Refine
Has Fulltext
- yes (3)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (3)
Document Type
- Journal article (3)
Language
- English (3)
Keywords
- dialysis adequacy (2)
- hemodialysis (2)
- LDL cholesterol (1)
- biocompatibility (1)
- end-stage kidney disease (1)
- end-stage renal disease (1)
- fractionation membranev (1)
- free light chains (1)
- hemodiafiltration (1)
- hypercholesterolemia (1)
Institute
Introduction
Medium-cut-off (MCO) dialyzers may beneficially impact outcomes in patients on hemodialysis.
Methods
In a randomized, controlled trial in maintenance hemodialysis patients, the new Nipro ELISIO-17HX MCO dialyzer was compared to the Baxter Theranova 400 filter regarding middle molecule removal. Furthermore, the suitability of two assays for free lambda-light chain (λFLC) detection (Freelite vs. N-Latex) was verified.
Results
ELISIO-HX achieved slightly lower reduction ratios for β2-microglobulin (71.8 ± 6.0 vs. 75.3 ± 5.8%; p = 0.001), myoglobin (54.7 ± 8.6 vs. 64.9 ± 8.7%; p < 0.001), and kappa-FLC (62.1 ± 8.8 vs. 56.3 ± 7.7%; p = 0.021). λFLC reduction ratios were more conclusive with the Freelite assay and not different between ELISIO-HX and Theranova (28.4 ± 3.9 vs. 38.7 ± 13.4%; p = 0.069). The albumin loss of Theranova was considerably higher (2.14 ± 0.45 vs. 0.77 ± 0.25 g; p = 0.001) and the Global Removal ScoreLoss alb largely inferior (30.6 ± 7.4 vs. 82.4 ± 29.2%/g; p = 0.006) to ELISIO-HX.
Conclusions
The new ELISIO-HX expands the choice of dialyzers for MCO hemodialysis.
The protein-bound uremic toxins para-cresyl sulfate (pCS) and indoxyl sulfate (IS) are associated with cardiovascular disease in chronic renal failure, but the effect of different dialysis procedures on their plasma levels over time is poorly studied. The present prospective, randomized, cross-over trial tested dialysis efficacy and monitored pre-treatment pCS and IS concentrations in 15 patients on low-flux and high-flux hemodialysis and high-convective volume postdilution hemodiafiltration over six weeks each. Although hemodiafiltration achieved by far the highest toxin removal, only the mean total IS level was decreased at week three (16.6 ± 12.1 mg/L) compared to baseline (18.9 ± 13.0 mg/L, p = 0.027) and to low-flux dialysis (20.0 ± 12.7 mg/L, p = 0.021). At week six, the total IS concentration in hemodiafiltration reached the initial values again. Concentrations of free IS and free and total pCS remained unaltered. Highest beta2-microglobulin elimination in hemodiafiltration (p < 0.001) led to a persistent decrease of the plasma levels at week three and six (each p < 0.001). In contrast, absent removal in low-flux dialysis resulted in rising beta2-microglobulin concentrations (p < 0.001). In conclusion, this trial demonstrated that even large differences in instantaneous protein-bound toxin removal by current extracorporeal dialysis techniques may have only limited impact on IS and pCS plasma levels in the longer term.
Activation of the complement system and leukocytes by blood–membrane interactions may further promote arteriosclerosis typically present in patients on lipoprotein apheresis. As clinical data on the hemocompatibility of lipoprotein apheresis are scarce, a controlled clinical study comparing two different types of plasma separation and fractionation membranes used in double-filtration lipoprotein apheresis was urgently needed, as its outcome may influence clinical decision-making. In a prospective, randomized, crossover controlled trial, eight patients on double-filtration lipoprotein apheresis were subjected to one treatment with recent polyethersulfone (PES) plasma separation and fractionation membranes and one control treatment using a set of ethylene-vinyl alcohol copolymer (EVAL) membranes. White blood cell (WBC) and platelet (PC) counts, complement factor C5a and thrombin–antithrombin III (TAT) concentrations were determined in samples drawn at defined times from different sites of the extracorporeal blood and plasma circuit. With a nadir at 25 minutes, WBCs in EVAL decreased to 33.5 ± 10.7% of baseline compared with 63.8 ± 22.0% at 20 minutes in PES (P < .001). The maximum C5a levels in venous blood reentering the patients were measured at 30 minutes, being 30.0 ± 11.2 µg/L with EVAL and 12.3 ± 9.0 µg/L with PES (P < .05). The highest C5a concentrations were found in plasma after the plasma filters (EVAL 56.1 ± 22.0 µg/L at 15 minutes vs PES 23.3 ± 15.2 µg/L at 10 minutes; P < .001). PC did not significantly decrease over time with both membrane types, whereas TAT levels did not rise until the end of the treatment without differences between membranes. Regarding lipoprotein(a) and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol removal, both membrane sets performed equally. Compared with EVAL, PES membranes cause less leukocyte and complement system activation, the classical parameters of hemocompatibility of extracorporeal treatment procedures, at identical treatment efficacy. Better hemocompatibility may avoid inflammation-promoting effects through blood–material interactions in patients requiring double-filtration lipoprotein apheresis.