14
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares

      Call for Papers: Green Renal Replacement Therapy: Caring for the Environment

      Submit here before July 31, 2024

      About Blood Purification: 3.0 Impact Factor I 5.6 CiteScore I 0.83 Scimago Journal & Country Rank (SJR)

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Treatment Time and Ultrafiltration Rate Are More Important in Dialysis Prescription than Small Molecule Clearance

      review-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Chronic hemodialysis sessions, as developed in Seattle in the 1960s, were long procedures with minimal intra- and interdialytic symptoms. Over the next three decades, dialysis duration was shorten to 4, 3, even 2 h in thrice weekly schedules. This method spread rapidly, particularly in the United States, after the National Cooperative Dialysis Study suggested that the time of dialysis is of minor importance as long as urea clearance multiplied by dialysis time and scaled to total body water (Kt/V<sub>urea</sub>) equals 0.95–1.0. This number was later increased to 1.3, but the assumption that hemodialysis time is of minimal importance remained unchanged. However, Kt/V<sub>urea</sub> measures only the removal of low molecular weight substances and does not consider the removal of larger molecules. Nor does it correlate with the other important function of hemodialysis, namely ultrafiltration. Rapid ultrafiltration is associated with cramps, nausea, vomiting, headache, fatigue, hypotensive episodes during dialysis, and hangover after dialysis; patients remain fluid overloaded with subsequent poor blood pressure control leading to left ventricular hypertrophy, diastolic dysfunction, and high cardiovascular mortality. Kt/V<sub>urea</sub> should be abandoned as a measure of dialysis quality. The formula suggests that it is possible to decrease t as long as K is proportionately increased, but this is not true. Time of dialysis should be adjusted in such a way that patients would not suffer from symptoms related to rapid ultrafiltration, would not have other uremic symptoms and most patients would have blood pressure controlled without antihypertensive drugs.

          Related collections

          Most cited references40

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Increasing arteriovenous fistulas in hemodialysis patients: problems and solutions.

          National guidelines promote increasing the prevalence of fistula use among hemodialysis patients. The prevalence of fistulas among hemodialysis patients reflects both national, regional, and local practice differences as well as patient-specific demographic and clinical factors. Increasing fistula prevalence requires increasing fistula placement, improving maturation of new fistulas, and enhancing long-term patency of mature fistulas for dialysis. Whether a patient receives a fistula depends on several factors: timing of referral for dialysis and vascular access, type of fistula placed, patient demographics, preference of the nephrologist, surgeon, and dialysis nurses, and vascular anatomy of the patient. Whether the placed fistula is useable for dialysis depends on additional factors, including adequacy of vessels, surgeon's experience, patient demographics, nursing skills, minimal acceptable dialysis blood flow, and attempts to revise immature fistulas. Whether a mature fistula achieves long-term patency depends on the ability to prevent and correct thrombosis. An optimal outcome is likely when there is (1) a multidisciplinary team approach to vascular access; (2) consensus about the goals among all interested parties (nephrologists, surgeons, radiologists, dialysis nurses, and patients); (3) early referral for placement of vascular access; (4) restriction of vascular access procedures to surgeons with demonstrable interest and experience; (5) routine, preoperative mapping of the patient's arteries and veins; (6) close, ongoing communication among the involved parties; and (7) prospective tracking of outcomes with continuous quality assessment. Implementing these measures is likely to increase the prevalence of fistulas in any given dialysis unit. However, differences among dialysis units are likely to persist because of differences in gender, race, and co-morbidity mix of the patient population.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Longer treatment time and slower ultrafiltration in hemodialysis: associations with reduced mortality in the DOPPS.

            Longer treatment time (TT) and slower ultrafiltration rate (UFR) are considered advantageous for hemodialysis (HD) patients. The study included 22,000 HD patients from seven countries in the Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (DOPPS). Logistic regression was used to study predictors of TT > 240 min and UFR > 10 ml/h/kg bodyweight. Cox regression was used for survival analyses. Statistical adjustments were made for patient demographics, comorbidities, dose of dialysis (Kt/V), and body size. Europe and Japan had significantly longer (P 240 min was independently associated with significantly lower relative risk (RR) of mortality (RR = 0.81; P = 0.0005). Every 30 min longer on HD was associated with a 7% lower RR of mortality (RR = 0.93; P 10 ml/h/kg was associated with higher odds of intradialytic hypotension (odds ratio = 1.30; P = 0.045) and a higher risk of mortality (RR = 1.09; P = 0.02). Longer TT and higher Kt/V were independently as well as synergistically associated with lower mortality. Rapid UFR during HD was also associated with higher mortality risk. These results warrant a randomized clinical trial of longer dialysis sessions in thrice-weekly HD.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Vascular access use in Europe and the United States: results from the DOPPS.

              A direct broad-based comparison of vascular access use and survival in Europe (EUR) and the United States (US) has not been performed previously. Case series reports suggest that vascular access practices differ substantially in the US and EUR. We report on a representative study (DOPPS) which has used the same data collection protocol for> 6400 hemodialysis (HD) patients to compare vascular access use at 145 US dialysis units and 101 units in five EUR countries (France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the United Kingdom). Logistic analysis evaluated factors associated with native arteriovenous fistula (AVF) versus graft use or permanent access versus catheter use for prevalent and incident HD patients. Times to failure for AVF and graft were analyzed using Cox proportional hazards regression. AVF was used by 80% of EUR and 24% of US prevalent patients, and was significantly associated with younger age, male gender, lower body mass index, non-diabetic status, lack of peripheral vascular disease, and no angina. After adjusting for these factors, AVF versus graft use was still much higher in EUR than US (AOR=21, P 30 days prior to ESRD compared with 74% in the US (P < 0.0001); pre-ESRD care was associated with increased odds of AVF versus graft use (AOR=1.9, P=0.01). New HD patients had a 1.8-fold greater odds (P=0.002) of starting HD with a permanent access if a facility's typical time from referral to access placement was < or =2 weeks. AVF use when compared to grafts was substantially lower (AOR=0.61, P=0.04) when surgery trainees assisted or performed access placements. When used as a patient's first access, AVF survival was superior to grafts regarding time to first failure (RR=0.53, P=0.0002), and AVF survival was longer in EUR compared with the US (RR=0.49, P=0.0005). AVF and grafts each displayed better survival if used when initiating HD compared with being used after patients began dialysis with a catheter. Large differences in vascular access use exist between EUR and the US, even after adjustment for patient characteristics. The results strongly suggest that a facility's preferences and approaches to vascular access practice are major determinants of vascular access use.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BPU
                Blood Purif
                10.1159/issn.0253-5068
                Blood Purification
                S. Karger AG
                978-3-8055-8237-7
                978-3-318-01434-1
                0253-5068
                1421-9735
                2007
                December 2006
                14 December 2006
                : 25
                : 1
                : 90-98
                Affiliations
                Department of Medicine, Division of Nephrology, University of Missouri, Columbia, Mo., USA
                Article
                96403 Blood Purif 2007;25:90–98
                10.1159/000096403
                17170543
                53cf8efb-e78b-4aab-8f56-239cbdecb459
                © 2007 S. Karger AG, Basel

                Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug. Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.

                History
                Page count
                References: 93, Pages: 9
                Categories
                Paper

                Cardiovascular Medicine,Nephrology
                Kt/Vurea ,Dialysis duration,Ultrafiltration,Sodium profiling,Hypotension, intradialytic,Hypertension,Lag phenomenon

                Comments

                Comment on this article