Search

Individuals afflicted with advanced kidney dysfunction who require dialysis for medical management exhibit different degrees of native kidney function, called residual kidney function (RKF), ranging from nil to appreciable levels. The primary focus of this manuscript is to delve into the concept of RKF, a pivotal yet under-represented topic in nephrology. To begin, we unpack the definition and intrinsic nature of RKF. We then juxtapose the efficiency of RKF against that of hemodialysis in preserving homeostatic equilibrium and facilitating physiological functions. Given the complex interplay of RKF and overall patient health, we shed light on the extent of its influence on patient outcomes, particularly in those living with advanced kidney dysfunction and on dialysis. This manuscript subsequently presents methodologies and measures to assess RKF, concluding with the potential benefits of targeted interventions aimed at preserving RKF.

PurposePrevious research on incremental hemodialysis transition has mainly focused on one or two benefits or prognoses. We aimed to conduct a comprehensive analysis by investigating whether incremental hemodialysis was simultaneously associated with adequate dialysis therapy, stable complication indicators, long-lasting arteriovenous vascular access, and long-lasting preservation of residual kidney function (RKF) without increasing mortality or hospitalization.Patients and methodsIncident hemodialysis patients from Huashan Hospital in Shanghai, China, over the period of 2012 to 2019, were enrolled and followed every three months until death or the time of censoring. Changes in complication indicators from baseline to all post-baseline visits were analyzed by mixed-effects models. The outcomes of RKF loss, arteriovenous vascular access complications, and the composite of all-cause mortality and cardiovascular events were compared between incremental and conventional hemodialysis by Cox proportional hazards model.ResultsOf the 113 patients enrolled in the study, 45 underwent incremental and 68 conventional hemodialysis. There were no significant differences in the changes from baseline to post-baseline visits in complication indicators between the two groups. Incremental hemodialysis reduced the risks of RKF loss (HR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.14-0.82), de novo arteriovenous access complication (HR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.08-0.82), and recurrent arteriovenous access complications under the Andersen-Gill (AG) model (HR, 0.27; 95% CI, 0.10-0.74) and the Prentice, Williams and Peterson Total Time (PWP-TT) model (HR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.12-0.80). There were no significant differences in all-cause hospitalization or the composite outcome between groups.ConclusionIncremental hemodialysis is an effective dialysis transition strategy that preserves RKF and arteriovenous access without affecting dialysis adequacy, patient stability, hospitalization risk and mortality risk. Randomized controlled tr

PurposePrevious research on incremental hemodialysis transition has mainly focused on one or two benefits or prognoses. We aimed to conduct a comprehensive analysis by investigating whether incremental hemodialysis was simultaneously associated with adequate dialysis therapy, stable complication indicators, long-lasting arteriovenous vascular access, and long-lasting preservation of residual kidney function (RKF) without increasing mortality or hospitalization.Patients and methodsIncident hemodialysis patients from Huashan Hospital in Shanghai, China, over the period of 2012 to 2019, were enrolled and followed every three months until death or the time of censoring. Changes in complication indicators from baseline to all post-baseline visits were analyzed by mixed-effects models. The outcomes of RKF loss, arteriovenous vascular access complications, and the composite of all-cause mortality and cardiovascular events were compared between incremental and conventional hemodialysis by Cox proportional hazards model.ResultsOf the 113 patients enrolled in the study, 45 underwent incremental and 68 conventional hemodialysis. There were no significant differences in the changes from baseline to post-baseline visits in complication indicators between the two groups. Incremental hemodialysis reduced the risks of RKF loss (HR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.14-0.82), de novo arteriovenous access complication (HR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.08-0.82), and recurrent arteriovenous access complications under the Andersen-Gill (AG) model (HR, 0.27; 95% CI, 0.10-0.74) and the Prentice, Williams and Peterson Total Time (PWP-TT) model (HR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.12-0.80). There were no significant differences in all-cause hospitalization or the composite outcome between groups.ConclusionIncremental hemodialysis is an effective dialysis transition strategy that preserves RKF and arteriovenous access without affecting dialysis adequacy, patient stability, hospitalization risk and mortality risk. Randomized controlled tr

ObjectiveIncremental hemodialysis (HD) is a strategy utilized to gradually intensify dialysis among patients with incident end-stage renal disease. However, there are scarce data about which patients' clinic status changes by increasing treatment frequency.MethodsWe retrospectively examined statistically de-identified data from 569 patients who successfully transitioned from twice- to thrice-weekly HD (2007-2011) and compared the differences in monthly-averaged values of hemodynamic and laboratory indices during the 3 months before and after the transition with the values at 1 month prior to transition serving as the reference.ResultsAt 3 months after transitioning from twice- to thrice-weekly HD, ultrafiltration volume decreased by 0.5 (95% CI 0.3-0.6) L/session among 189 patients (33%) with weekly interdialytic weight gain (IDWG) ≥5.4 kg/week, and increased by 0.4 (95% CI 0.3-0.5) L/session among 186 patients (33%) with weekly IDWG <3.3 kg/week. Weekly IDWG consistently increased after the transition irrespective of baseline values (1.7 [95% CI 1.5-1.9] kg/week). Pre-HD systolic blood pressure (SBP) decreased by 12 (95% CI 9-14) mm Hg among 177 patients (31%) with baseline pre-HD SBP ≥160 mm Hg, which coincided with a decreasing trend in post-HD body weight (1.3 [95% CI 0.8-1.7] kg).DiscussionIn conclusion, patients who increased HD frequency from twice to thrice weekly treatment experienced increased weekly IDWG and better pre-HD SBP control with lower post-HD body weight.

ObjectiveIncremental hemodialysis (HD) is a strategy utilized to gradually intensify dialysis among patients with incident end-stage renal disease. However, there are scarce data about which patients' clinic status changes by increasing treatment frequency.MethodsWe retrospectively examined statistically de-identified data from 569 patients who successfully transitioned from twice- to thrice-weekly HD (2007-2011) and compared the differences in monthly-averaged values of hemodynamic and laboratory indices during the 3 months before and after the transition with the values at 1 month prior to transition serving as the reference.ResultsAt 3 months after transitioning from twice- to thrice-weekly HD, ultrafiltration volume decreased by 0.5 (95% CI 0.3-0.6) L/session among 189 patients (33%) with weekly interdialytic weight gain (IDWG) ≥5.4 kg/week, and increased by 0.4 (95% CI 0.3-0.5) L/session among 186 patients (33%) with weekly IDWG <3.3 kg/week. Weekly IDWG consistently increased after the transition irrespective of baseline values (1.7 [95% CI 1.5-1.9] kg/week). Pre-HD systolic blood pressure (SBP) decreased by 12 (95% CI 9-14) mm Hg among 177 patients (31%) with baseline pre-HD SBP ≥160 mm Hg, which coincided with a decreasing trend in post-HD body weight (1.3 [95% CI 0.8-1.7] kg).DiscussionIn conclusion, patients who increased HD frequency from twice to thrice weekly treatment experienced increased weekly IDWG and better pre-HD SBP control with lower post-HD body weight.

BackgroundResidual kidney function (RKF) is often expected to inevitably and rapidly decline among hemodialysis patients and, hence, has been inadvertently ignored in clinical practice. The importance of RKF has been revisited in some recent studies. Given that patients with end-stage renal disease now tend to initiate maintenance hemodialysis therapy with higher RKF levels, there seem to be important opportunities for incremental hemo-dialysis by individualizing the dose and frequency according to their RKF levels. This approach is realigned with precision medicine and patient-centeredness.SummaryIn this article, we first review the available methods to estimate RKF among hemodialysis patients. We then discuss the importance of maintaining and monitoring RKF levels based on a variety of clinical aspects, including volume overload, blood pressure control, mineral and bone metabolism, nutrition, and patient survival. We also review several potential measures to protect RKF: the use of high-flux and biocompatible membranes, the use of ultrapure dialysate, the incorporation of hemodiafiltration, incremental hemodialysis, and a low-protein diet, as well as general care such as avoiding nephrotoxic events, maintaining appropriate blood pressure, and better control of mineral and bone disorder parameters. Key Message: Individualized hemodialysis regimens may maintain RKF, lead to a better quality of life without compromising long-term survival, and ensure precision medicine and patient-centeredness in nephrology practice.

BackgroundResidual kidney function (RKF) is often expected to inevitably and rapidly decline among hemodialysis patients and, hence, has been inadvertently ignored in clinical practice. The importance of RKF has been revisited in some recent studies. Given that patients with end-stage renal disease now tend to initiate maintenance hemodialysis therapy with higher RKF levels, there seem to be important opportunities for incremental hemo-dialysis by individualizing the dose and frequency according to their RKF levels. This approach is realigned with precision medicine and patient-centeredness.SummaryIn this article, we first review the available methods to estimate RKF among hemodialysis patients. We then discuss the importance of maintaining and monitoring RKF levels based on a variety of clinical aspects, including volume overload, blood pressure control, mineral and bone metabolism, nutrition, and patient survival. We also review several potential measures to protect RKF: the use of high-flux and biocompatible membranes, the use of ultrapure dialysate, the incorporation of hemodiafiltration, incremental hemodialysis, and a low-protein diet, as well as general care such as avoiding nephrotoxic events, maintaining appropriate blood pressure, and better control of mineral and bone disorder parameters. Key Message: Individualized hemodialysis regimens may maintain RKF, lead to a better quality of life without compromising long-term survival, and ensure precision medicine and patient-centeredness in nephrology practice.

The aim of the review is to provide the ultimate distinction between incremental dialysis and what is referred to as infrequent dialysis. Infrequent dialysis is defined as any hemodialytic schedule that includes fewer than three hemodialysis sessions per week. Nonetheless, infrequent dialysis could be defined as a therapy that requires close clinical and nutritional monitoring, and it should also be accompanied by a slightly hypoproteic dietetic approach. Incremental dialysis (CDDP) is a well-defined therapeutic program requiring significant clinical monitoring; it begins in the outpatient clinic when patients shift to a hypoproteic diet (0.6 g/kg per day) with or without essential amino acids and a low-salt diet supplemented by one dialysis session per week. The incremental dialysis program is strictly tailored on the residual renal function (RRF) trend and it represents a time variable for a therapeutic “bridge” that must provide a favourable metabolic status together with good quality of life. Recent studies have demonstrated lower mortality rates compared with thrice-weekly dialysis and a neutral input/output balance of the phosphorus pool. Further studies are needed to confirm the safety and validity of this therapeutic choice., non disponibile

The aim of the review is to provide the ultimate distinction between incremental dialysis and what is referred to as infrequent dialysis. Infrequent dialysis is defined as any hemodialytic schedule that includes fewer than three hemodialysis sessions per week. Nonetheless, infrequent dialysis could be defined as a therapy that requires close clinical and nutritional monitoring, and it should also be accompanied by a slightly hypoproteic dietetic approach. Incremental dialysis (CDDP) is a well-defined therapeutic program requiring significant clinical monitoring; it begins in the outpatient clinic when patients shift to a hypoproteic diet (0.6 g/kg per day) with or without essential amino acids and a low-salt diet supplemented by one dialysis session per week. The incremental dialysis program is strictly tailored on the residual renal function (RRF) trend and it represents a time variable for a therapeutic “bridge” that must provide a favourable metabolic status together with good quality of life. Recent studies have demonstrated lower mortality rates compared with thrice-weekly dialysis and a neutral input/output balance of the phosphorus pool. Further studies are needed to confirm the safety and validity of this therapeutic choice., non disponibile

The aim of the review is to provide the ultimate distinction between incremental dialysis and what is referred to as infrequent dialysis. Infrequent dialysis is defined as any hemodialytic schedule that includes fewer than three hemodialysis sessions per week. Nonetheless, infrequent dialysis could be defined as a therapy that requires close clinical and nutritional monitoring, and it should also be accompanied by a slightly hypoproteic dietetic approach. Incremental dialysis (CDDP) is a well-defined therapeutic program requiring significant clinical monitoring; it begins in the outpatient clinic when patients shift to a hypoproteic diet (0.6 g/kg per day) with or without essential amino acids and a low-salt diet supplemented by one dialysis session per week. The incremental dialysis program is strictly tailored on the residual renal function (RRF) trend and it represents a time variable for a therapeutic “bridge” that must provide a favourable metabolic status together with good quality of life. Recent studies have demonstrated lower mortality rates compared with thrice-weekly dialysis and a neutral input/output balance of the phosphorus pool. Further studies are needed to confirm the safety and validity of this therapeutic choice., non disponibile

Purpose of reviewHigh-protein intake may lead to increased intraglomerular pressure and glomerular hyperfiltration. This can cause damage to glomerular structure leading to or aggravating chronic kidney disease (CKD). Hence, a low-protein diet (LPD) of 0.6-0.8 g/kg/day is often recommended for the management of CKD. We reviewed the effect of protein intake on incidence and progression of CKD and the role of LPD in the CKD management.Recent findingsActual dietary protein consumption in CKD patients remains substantially higher than the recommendations for LPD. Notwithstanding the inconclusive results of the 'Modification of Diet in Renal Disease' (MDRD) study, the largest randomized controlled trial to examine protein restriction in CKD, several prior and subsequent studies and meta-analyses appear to support the role of LPD on retarding progression of CKD and delaying initiation of maintenance dialysis therapy. LPD can also be used to control metabolic derangements in CKD. Supplemented LPD with essential amino acids or their ketoanalogs may be used for incremental transition to dialysis especially on nondialysis days. The LPD management in lieu of dialysis therapy can reduce costs, enhance psychological adaptation, and preserve residual renal function upon transition to dialysis. Adherence and adequate protein and energy intake should be ensured to avoid protein-energy wasting.SummaryA balanced and individualized dietary approach based on LPD should be elaborated with periodic dietitian counseling and surveillance to optimize management of CKD, to assure adequate protein and energy intake, and to avoid or correct protein-energy wasting.

Most people who make the transition to maintenance dialysis therapy are treated with a fixed dose thrice-weekly hemodialysis regimen without considering their residual kidney function (RKF). The RKF provides effective and naturally continuous clearance of both small and middle molecules, plays a major role in metabolic homeostasis, nutritional status, and cardiovascular health, and aids in fluid management. The RKF is associated with better patient survival and greater health-related quality of life, although these effects may be confounded by patient comorbidities. Preservation of the RKF requires a careful approach, including regular monitoring, avoidance of nephrotoxins, gentle control of blood pressure to avoid intradialytic hypotension, and an individualized dialysis prescription including the consideration of incremental hemodialysis. There is currently no standardized method for applying incremental hemodialysis in practice. Infrequent (once- to twice-weekly) hemodialysis regimens are often used arbitrarily, without knowing which patients would benefit the most from them or how to escalate the dialysis dose as RKF declines over time. The recently heightened interest in incremental hemodialysis has been hindered by the current limitations of the urea kinetic models (UKM) which tend to overestimate the dialysis dose required in the presence of substantial RKF. This is due to an erroneous extrapolation of the equivalence between renal urea clearance (Kru) and dialyser urea clearance (Kd), correctly assumed by the UKM, to the clinical domain. In this context, each ml/min of Kd clears the urea from the blood just as 1 ml/min of Kru does. By no means should such kinetic equivalence imply that 1 ml/min of Kd is clinically equivalent to 1 ml/min of urea clearance provided by the native kidneys. A recent paper by Casino and Basile suggested a variable target model (VTM) as opposed to the fixed model, because the VTM gives more clinical weight to the RKF

Most people who make the transition to maintenance dialysis therapy are treated with a fixed dose thrice-weekly hemodialysis regimen without considering their residual kidney function (RKF). The RKF provides effective and naturally continuous clearance of both small and middle molecules, plays a major role in metabolic homeostasis, nutritional status, and cardiovascular health, and aids in fluid management. The RKF is associated with better patient survival and greater health-related quality of life, although these effects may be confounded by patient comorbidities. Preservation of the RKF requires a careful approach, including regular monitoring, avoidance of nephrotoxins, gentle control of blood pressure to avoid intradialytic hypotension, and an individualized dialysis prescription including the consideration of incremental hemodialysis. There is currently no standardized method for applying incremental hemodialysis in practice. Infrequent (once- to twice-weekly) hemodialysis regimens are often used arbitrarily, without knowing which patients would benefit the most from them or how to escalate the dialysis dose as RKF declines over time. The recently heightened interest in incremental hemodialysis has been hindered by the current limitations of the urea kinetic models (UKM) which tend to overestimate the dialysis dose required in the presence of substantial RKF. This is due to an erroneous extrapolation of the equivalence between renal urea clearance (Kru) and dialyser urea clearance (Kd), correctly assumed by the UKM, to the clinical domain. In this context, each ml/min of Kd clears the urea from the blood just as 1 ml/min of Kru does. By no means should such kinetic equivalence imply that 1 ml/min of Kd is clinically equivalent to 1 ml/min of urea clearance provided by the native kidneys. A recent paper by Casino and Basile suggested a variable target model (VTM) as opposed to the fixed model, because the VTM gives more clinical weight to the RKF

Purpose of reviewHigh-protein intake may lead to increased intraglomerular pressure and glomerular hyperfiltration. This can cause damage to glomerular structure leading to or aggravating chronic kidney disease (CKD). Hence, a low-protein diet (LPD) of 0.6-0.8 g/kg/day is often recommended for the management of CKD. We reviewed the effect of protein intake on incidence and progression of CKD and the role of LPD in the CKD management.Recent findingsActual dietary protein consumption in CKD patients remains substantially higher than the recommendations for LPD. Notwithstanding the inconclusive results of the 'Modification of Diet in Renal Disease' (MDRD) study, the largest randomized controlled trial to examine protein restriction in CKD, several prior and subsequent studies and meta-analyses appear to support the role of LPD on retarding progression of CKD and delaying initiation of maintenance dialysis therapy. LPD can also be used to control metabolic derangements in CKD. Supplemented LPD with essential amino acids or their ketoanalogs may be used for incremental transition to dialysis especially on nondialysis days. The LPD management in lieu of dialysis therapy can reduce costs, enhance psychological adaptation, and preserve residual renal function upon transition to dialysis. Adherence and adequate protein and energy intake should be ensured to avoid protein-energy wasting.SummaryA balanced and individualized dietary approach based on LPD should be elaborated with periodic dietitian counseling and surveillance to optimize management of CKD, to assure adequate protein and energy intake, and to avoid or correct protein-energy wasting.

IntroductionWe hypothesized that at least half of incident hemodialysis (HD) patients on 3-times weekly dialysis could safely start on an incremental, 2-times weekly HD schedule if residual kidney function (RKF) had been considered.MethodsRKF is assessed in all our HD patients. This single-center, retrospective cohort study of incident adult HD patients, who survived ≥6 months on a 3-times weekly HD regimen and had a timed urine collection within 3 months of starting HD, assessed each patient's theoretical ability to achieve adequate urea clearance, ultrafiltration rate, and hemodynamic stability if on 2-times weekly HD.ResultsOf the 410 patients in the cohort, we found that 112 (27%) could have optimally and 107 (26%) could have been appropriately considered for 2-times weekly incremental HD. In general, diuretics were underutilized in >50% of subjects who had adequate RKF urea clearance. The optimal 2-times weekly patients had better potassium and phosphorus control. The correlation coefficient of calculated residual kidney urea clearance with 24-hour urine volume and with kinetic model residual kidney clearance was 0.68 and 0.99, respectively.DiscussionMore than 50% of incident HD patients with RKF have adequate kidney urea clearance to be considered for 2-times weekly HD. When additionally ultrafiltration volume and blood pressure stability are taken into account, more than one-fourth of the total cohort could optimally start HD in an incremental fashion.

BackgroundMaintenance hemodialysis is typically prescribed thrice weekly irrespective of a patient's residual kidney function (RKF). We hypothesized that a less frequent schedule at hemodialysis therapy initiation is associated with greater preservation of RKF without compromising survival among patients with substantial RKF.Study designA longitudinal cohort.Setting & participants23,645 patients who initiated maintenance hemodialysis therapy in a large dialysis organization in the United States (January 2007 to December 2010), had available RKF data during the first 91 days (or quarter) of dialysis, and survived the first year.PredictorIncremental (routine twice weekly for >6 continuous weeks during the first 91 days upon transition to dialysis) versus conventional (thrice weekly) hemodialysis regimens during the same time.OutcomesChanges in renal urea clearance and urine volume during 1 year after the first quarter and survival after the first year.ResultsAmong 23,645 included patients, 51% had substantial renal urea clearance (≥3.0mL/min/1.73m(2)) at baseline. Compared with 8,068 patients with conventional hemodialysis regimens matched based on baseline renal urea clearance, urine volume, age, sex, diabetes, and central venous catheter use, 351 patients with incremental regimens exhibited 16% (95% CI, 5%-28%) and 15% (95% CI, 2%-30%) more preserved renal urea clearance and urine volume at the second quarter, respectively, which persisted across the following quarters. Incremental regimens showed higher mortality risk in patients with inadequate baseline renal urea clearance (≤3.0mL/min/1.73m(2); HR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.07-2.44), but not in those with higher baseline renal urea clearance (HR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.76-1.28). Results were similar in a subgroup defined by baseline urine volume of 600mL/d.LimitationsPotential selection bias and wide CIs.ConclusionsAmong incident hemodialysis patients with substantial RKF, incremental hemodialysis may be a safe treatment r

Residual kidney function (RKF) may confer a variety of benefits to patients on maintenance dialysis. RKF provides continuous clearance of middle molecules and protein-bound solutes. Whereas the definition of RKF varies across studies, interdialytic urine volume may emerge as a pragmatic alternative to more cumbersome calculations. RKF preservation is associated with better patient outcomes including survival and quality of life and is a clinical parameter and research focus in peritoneal dialysis. We propose the following practical considerations to preserve RKF, especially in newly transitioned (incident) hemodialysis patients: (1) periodic monitoring of RKF in hemodialysis patients through urine volume and including residual urea clearance with dialysis adequacy and outcome markers such as anemia, fluid gains, minerals and electrolytes, nutritional, status and quality of life; (2) avoidance of nephrotoxic agents such as radiocontrast dye, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and aminoglycosides; (3) more rigorous hypertension control and minimizing intradialytic hypotensive episodes; (4) individualizing the initial dialysis prescription with consideration of an incremental/infrequent approach to hemodialysis initiation (e.g., twice weekly) or peritoneal dialysis; and (5) considering a lower protein diet, especially on nondialysis days. Because RKF appears to be associated with better patient outcomes, it requires more clinical and research focus in the care of hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis patients.

Residual kidney function (RKF) may confer a variety of benefits to patients on maintenance dialysis. RKF provides continuous clearance of middle molecules and protein-bound solutes. Whereas the definition of RKF varies across studies, interdialytic urine volume may emerge as a pragmatic alternative to more cumbersome calculations. RKF preservation is associated with better patient outcomes including survival and quality of life and is a clinical parameter and research focus in peritoneal dialysis. We propose the following practical considerations to preserve RKF, especially in newly transitioned (incident) hemodialysis patients: (1) periodic monitoring of RKF in hemodialysis patients through urine volume and including residual urea clearance with dialysis adequacy and outcome markers such as anemia, fluid gains, minerals and electrolytes, nutritional, status and quality of life; (2) avoidance of nephrotoxic agents such as radiocontrast dye, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and aminoglycosides; (3) more rigorous hypertension control and minimizing intradialytic hypotensive episodes; (4) individualizing the initial dialysis prescription with consideration of an incremental/infrequent approach to hemodialysis initiation (e.g., twice weekly) or peritoneal dialysis; and (5) considering a lower protein diet, especially on nondialysis days. Because RKF appears to be associated with better patient outcomes, it requires more clinical and research focus in the care of hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis patients.

BackgroundMaintenance hemodialysis is typically prescribed thrice weekly irrespective of a patient's residual kidney function (RKF). We hypothesized that a less frequent schedule at hemodialysis therapy initiation is associated with greater preservation of RKF without compromising survival among patients with substantial RKF.Study designA longitudinal cohort.Setting & participants23,645 patients who initiated maintenance hemodialysis therapy in a large dialysis organization in the United States (January 2007 to December 2010), had available RKF data during the first 91 days (or quarter) of dialysis, and survived the first year.PredictorIncremental (routine twice weekly for >6 continuous weeks during the first 91 days upon transition to dialysis) versus conventional (thrice weekly) hemodialysis regimens during the same time.OutcomesChanges in renal urea clearance and urine volume during 1 year after the first quarter and survival after the first year.ResultsAmong 23,645 included patients, 51% had substantial renal urea clearance (≥3.0mL/min/1.73m(2)) at baseline. Compared with 8,068 patients with conventional hemodialysis regimens matched based on baseline renal urea clearance, urine volume, age, sex, diabetes, and central venous catheter use, 351 patients with incremental regimens exhibited 16% (95% CI, 5%-28%) and 15% (95% CI, 2%-30%) more preserved renal urea clearance and urine volume at the second quarter, respectively, which persisted across the following quarters. Incremental regimens showed higher mortality risk in patients with inadequate baseline renal urea clearance (≤3.0mL/min/1.73m(2); HR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.07-2.44), but not in those with higher baseline renal urea clearance (HR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.76-1.28). Results were similar in a subgroup defined by baseline urine volume of 600mL/d.LimitationsPotential selection bias and wide CIs.ConclusionsAmong incident hemodialysis patients with substantial RKF, incremental hemodialysis may be a safe treatment r