Search

Background: On-line determination of ionic dialysance (ID) has been used to measure the clearance of small solutes like urea. However, attempts to determine the in vivo relationship between ID and urea clearance have led to discordant findings. The aim of this study was to determine the relationship between the mean values of repeated instantaneous determinations of ID throughout a dialysis session ((m)ID), obtained using a single-step inlet dialysate conductivity profile, and the mean values of urea clearance corrected for access recirculation (K(eu1)), total recirculation (access plus cardiopulmonary recirculation, K(eu2)), and the entire postdialysis urea rebound (K(wb))., Methods: Eighty-two anuric patients on chronic thrice-weekly hemodialysis were studied using an Integra machine equipped with the Diascan module for the automatic determination of ID. The mean values of repeated ID measurements made at 30-minute intervals were compared with K(eu1) (available for only 31 patients), K(eu2), and K(wb)., Results: The results in all 82 patients were: (m)ID = 176 +/- 23 mL/min; K(eu2) = 181 +/- 25 mL/min; K(wb) = 159 +/- 22 mL/min. The mean (m)ID/K(wb) and (m)ID/K(eu2) ratios were, respectively, 1.11 +/- 0.06 and 0.98 +/- 0.06. The results in the 31 patients for whom K(eu1) values were available were: (m)ID = 179 +/- 24 mL/min and K(eu1) = 200 +/- 27 mL/min; the mean (m)ID/K(eu1) ratio was 0.90 +/- 0.05., Conclusion: The mean value of repeated ID determinations obtained using a single-step conductivity profile underestimates urea clearance corrected for access recirculation, and may be considered an adequate estimate of urea clearance corrected for total recirculation.

Background: An adequate estimation of urea distribution volume (V) in hemodialysis patients is useful to monitor protein nutrition. Direct dialysis quantification (DDQ) is the gold standard for determining V, but it is impractical for routine use because it requires equilibrated postdialysis plasma water urea concentration. The single pool variable volume urea kinetic model (SPVV-UKM), recommended as a standard by Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (K/DOQI), does not need a delayed postdialysis blood sample but it requires a correct estimate of dialyser urea clearance., Methods: Ionic dialysance (ID) may accurately estimate dialyzer urea clearance corrected for total recirculation. Using ID as input to SPVV-UKM, correct V values are expected when end-dialysis plasma water urea concentrations are determined in the end-of-session blood sample taken with the blood pump speed reduced to 50 mL/min for two minutes (U(pwt2')). The aim of this study was to determine whether the V values determined by means of SPVV-UKM, ID, and U(pwt2') (V(ID)) are similar to those determined by the "gold standard" DDQ method (V(DDQ)). Eighty-two anuric hemodialysis patients were studied., Results: V(DDQ) was 26.3 +/- 5.2 L; V(ID) was 26.5 +/- 4.8 L. The (V(ID)-V(DDQ)) difference was 0.2 +/- 1.6 L, which is not statistically significant (P= 0.242). Anthropometric volume (V(A)) calculated using Watson equations was 33.6 +/- 6.0 L. The (V(A)-V(DDQ)) difference was 7.3 +/- 3.3 L, which is statistically significant (P < 0.001)., Conclusion: Anthropometric-based V values overestimate urea distribution volume calculated by DDQ and SPVV-UKM. ID allows adequate V values to be determined, and circumvents the problem of delayed postdialysis blood samples.

Background: Ionic dialysance may be equivalent to blood-water urea clearance corrected for recirculation (effective urea clearance); however, this is controversial. The aims of our study were (1) to verify in vivo whether the value of ionic dialysance is affected by the method of determination, given the effect of cardiopulmonary recirculation on inlet plasma water conductivity when the inlet dialysate conductivity is changed; and (2) to define the operative modalities for determining ionic dialysance to obtain an adequate estimate of effective urea clearance., Methods: Thirty-three hemodialysis patients were studied during 186 dialysis sessions with low-flux polysulfone dialyzers using a modified Fresenius Medical Care 4008 B machine equipped with meters to measure inlet and outlet dialysate conductivities. This machine varied inlet dialysate conductivity (Cdi) according to the following pattern: starting from baseline (step 0), Cdi was increased by 8% (step 1). After Cdi had reached the target value, which took 8 to 10 minutes, it was lowered to 8% below the baseline value (step 2). After 8 to 10 minutes, when Cdi had reached the new target, it was returned to its starting value (step 3). Four values of conventional ionic dialysance (using the standard formula) and actual ionic dialysance (taking into account cardiopulmonary recirculation) were obtained for each cycle and were compared among them and with effective urea clearance (Kde)., Results: Mean conventional dialysance values at steps 0 to 2 and 2 to 3 (190 and 189 mL/min) were similar and higher than those at steps 0 to 1 and 1 to 2 (171 and 181 mL/min). Mean conventional ionic dialysance values underestimated Kde, particularly at steps 0 to 1 (-22.2 mL/min, P < 0.001) and 1 to 2 (-12.6 mL/min, P < 0.001). The actual dialysance values underestimated Kde by no more than 4.3 mL/min (P < 0.001). In steps 0 to 1 and 1 to 2, the underestimate of Kde by conventional dialysance increased at higher values of Kde, but this relationship did not exist when considering actual dialysance., Conclusions: The value of ionic dialysance is affected by the method of determination, given the effect of cardiopulmonary recirculation on inlet plasma water conductivity when inlet dialysate conductivity is changed. As a consequence, to provide a correct and direct estimate of effective urea clearance, ionic dialysance must be determined by changing inlet dialysate conductivity in such a way as to keep inlet plasma water conductivity constant by means of two symmetrical high and low dialysate conductivity steps.