Patient-reported outcomes and patient voices.

Online hemodiafilration (HDF) treatment may be associated with better quality of life due to improved clearance of middle-molecular-weight uremic toxins and hemodynamic stability in dialysis patients, in addition to better overall survival.

The probability of receiving a kidney transplantation in end-stage kidney disease patients who are treated with haemodiafiltration or haemodialysis: a pooled individual participant data from four randomised controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Due to a critical shortage of available kidney grafts, most patients with Stage 5 Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD5) require bridging dialysis support. It remains unclear whether treatment by different dialysis modalities changes the selection and/or preparation of a potential transplant candidate. Therefore, we assessed whether the likelihood of receiving kidney transplant (both living or deceased kidney donors) differs between haemodialysis (HD) and online haemodiafiltration (HDF) in patients with CKD5D. METHODS: Individual participant data from four randomised controlled trials comparing online HDF with HD were used. Information on kidney transplant was obtained during follow-up. The likelihood of receiving a kidney transplant was compared between HD and HDF, and evaluated across different subgroups: age, sex, diabetes, history of cardiovascular disease, albumin, dialysis vintage, fistula, and level of convection volume standardized to body surface area. Hazard ratios (HRs), with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (95% CI), comparing the effect of online HDF versus HD on the likelihood of receiving a kidney transplant, were estimated using Cox proportional hazards models with a random effect for study. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 2.5 years (Q1 to Q3: 1.9-3.0), 331 of the 1620 (20.4%) patients with CKD5D received a kidney transplant. This concerned 22% (n = 179) of patients who were treated with online HDF compared with 19% (n = 152) of patients who were treated with HD. No differences in the likelihood of undergoing a kidney transplant were found between the two dialysis modalities in both the crude analyse (HR: 1.07, 95% CI: 0.86-1.33) and adjusted analysis for age, sex, diabetes, cardiovascular history, albumin, and creatinine (HR: 1.15, 95%-CI: 0.92-1.44). There was no evidence for a differential effect across subgroups based on patient- and disease-characteristics nor in different categories of convection volumes. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with HD and HDF does not affect the selection and/or preparation of CKD5D patients for kidney transplant given that the likelihood of receiving a kidney transplant does not differ between the dialysis modalities. These finding persisted across a variety of subgroups differing in patient and disease characteristics and is not affected by the level of convection volume delivered during HDF treatment sessions.

Controversies and problems of volume control and hypertension in haemodialysis.

Extracellular volume overload and hypertension are important contributors to the high risk of cardiovascular mortality in patients undergoing haemodialysis. Hypertension is present in more than 90% of patients at the initiation of haemodialysis and persists in more than two-thirds, despite use of several antihypertensive medications. High blood pressure is a risk factor for the development of left ventricular hypertrophy, heart failure, and mortality, although there are controversies with some study findings showing poor survival with low-but not high-blood pressure. The most frequent cause of hypertension in patients undergoing haemodialysis is volume overload, which is associated with poor cardiovascular outcomes itself independent of blood pressure. Although antihypertensive medications might not be successful to control blood pressure, extracellular volume reduction by persistent ultrafiltration and dietary salt restriction can produce favourable results with good blood pressure control. More frequent or longer haemodialysis can facilitate volume and blood pressure control. However, successful volume and blood pressure control is also possible in patients undergoing conventional haemodialysis.

Mortality reduction by post-dilution online-haemodiafiltration: a cause-specific analysis.

Background: From an individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis from four randomized controlled trials comparing haemodialysis (HD) with post-dilution online-haemodiafiltration (ol-HDF), previously it appeared that HDF decreases all-cause mortality by 14% (95% confidence interval 25; 1) and fatal cardiovascular disease (CVD) by 23% (39; 3). Significant differences were not found for fatal infections and sudden death. So far, it is unclear, however, whether the reduced mortality risk of HDF is only due to a decrease in CVD events and if so, which CVD in particular is prevented, if compared with HD. Methods: The IPD base was used for the present study. Hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals for cause-specific mortality overall and in thirds of the convection volume were calculated using the Cox proportional hazard regression models. Annualized mortality and numbers needed to treat (NNT) were calculated as well. Results: Besides 554 patients dying from CVD, fatal infections and sudden death, 215 participants died from 'other causes', such as withdrawal from treatment and malignancies. In this group, the mortality risk was comparable between HD and ol-HDF patients, both overall and in thirds of the convection volume. Subdivision of CVD mortality in fatal cardiac, non-cardiac and unclassified CVD showed that ol-HDF was only associated with a lower risk of cardiac casualties [0.64 (0.61; 0.90)]. Annual mortality rates also suggest that the reduction in CVD death is mainly due to a decrease in cardiac fatalities, including both ischaemic heart disease and congestion. Overall, 32 and 75 patients, respectively, need to be treated by high-volume HDF (HV-HDF) to prevent one all-cause and one CVD death, respectively, per year. Conclusion: The beneficial effect of ol-HDF on all-cause and CVD mortality appears to be mainly due to a reduction in fatal cardiac events, including ischaemic heart disease as well as congestion. In HV-HDF, the NNT to prevent one CVD death is 75 per year.

The importance of considering competing treatment affecting prognosis in the evaluation of therapy in trials: the example of renal transplantation in hemodialysis trials.

Background: During the follow-up in a randomized controlled trial (RCT), participants may receive additional (non-randomly allocated) treatment that affects the outcome. Typically such additional treatment is not taken into account in evaluation of the results. Two pivotal trials of the effects of hemodiafiltration (HDF) versus hemodialysis (HD) on mortality in patients with end-stage renal disease reported differing results. We set out to evaluate to what extent methods to take other treatments (i.e. renal transplantation) into account may explain the difference in findings between RCTs. This is illustrated using a clinical example of two RCTs estimating the effect of HDF versus HD on mortality. Methods: Using individual patient data from the Estudio de Supervivencia de Hemodiafiltración On-Line (ESHOL; n = 902) and The Dutch CONvective TRAnsport STudy (CONTRAST; n = 714) trials, five methods for estimating the effect of HDF versus HD on all-cause mortality were compared: intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis (i.e. not taking renal transplantation into account), per protocol exclusion (PP excl ; exclusion of patients who receive transplantation), PP cens (censoring patients at the time of transplantation), transplantation-adjusted (TA) analysis and an extension of the TA analysis (TA ext ) with additional adjustment for variables related to both the risk of receiving a transplant and the risk of an outcome (transplantation-outcome confounders). Cox proportional hazards models were applied. Results: Unadjusted ITT analysis of all-cause mortality led to differing results between CONTRAST and ESHOL: hazard ratio (HR) 0.95 (95% CI 0.75-1.20) and HR 0.76 (95% CI 0.59-0.97), respectively; difference between 5 and 24% risk reductions. Similar differences between the two trials were observed for the other unadjusted analytical methods (PP cens, PP excl , TA) The HRs of HDF versus HD treatment became more similar after adding transplantation as a time-varying covariate and including transplantation-outcome confounders: HR 0.89 (95% CI 0.69-1.13) in CONTRAST and HR 0.80 (95% CI 0.62-1.02) in ESHOL. Conclusions: The apparent differences in estimated treatment effects between two dialysis trials were to a large extent attributable to differences in applied methodology for taking renal transplantation into account in their final analyses. Our results exemplify the necessity of careful consideration of the treatment effect of interest when estimating the therapeutic effect in RCTs in which participants may receive additional treatments.

Interplay of volume, blood pressure, organ ischemia, residual renal function, and diet: certainties and uncertainties with dialytic management.

Extracellular fluid volume overload and its inevitable consequence, hypertension, increases cardiovascular mortality in the long term by leading to left ventricular hypertrophy, heart failure, and ischemic heart disease in dialysis patients. Unlike antihypertensive medications, a strict volume control strategy provides optimal blood pressure control without need for antihypertensive drugs. However, utilization of this strategy has remained limited because of several factors, including the absence of a gold standard method to assess volume status, difficulties in reducing extracellular fluid volume, and safety concerns associated with reduction of extracellular volume. These include intradialytic hypotension; ischemia of heart, brain, and gut; loss of residual renal function; and vascular access thrombosis. Comprehensibly, physicians are hesitant to follow strict volume control policy because of these safety concerns. Current data, however, suggest that a high ultrafiltration rate rather than the reduction in excess volume is related to these complications. Restriction of dietary salt intake, increased frequency, and/or duration of hemodialysis sessions or addition of temporary extra sessions during the process of gradually reducing postdialysis body weight in conventional hemodialysis and discontinuation of antihypertensive medications may prevent these complications. We believe that even if an unwanted effect occurs while gradually reaching euvolemia, this is likely to be counterbalanced by favorable cardiovascular outcomes such as regression of left ventricular hypertrophy, prevention of heart failure, and, ultimately, cardiovascular mortality as a result of the eventual achievement of normal extracellular fluid volume and blood pressure over the long term.

Reduction of Dialysate Calcium Level Reduces Progression of Coronary Artery Calcification and Improves Low Bone Turnover in Patients on Hemodialysis.

Exposure to high Ca concentrations may influence the development of low-turnover bone disease and coronary artery calcification (CAC) in patients on hemodialysis (HD). In this randomized, controlled study, we investigated the effects of lowering dialysate Ca level on progression of CAC and histologic bone abnormalities in patients on HD. Patients on HD with intact parathyroid hormone levels ≤300 pg/ml receiving dialysate containing 1.75 or 1.50 mmol/L Ca (n=425) were randomized to the 1.25-mmol/L Ca (1.25 Ca; n=212) or the 1.75-mmol/L Ca (1.75 Ca; n=213) dialysate arm. Primary outcome was a change in CAC score measured by multislice computerized tomography; main secondary outcome was a change in bone histomorphometric parameters determined by analysis of bone biopsy specimens. CAC scores increased from 452±869 (mean±SD) in the 1.25 Ca group and 500±909 in the 1.75 Ca group (P=0.68) at baseline to 616±1086 and 803±1412, respectively, at 24 months (P=0.25). Progression rate was significantly lower in the 1.25 Ca group than in the 1.75 Ca group (P=0.03). The prevalence of histologically diagnosed low bone turnover decreased from 85.0% to 41.8% in the 1.25 Ca group (P=0.001) and did not change in the 1.75 Ca group. At 24 months, bone formation rate, trabecular thickness, and bone volume were higher in the 1.25 Ca group than in the 1.75 Ca group. Thus, lowering dialysate Ca levels slowed the progression of CAC and improved bone turnover in patients on HD with baseline intact parathyroid hormone levels ≤300 pg/ml.

Higher convection volume exchange with online hemodiafiltration is associated with survival advantage for dialysis patients: the effect of adjustment for body size.

Mortality remains high for hemodialysis patients. Online hemodiafiltration (OL-HDF) removes more middle-sized uremic toxins but outcomes of individual trials comparing OL-HDF with hemodialysis have been discrepant. Secondary analyses reported higher convective volumes, easier to achieve in larger patients, and improved survival. Here we tested different methods to standardize OL-HDF convection volume on all-cause and cardiovascular mortality compared with hemodialysis. Pooled individual patient analysis of four prospective trials compared thirds of delivered convection volume with hemodialysis. Convection volumes were either not standardized or standardized to weight, body mass index, body surface area, and total body water. Data were analyzed by multivariable Cox proportional hazards modeling from 2793 patients. All-cause mortality was reduced when the convective dose was unstandardized or standardized to body surface area and total body water; hazard ratio (95% confidence intervals) of 0.65 (0.51-0.82), 0.74 (0.58-0.93), and 0.71 (0.56-0.93) for those receiving higher convective doses. Standardization by body weight or body mass index gave no significant survival advantage. Higher convection volumes were generally associated with greater survival benefit with OL-HDF, but results varied across different ways of standardization for body size. Thus, further studies should take body size into account when evaluating the impact of delivered convection volume on mortality end points.

Haemodiafiltration and mortality in end-stage kidney disease patients: a pooled individual participant data analysis from four randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Mortality rates remain high for haemodialysis (HD) patients and simply increasing the HD dose to remove more small solutes does not improve survival. Online haemodiafiltration (HDF) provides additional clearance of larger toxins compared with standard HD. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing HDF with conventional HD on all-cause and cause-specific mortality in end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) patients reported inconsistent results and were at high risk of bias. We conducted a pooled individual participant data analysis of RCTs to provide the most reliable evidence to date on the effects of HDF on mortality outcomes in ESKD patients. METHODS: Individual participant data were used from four trials that compared online HDF with HD and were designed to examine the effects of HDF on mortality endpoints. Bias by informative censoring of patients was resolved. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) comparing the effect of online HDF versus HD on all-cause and cause-specific mortality were calculated using the Cox proportional hazard regression models. The relationship between convection volume and the study outcomes was examined by delivered convection volume standardized to body surface area. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 2.5 years (Q1-Q3: 1.9-3.0), 769 of the 2793 participants had died (292 cardiovascular deaths). Online HDF reduced the risk of all-cause mortality by 14% (95% CI: 1%; 25%) and cardiovascular mortality by 23% (95% CI: 3%; 39%). There was no evidence for a differential effect in subgroups. The largest survival benefit was for patients receiving the highest delivered convection volume [>23 L per 1.73 m(2) body surface area (BSA) per session], with a multivariable-adjusted HR of 0.78 (95% CI: 0.62; 0.98) for all-cause mortality and 0.69 (95% CI: 0.47; 1.00) for cardiovascular disease mortality. CONCLUSIONS: This pooled individual participant analysis on the effects of online HDF compared with conventional HD indicates that online HDF reduces the risk of mortality in ESKD patients. This effect holds across a variety of important clinical subgroups of patients and is most pronounced for those receiving a higher convection volume normalized to BSA.

Longitudinal Changes in Body Composition in Patients After Initiation of Hemodialysis Therapy: Results From an International Cohort.

OBJECTIVE: In patients with advanced kidney disease, metabolic and nutritional derangements induced by uremia interact and reinforce each other in a deleterious vicious circle. Literature addressing the effect of dialysis initiation on changes in body composition (BC) is limited and contradictory. The aim of this study was to evaluate changes in BC in a large international cohort of incident hemodialysis patients. METHODS: A total of 8,227 incident adult end-stage renal disease patients with BC evaluation within the initial first 6 months of baseline, defined as 6 months after renal replacement therapy initiation, were considered. BC, including fat tissue index (FTI) and lean tissue index (LTI), were evaluated by Body Composition Monitor (BCM, Fresenius Medical Care, Bad Homburg, Germany). Exclusion criteria at baseline were lack of a BCM measurement before or after baseline, body mass index (BMI) < 18.5 kg/m(2), presence of metastatic solid tumors, treatment with a catheter, and prescription of less or more than 3 treatments per week. Maximum follow-up was 2 years. Descriptive analysis was performed comparing current values with the baseline in each interval (delta analysis). Linear mixed models considering the correlation structure of the repeated measurements were used to evaluate factors associated with different trends in FTI and LTI. RESULTS: BMI increased about 0.6 kg/m(2) over 24 months from baseline. This was associated with increase in FTI of about 0.95 kg/m(2) and a decrease in LTI of about 0.4 kg/m(2). Female gender, diabetic status, and low baseline FTI were associated with a significant greater increase of FTI. Age > 67 years, diabetes, male gender, high baseline LTI, and low baseline FTI were associated with a significant greater decrease of LTI. CONCLUSIONS: With the transition to hemodialysis, end-stage renal disease patients presented with distinctive changes in BC. These were mainly associated with gender, older age, presence of diabetes, low baseline FTI, and high baseline LTI. BMI increases did not fully represent the changes in BC.

Glycated hemoglobin predicts overall and cardiovascular mortality in non-diabetic hemodialysis patients.

AIMS: Besides diabetic patients, glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels have been reported to predict mortality in non-diabetics patients. However, the importance of HbA1c levels in non-diabetic hemodialysis patients still remains unknown. Thus, we aimed to prospectively investigate the impact of HbA1c on all-cause and cardiovascular mortality in a large group of prevalent non-diabetic hemodialysis patients. METHODS: HbA1c was measured quarterly in 489 non-diabetic prevalent hemodialysis patients. Overall and cardiovascular mortality were evaluated over a 3 year follow-up. RESULTS: Mean HbA1c level was 4.88 ± 0.46% (3.5 - 6.9%). During the 28.3 ± 10.6 months follow-up period, 67 patients (13.7%) died; 31 from cardiovascular causes. In Kaplan-Meier analysis, patients in the lowest (< 4.69%) and highest HbA1c (> 5.04%) tertiles had poorer overall survival compared to the middle HbA1c tertile (p < 0.001). Adjusted Cox-regression analysis revealed that the highest HbA1c tertile was associated with both overall (HR = 3.60, 95% CI 1.57 - 8.27, p = 0.002) and cardiovascular (HR = 6.66, 95% CI 1.51 - 29.4; p = 0.01) mortality. Also, low HbA1c levels tended to be associated with overall mortality (HR = 2.26, 95% CI 0.96 - 5.29, p = 0.06). CONCLUSION: Upper normal HbA1c levels are independently associated with cardiovascular and overall mortality in non-diabetic hemodialysis patients, whereas lower HbA1c levels are not.

The impact of membrane permeability and dialysate purity on cardiovascular outcomes.

The effects of high-flux dialysis and ultrapure dialysate on survival of hemodialysis patients are incompletely understood. We conducted a randomized controlled trial to investigate the effects of both membrane permeability and dialysate purity on cardiovascular outcomes. We randomly assigned 704 patients on three times per week hemodialysis to either high- or low-flux dialyzers and either ultrapure or standard dialysate using a two-by-two factorial design. The primary outcome was a composite of fatal and nonfatal cardiovascular events during a minimum 3 years follow-up. We did not detect statistically significant differences in the primary outcome between high- and low-flux (HR=0.73, 95% CI=0.49 to 1.08, P=0.12) and between ultrapure and standard dialysate (HR=0.90, 95% CI=0.61 to 1.32, P=0.60). Posthoc analyses suggested that cardiovascular event-free survival was significantly better in the high-flux group compared with the low-flux group for the subgroup with arteriovenous fistulas, which constituted 82% of the study population (adjusted HR=0.61, 95% CI=0.38 to 0.97, P=0.03). Furthermore, high-flux dialysis associated with a lower risk for cardiovascular events among diabetic subjects (adjusted HR=0.49, 95% CI=0.25 to 0.94, P=0.03), and ultrapure dialysate associated with a lower risk for cardiovascular events among subjects with more than 3 years of dialysis (adjusted HR=0.55, 95% CI=0.31 to 0.97, P=0.04). In conclusion, this trial did not detect a difference in cardiovascular event-free survival between flux and dialysate groups. Posthoc analyses suggest that high-flux hemodialysis may benefit patients with an arteriovenous fistula and patients with diabetes and that ultrapure dialysate may benefit patients with longer dialysis vintage.

Effect of fluid management guided by bioimpedance spectroscopy on cardiovascular parameters in hemodialysis patients: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Fluid overload is the main determinant of hypertension and left ventricular hypertrophy in hemodialysis patients. However, assessment of fluid overload can be difficult in clinical practice. We investigated whether objective measurement of fluid overload with bioimpedance spectroscopy is helpful in optimizing fluid status. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, and controlled study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: 156 hemodialysis patients from 2 centers were randomly assigned to 2 groups. INTERVENTION: Dry weight was assessed by routine clinical practice and fluid overload was assessed by bioimpedance spectroscopy in both groups. In the intervention group (n = 78), fluid overload information was provided to treating physicians and used to adjust fluid removal during dialysis. In the control group (n = 78), fluid overload information was not provided to treating physicians and fluid removal during dialysis was adjusted according to usual clinical practice. OUTCOMES: The primary outcome was regression of left ventricular mass index during a 1-year follow-up. Improvement in blood pressure and left atrial volume were the main secondary outcomes. Changes in arterial stiffness parameters were additional outcomes. MEASUREMENTS: Fluid overload was assessed twice monthly in the intervention group and every 3 months in the control group before the mid- or end-week hemodialysis session. Echocardiography, 48-hour ambulatory blood pressure measurement, and pulse wave analysis were performed at baseline and 12 months. RESULTS: Baseline fluid overload parameters in the intervention and control groups were 1.45 ± 1.11 (SD) and 1.44 ± 1.12 L, respectively (P = 0.7). Time-averaged fluid overload values significantly decreased in the intervention group (mean difference, -0.5 ± 0.8 L), but not in the control group (mean difference, 0.1 ± 1.2 L), and the mean difference between groups was -0.5 L (95% CI, -0.8 to -0.2; P = 0.001). Left ventricular mass index regressed from 131 ± 36 to 116 ± 29 g/m(2) (P < 0.001) in the intervention group, but not in the control group (121 ± 35 to 120 ± 30 g/m(2); P = 0.9); mean difference between groups was -10.2 g/m(2) (95% CI, -19.2 to -1.17 g/m(2); P = 0.04). In addition, values for left atrial volume index, blood pressure, and arterial stiffness parameters decreased in the intervention group, but not in the control group. LIMITATIONS: Ambulatory blood pressure data were not available for all patients. CONCLUSIONS: Assessment of fluid overload with bioimpedance spectroscopy provides better management of fluid status, leading to regression of left ventricular mass index, decrease in blood pressure, and improvement in arterial stiffness.

Effects of three times weekly eight-hour nocturnal hemodialysis on volume and nutritional status.

BACKGROUND: This prospective cohort study compared the changes in body water composition and nutritional parameters measured with multifrequency bioimpedance analysis between 8-hour three times weekly nocturnal hemodialysis (NHD) and 4-hour conventional hemodialysis (CHD) patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 55 patients on CHD and 57 patients on NHD were included in the study. Multifrequency bioimpedance analysis was performed at baseline and at the 12th month. The primary outcomes of the study were changes in extracellular water (ECW), fat mass, dry lean mass and phase angle. Secondary outcomes of the study included changes in blood pressure and biochemical parameters related to nutrition and inflammation. RESULTS: ECW/height values decreased in the NHD group, while they increased in the CHD group. Fat mass, dry lean mass, and serum albumin increased and high sensitive CRP decreased in the NHD group but did not change in the CHD group. When changes in parameters from baseline to the 12th month between the groups were compared, NHD was associated with improvement in volume parameter including ECW/height (difference -0.44 l/m, p < 0.001). Change in blood pressure was not different between the groups, however requirement for antihypertensive medication decreased from 26.5 to 8.5% in the NHD group (p = 0.002). NHD was also associated with increases in fat mass (difference 1.8 kg, p < 0.001), dry lean mass (difference 0.6 kg, p = 0.006), serum albumin (difference 0.19 g/dl, p < 0.001) and cholesterol (difference 18.8 mg, p < 0.001). Phase angle values decreased in the CHD group but did not change in the NHD group (difference between the groups 0.37°, p = 0.04). CONCLUSION: This study revealed that longer HD facilitates volume control and improves nutritional status.

Thrice-weekly nocturnal hemodialysis: the overlooked alternative to improve patient outcomes.

Hemodialysis (HD) therapy for patients suffering from end-stage renal disease (ESRD) has been a major breakthrough in medicine during the twentieth century. Empirically, the conventional treatment is prescribed as 3-4.5 h of dialysis, three times a week. However, this prescription is being questioned because of poor patient outcomes including a persistently high death rate. Over the past 30 years, K(t)/V(urea) has been recognized as the predominant marker of dialysis adequacy. However, other important markers of 'adequate' dialysis are increasingly being recognized, including fluid and phosphate balance, and middle molecule removal. Conventional HD therapy, as it exists today, is limited in its scope to make a significant impact on these markers. Consequently, there is an active debate on novel HD strategies to improve patient outcomes. Recently, two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have highlighted potential benefits for patients with two such strategies, short or long nocturnal daily dialysis. These two trials did, however, highlight the difficulty in recruiting patients for such studies. A higher rate of blood access-related complications was also reported. Such novel strategies are also limited in their application by a higher economic burden and logistical difficulties. On the other hand, the thrice-weekly nocturnal HD prescription has been associated with excellent clinical results in observational reports published over recent years. Several non-randomized controlled studies support the clinical benefits of this approach. This prescription may overcome the limitations of daily dialysis and offer a potential for improving patient outcomes on HD. Even if the methodology of the latter studies may not be optimal, we underscore the point that this alternative dialysis prescription should be included in the current debate of novel dialysis strategies.

Mortality and cardiovascular events in online haemodiafiltration (OL-HDF) compared with high-flux dialysis: results from the Turkish OL-HDF Study.

BACKGROUND: Online haemodiafiltration (OL-HDF) is considered to confer clinical benefits over haemodialysis (HD) in terms of solute removal in patients undergoing maintenance HD. The aim of this study was to compare postdilution OL-HDF and high-flux HD in terms of morbidity and mortality. METHODS: In this prospective, randomized, controlled trial, we enrolled 782 patients undergoing thrice-weekly HD and randomly assigned them in a 1:1 ratio to either postdilution OL-HDF or high-flux HD. The mean age of patients was 56.5 ± 13.9 years, time on HD 57.9 ± 44.6 months with a diabetes incidence of 34.7%. The follow-up period was 2 years, with the mean follow-up of 22.7 ± 10.9 months. The primary outcome was a composite of death from any cause and nonfatal cardiovascular events. The major secondary outcomes were cardiovascular and overall mortality, intradialytic complications, hospitalization rate, changes in several laboratory parameters and medications used. RESULTS: The filtration volume in OL-HDF was 17.2 ± 1.3 L. Primary outcome was not different between the groups (event-free survival of 77.6% in OL-HDF versus 74.8% in the high-flux group, P = 0.28), as well as cardiovascular and overall survival, hospitalization rate and number of hypotensive episodes. In a post hoc analysis, the subgroup of OL-HDF patients treated with a median substitution volume >17.4 L per session (high-efficiency OL-HDF, n = 195) had better cardiovascular (P = 0.002) and overall survival (P = 0.03) compared with the high-flux HD group. In adjusted Cox-regression analysis, treatment with high-efficiency OL-HDF was associated with a 46% risk reduction for overall mortality {RR = 0.54 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.31-0.93], P = 0.02} and a 71% risk reduction for cardiovascular mortality [RR = 0.29 (95% CI 0.12-0.65), P = 0.003] compared with high-flux HD. CONCLUSIONS: The composite of all-cause mortality and nonfatal cardiovascular event rate was not different in the OL-HDF and in the high-flux HD groups. In a post hoc analysis, OL-HDF treatment with substitution volumes over 17.4 L was associated with better cardiovascular and overall survival.

Increased arterial stiffness in patients with nephrotic syndrome.

INTRODUCTION: Nephrotic syndrome (NS) and arterial stiffness (AS) have each been linked with increased risk for cardiovascular diseases. However, there is no data in the literature up-to-date on AS in adult patients with NS. Thus, in this study, we aimed to evaluate the potential associations between AS, volume and nutritional status in patients with NS in comparison to a healthy control group. METHODS: 34 adult patients with newly diagnosed but untreated NS and 34 healthy controls were studied. AS was assessed by carotid-femoral PWV (cf-PWV) and body composition, nutritional status by multifrequency bioelectric impedance analysis (BIA). RESULTS: Mean age was 44.6 ± 18.7 years (18 - 72). Mean cf-PWV was 8.3 ± 2.5 m/s in patients with NS and 6.7 ± 1.1 m/s in controls (p = 0.002) . In univariate analysis, cf-PWV and positively correlated with age, systolic blood pressure, mean arterial pressure (MAP), pulse pressure, body mass index, body fat ratio, waisthip ratio, creatinine, uric acid and negatively with creatinine clearance. In linear regression analysis, only age and MAP predicted arterial stiffness. Total body fluid, extracellular water (ECW), ECW/Height, ECW/body surface area and third space volumes were higher in patients with NS. CONCLUSION: Patients with NS have increased AS and are more hypervolemic compared to the healthy subjects.

The role of intra- and interdialytic sodium balance and restriction in dialysis therapies.

The relationship between sodium, blood pressure and extracellular volume could not be more pronounced or complex than in a dialysis patient. We review the patients' sources of sodium exposure in the form of dietary salt intake, medication administration, and the dialysis treatment itself. In addition, the roles dialysis modalities, hemodialysis types, and dialysis fluid sodium concentration have on blood pressure, intradialytic symptoms, and interdialytic weight gain affect patient outcomes are discussed. We review whether sodium restriction (reduced salt intake), alteration in dialysis fluid sodium concentration and the different dialysis types have any impact on blood pressure, intradialytic symptoms, and interdialytic weight gain.

Patient Survival With Extended Home Hemodialysis Compared to In-Center Conventional Hemodialysis.

Introduction: More frequent and/or longer hemodialysis (HD) has been associated with improvements in numerous clinical outcomes in patients on dialysis. Home HD (HHD), which allows more frequent and/or longer dialysis with lower cost and flexibility in treatment planning, is not widely used worldwide. Although, retrospective studies have indicated better survival with HHD, this issue remains controversial. In this multicenter study, we compared thrice-weekly extended HHD with in-center conventional HD (ICHD) in a large patient population with a long-term follow-up. Methods: We matched 349 patients starting HHD between 2010 and 2014 with 1047 concurrent patients on ICHD by using propensity scores. Patients were followed-up with from their respective baseline until September 30, 2018. The primary outcome was overall survival. Secondary outcomes were technique survival; hospitalization; and changes in clinical, laboratory, and medication parameters. Results: The mean duration of dialysis session was 418 ± 54 minutes in HHD and 242 ± 10 minutes in patients on ICHD. All-cause mortality rate was 3.76 and 6.27 per 100 patient-years in the HHD and the ICHD groups, respectively. In the intention-to-treat analysis, HHD was associated with a 40% lower risk for all-cause mortality than ICHD (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.60; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.45 to 0.80; P < 0.001). In HHD, the 5-year technical survival was 86.5%. HHD treatment provided better phosphate and blood pressure (BP) control, improvements in nutrition and inflammation, and reduction in hospitalization days and medication requirement. Conclusion: These results indicate that extended HHD is associated with higher survival and better outcomes compared to ICHD.

Association of Intima-Media Thickness Measured at the Common Carotid Artery With Incident Carotid Plaque: Individual Participant Data Meta-Analysis of 20 Prospective Studies.

Background The association between common carotid artery intima-media thickness (CCA-IMT) and incident carotid plaque has not been characterized fully. We therefore aimed to precisely quantify the relationship between CCA-IMT and carotid plaque development. Methods and Results We undertook an individual participant data meta-analysis of 20 prospective studies from the Proof-ATHERO (Prospective Studies of Atherosclerosis) consortium that recorded baseline CCA-IMT and incident carotid plaque involving 21 494 individuals without a history of cardiovascular disease and without preexisting carotid plaque at baseline. Mean baseline age was 56 years (SD, 9 years), 55% were women, and mean baseline CCA-IMT was 0.71 mm (SD, 0.17 mm). Over a median follow-up of 5.9 years (5th-95th percentile, 1.9-19.0 years), 8278 individuals developed first-ever carotid plaque. We combined study-specific odds ratios (ORs) for incident carotid plaque using random-effects meta-analysis. Baseline CCA-IMT was approximately log-linearly associated with the odds of developing carotid plaque. The age-, sex-, and trial arm-adjusted OR for carotid plaque per SD higher baseline CCA-IMT was 1.40 (95% CI, 1.31-1.50; I2=63.9%). The corresponding OR that was further adjusted for ethnicity, smoking, diabetes, body mass index, systolic blood pressure, low- and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and lipid-lowering and antihypertensive medication was 1.34 (95% CI, 1.24-1.45; I2=59.4%; 14 studies; 16 297 participants; 6381 incident plaques). We observed no significant effect modification across clinically relevant subgroups. Sensitivity analysis restricted to studies defining plaque as focal thickening yielded a comparable OR (1.38 [95% CI, 1.29-1.47]; I2=57.1%; 14 studies; 17 352 participants; 6991 incident plaques). Conclusions Our large-scale individual participant data meta-analysis demonstrated that CCA-IMT is associated with the long-term risk of developing first-ever carotid plaque, independent of traditional cardiovascular risk factors.