07 per session, P < 0.0005) and HV-HDF (0.10 per session, P = 0.001). SBP, DBP, and MAP declined during S-HD (-6.8, -5.2, -5.2 mmHg per session; P = 0.004, P < 0.0005, P = 0.002 respectively), which was markedly different from C-HD (P < 0.01).

Conclusion: Though C-HD and HV-HDF showed the lowest IDH frequency and the best intradialytic hemodynamic stability, all parameters were most disrupted in S-HD. Therefore, the survival benefit of HV-HDF over S-HD may be partly caused by a more beneficial intradialytic BP profile.

Keywords: dialysate temperature; hemodiafiltration; hemodialysis; hemodynamic stability; intradialytic hypotension; randomized cross-over trial.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

None
Graphical abstract
Figure 1
Figure 1
Study flowchart.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Average number of IDH (definition see text) episodes per session of each dialysis modality with 95% confidence interval, subdivided into early- and late-onset IDH (resp. ≤120 minutes and >120 minutes after the start of dialysis). For the corresponding P-values, see Table 3. C-HD, cool hemodialysis; IDH, intradialytic hypotensive; LV and HV-HDF: low-volume and high-volume hemodiafiltration; S-HD, standard hemodialysis.
Figure 3
Figure 3
(A) Intradialytic courses of mean SBP; (B) mean diastolic BP; (C) mean arterial pressure during S-HD, C-HD, LV-HDF and HV-HDF. SBP, DBP and mean arterial pressure all declined significantly during S-HD (P = 0.004, P < 0.0005, P = 0.002 respectively). C-HD, cool hemodialysis; LV and HV-HDF, low-volume and high-volume hemodiafiltration; S-HD, standard hemodialysis; SBP, systolic blood pressure.

References

    1. Johansen K.L., Chertow G.M., Foley R.N., et al. US renal data system 2020 annual data report: epidemiology of kidney disease in the United States. Am J Kidney Dis. 2021;77(suppl 1):A7–A8. doi: 10.1053/j.ajkd.2021.01.002. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Foley R.N., Parfrey P.S., Sarnak M.J. Epidemiology of cardiovascular disease in chronic renal disease. J Am Soc Nephrol. 1998;9(suppl):S16–S23. - PubMed
    1. Ajiro J., Alchi B., Narita I., et al. Mortality predictors after 10 years of dialysis: a prospective study of Japanese hemodialysis patients. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2007;2:653–660. doi: 10.2215/CJN.03160906. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Tong J., Liu M., Li H., et al. Mortality and associated risk factors in dialysis patients with cardiovascular disease. Kidney Blood Press Res. 2016;41:479–487. doi: 10.1159/000443449. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Locatelli F., Pozzoni P., Tentori F., del Vecchio L. Epidemiology of cardiovascular risk in patients with chronic kidney disease. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2003;18(suppl 7):vii2–vii9. doi: 10.1093/ndt/gfg1072. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources