+1 Recommend
1 collections
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Biocompatibility of Hemodialysis Membranes: Interrelations between Plasma Complement and Cytokine Levels

      Read this article at

          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.


          Hemodialysis (HD) membrane biocompatibility is defined as absence of complement activation. We have recently shown that circulating levels of interleukin (IL) 1 and IL-2 predict death and survival, respectively, of HD patients. Studies have assessed IL-1 in treatments with biocompatible and less biocompatible dialysis membranes, but no study has correlated circulating levels of all these immunoreactants. We assessed these immunoreactants, and temperature as an outcome, during HD in patients treated with different membranes. Twelve stable patients, receiving thrice-weekly chronic bicarbonate HD, were randomly dialyzed with three different types of membranes, composed of: Cuprophan, cuprammonium rayon modified cellulose, and Hemophan. Blood was drawn from the arterial line port before (Pre) and 15, 30, and 60 min during and after (Post) HD. Patients’ temperatures were measured before and after each treatment. The plasma concentrations of IL-1 and IL-2 and factors C3a and C5a were assessed by ELISA. There were no differences between baseline levels of any of the immunoreactants in patients treated with different dialyzers. C3a, C5a, and IL-1 levels increased significantly during HD treatments with all three different membranes. C3a, C5a, and IL-1 levels during Cuprophan and Hemophan treatments were significantly higher than the levels during modified cellulose treatment at 30 and 60 min and Post (p < 0.01). For all the immunoreactants, however, the Post levels were higher than the Pre levels. In contrast to IL-1, there were no differences in mean IL-2 levels during treatments when different membranes were compared. There were few correlations of plasma C3a and C5a levels with plasma IL-1 levels, but there was only one treatment time in one dialyzer group during which IL-2 and any of the other factors were correlated. Pre and Post temperature values and percent change in temperature were not correlated with any of the immunoreactants measured. These data show that C3a, C5a, and IL-1 responses are similar, but not identical, during treatments with different membranes. The response of circulating IL-2 levels to treatments is quite different from that of plasma C3a, C5a and IL-1 levels and suggests that these changes are not solely due to treatment factors. Treatment with modified cellulose membranes is associated with a different immunoreactive profile as compared with patients dialyzed using other cellulose membranes. We suggest that circulating IL-1 levels are good biocompatibility markers.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 2

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

          Detection of native human complement components C3 and C5 and their primary activation peptides C3a and C5a (anaphylatoxic peptides) by ELISAs with monoclonal antibodies

           J Grabbe,  A. Klos,  V. Ihrig (1988)
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Hemofiltration and double high flux dialysis


              Author and article information

              Blood Purif
              Blood Purification
              S. Karger AG
              20 September 2001
              : 19
              : 4
              : 370-379
              aDivision of Renal Diseases and Hypertension, Department of Medicine, and bImmunochemistry Laboratory, Department of Microbiology and Immunology, George Washington University Medical Center, Washington, D.C., USA
              46967 Blood Purif 2001;19:370–379
              © 2001 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.

              Page count
              Figures: 2, Tables: 1, References: 49, Pages: 10
              Self URI (application/pdf): https://www.karger.com/Article/Pdf/46967
              Original Paper


              Comment on this article