Proteomic analisys of protein extraction during hemofiltration with on-line endogenous reinfusion (HFR) using different polysulphone membranes.

In end-stage renal disease patients, extracorporeal dialytic therapy is not able to prevent the accumulation of toxins related to the uremic syndrome, a severe complication that increases morbidity and mortality rate. In this paper, hemoFiltration with on-line Reinfusion (HFR) architecture is used to evaluate the effect of a more permeable membrane on the extraction of medium-high molecular weight molecules. The aim of this study was to compare two polysulphone membranes for convective chamber: polyphenylene High Flux (pHF) and polyphenylene Super High-Flux (pSHF). Fourteen patients were subjected to HFR with pHF and pSHF membranes and ultra filtrate (UF) samples were collected to evaluate molecular weight cut-off (MWCO) and to identify extracted proteins. Furthermore, image analysis software was used in order to evaluate change in protein extraction during the dialysis. The quantification of four proteins by immunoassay demonstrates a higher permeability of pSHF membrane. Two-dimensional electrophoresis (2-DE) gels showed, for both membranes, the greater number of protein spots at 235 min. Some of the identified proteins, involved in nephropathic disease complications, were compared to assess differences in extraction during dialytic treatment by PDQuest analysis. UF proteomic analysis demonstrated a different behavior for the two membranes; pHF membrane was more permeable at the beginning of HFR treatment (15 min), while pSHF membrane at the end of treatment (235 min). Proteomic analysis is a suitable approach to investigate the behavior of different membranes during dialysis. Results indicated that pSHF membrane offers the higher permeability, and showed higher efficiency in removal of middle molecules related to uremic syndrome.

Effects of acetate-free haemodiafiltration (HDF) with endogenous reinfusion (HFR) on cardiac troponin levels.

BACKGROUND: Haemofiltrate reinfusion (HFR) is a form of haemodiafiltration (HDF) in which replacement fluid is constituted by ultrafiltrate from the patient 'regenerated' through a cartridge containing hydrophobic styrene resin. Bicarbonate-based dialysis solutions (DS) used in routine haemodialysis and HDF contain small quantities of acetate (3-5 mMol/L) as stabilizing agent, one of the major causes of intradialytic hypotension. Acetate-free (AF) DS have recently been made available, substituting acetate with hydrochloric acid. Cardiac troponin (cTnT) constitutes an appreciable marker of myocardial damage and cardiac hypertrophy, and correlates with left ventricular mass. METHODS: The aim of this study was to assess the impact of the presence or lack of acetate in DS on cTnT levels in patients treated with HFR and to evaluate outcome of intra-session cardiovascular stability. Twenty-five patients devoid of major cardiovascular comorbidity were randomized and treated with AF HFR for 3 months. The same patients were subsequently treated by means of HFR with DS containing 3 mMol/L acetate for 3 months and finally with AF HFR for a further 3 months. Prior and subsequent to each treatment period, samples were collected for cTnT measurement. RESULTS: A significant decrease was observed in cTnT levels throughout the first session of AF HFR (1.32 ± 0.35-1.12 ± 0.31 ng/mL, P < 0.05) with a subsequent rise being registered during HFR with acetate-containing DS (1.12 ± 0.31-1.28 ± 0.37 ng/mL, P < 0.05) and a further drop from 1.28 ± 0.37 to 1.21 ± 0.35 ng/mL in the last AF HFR period. During HFR with acetate-containing DS, a significant drop in systolic and diastolic arterial pressure was observed in conjunction with a higher heart rate at the end of the session. CONCLUSION: We observed an increase in cTnT during HFR with acetate and drops manifested during HFR without acetate; it may therefore be concluded that the drop in cTnT level, significantly correlated with lack of acetate, is indicative of improvement of cardiac microvascular function.

A single dialysis session of hemodiafiltration with sorbent-regenerated endogenous ultrafiltrate reinfusion (HFR) removes hepcidin more efficiently than bicarbonate hemodialysis: a new approach to containing hepcidin burden in dialysis patients?

BACKGROUND: Most hemodialysis patients have high Hepcidin-25 levels, which may be involved in the pathogenesis of several uremic complications related to an altered iron biology. The hemodialysis procedure itself can influence Hepcidin-25 levels by removing Hepcidin-25 and maybe stimulating its production due to a pro-inflammatory effect. METHODS: To assess the relationship between dialysis-related inflammation and intradialysis changes in Hepcidin-25, we performed a crossover trial in 28 hemodialysis patients to compare the effects on serum levels of Hepcidin-25 and inflammatory markers activated during dialysis [Tumor Necrosis Factor-α (TNF-α), Interleukin-6, C-reactive protein (CRP), Pentraxin-3] of a single dialysis session using a technique capable of reducing inflammation, HFR (Hemo Filtrate Reinfusion: a hemodiafiltration system combining convection, diffusion and adsorption) or bicarbonate-dialysis using either the same low-flux membrane as in the diffusion stage of HFR (LFBD) or a high-flux membrane (HFBD). RESULTS: HFR achieved a greater reduction in Hepcidin-25 levels than both LFBD [-72% (95% CI: -11 to -133), p = 0.022] and HFBD [-137% (95% CI: -2 to -272), p = 0.047], conceivably due to both a greater removal (because of its convective/adsorptive component) and a lower inflammation-related Hepcidin-25 production. HFR also led to a greater decrease in TNF-α than LFBD [-277% (95% CI: -59 to -494), p = 0.014], while the two methods induced similar changes in Interleukin-6, CRP and Pentraxin-3 levels. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that a single bicarbonate-dialysis session can upregulate Hepcidin-25 synthesis and that HFR can fully overcome this effect, enabling a greater Hepcidin-25 removal during dialysis. Adequately-designed studies are needed, however, to establish whether the beneficial effect of HFR emerging from our study could reduce Hepcidin-25 (and TNF-α) burden and improve clinically-relevant outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN15957905.