Search

Background: Hemodiafiltration with on-line endogenous reinfusion (HFR) is an extracorporeal dialytic method that combines diffusion, convection and adsorption. HFR-Supra (HFR-S) is a second-generation system with increased convective permeability and adsorption capability. Previous studies suggested that HFR reduces oxidative stress compared to standard haemodialysis. The principal aim of the present study was to compare antioxidant vitamins behavior and oxidative status of hemodialysis patients treated with HFR and HFR-S., Methods: The study was designed as a multicenter, randomized, crossover trial. Forty-one patients were recruited from 19 dialysis centers and after a 4-month washout stabilization period in on-line hemodiafiltration (ol-HDF), each patient was randomized to a sequence of treatments (HFR-S followed by HFR or viceversa) with each treatment applied over 6 months. Plasma levels of Advanced Oxidation Protein Products, Total Antioxidant Status, vitamins C, A and E and their ligands (Retinol Binding Protein and total lipids) were measured at baseline and at the end of each treatment period., Results: Results show that the higher convective permeability of HFR-S with respect to HFR did not produce additional beneficial effects on the patients' oxidative status, a slight decrease of both Vitamin A and Retinol Binding Protein being the only difference registered in the long-term. However, as compared to ol-HDF, both the re-infusive techniques allowed to reduce the intradialytic loss of Vitamin C and, in the long-term, improve the patients' oxidative status and increase Retinol Binding Protein plasma values. No significant differences were found between the Vitamin C concentration of pre- and post cartridge UF neither in HFR-S nor in HFR showing that the sorbent resin does not adsorb Vitamin C., Conclusion: HFR-S and HFR are almost equivalent in term of impact on antioxidant vitamins and oxidative status of hemodialysis patients. Nonetheless, as compared to ol-HDF, both treatments produced a sensible sparing of Vitamin C and may represent a new approach for reducing oxidative stress and related complications in dialysis patients. Long-term effects of re-infusive treatments on patients' cardiovascular morbidity and mortality need to be evaluated., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01492491 , retrospectively registered in 10 December 2011.

Background: Hemofiltrate reinfusion (HFR) is a form of hemodiafiltration (HDF) in which replacement fluid is constituted by ultrafiltrate from the patient 'regenerated' through a cartridge containing hydrophobic styrene resin. Bicarbonate-based dialysis solutions (DS) used in routine hemodialysis and HDF contain small quantities of acetate (3-5 mM) as a stabilizing agent, one of the major causes of intradialytic hypotension. Acetate-free (AF) DS have recently been made available, substituting acetate with hydrochloric acid. The impact of AF DS during HFR on Hb levels and erythropoietic-stimulating agent (ESA) requirement in chronic dialysis patients was assessed., Patients and Methods: After obtaining informed consent, 30 uremic patients treated by standard bicarbonate dialysis (BHD, DS with acetate) were randomized to treatment in 3-month cycles: first AF HFR, followed by HFR with acetate, and again AF HFR. At the beginning and end of each period, Hb and ESA requirements were evaluated., Results: A significant increase in the Hb level was observed throughout all periods of HFR versus BHD (from 11.1 to 11.86 g/dl; p = 0.04), with a significant decrease of ESA requirements from 29,500 to 25,033 IU/month (p = 0.04)., Conclusion: Regardless of the presence or absence of acetate in DS, HFR per se allows a significant lowering of ESA dosage versus BHD, while at the same time increasing Hb levels. Taking for granted the clinical impact produced, HFR seems to provide a relevant decrease in end-stage renal disease patient costs., (Copyright © 2011 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Aim: The purpose of the study was to examine the effect of hemodiafiltration with endogenous reinfusion (HFR) compared to hemodialysis (HD) on 28 uremic patients with secondary hyperparathyroidism (2HPT) but positively selected for good and stable control of phosphatemia in order to evaluate the independent effects of dialysis treatments on bone turnover metabolism., Methods: The study was divided into 3 periods of observation: a) HD for three months; b) HFR for three months; c) HFR for a further 3 months. We analysed the trend of: whole PTH, 1-84 PTH, 7-84 PTH, alkaline phosphatase and its bone isoenzyme, total and ionised calcium, phosphatemia, dose of phosphate binder agents, beta2-microglobulin, CRP. All the variations found were evaluated through mean values +/- SD, t-tests, multivariate analysis., Results: We observed a deceleration in bone turnover characterized by a reduction of the total and bone alkaline phosphatase (IU/mL) from 92.3 +/- 82.8 and 35.8 +/- 49.8 at the end of HD to 63.4 +/- 23.9 and 16.0 +/- 8.7 at the end of HFR, respectively, and 1-84 PTH from 317.5 +/- 264.6 pg/mL at the end of HD to 287.5 +/- 258.9 pg/mL at the end of the 3rd month of HFR. Beta2-microglobulin was reduced from 32.9 +/- 16.1 mg/L at the end of HD to 26.4 +/- 8.1 mg/L already at the end of the first three months of HFR. CRP was reduced from 2.5 +/- 2.6 mg/dL at the beginning of the study to 1.3 +/- 1.7 mg/dL at the end of HFR. There were no differences with regard to: dialytic efficiency, nutritional status, calcemia, phosphatemia (maintained in the K-DOQI range for the entire duration of the study), also thanks to more careful use of phosphate chelating agents., Conclusion: We are of the opinion that HFR - essentially thanks to the use of ultrapure endogenous infusate - induces a deceleration in bone turnover due to 2PHT. In addition, phosphate subtraction in HFR is better compared to HD, thanks to the improvement of the anti-inflammatory conditions by removing the cytokines harmful to bone metabolism and excluding a priori the negative effects related to hyperphosphatemia.

Background: The objective of the study was to compare the convective treatment modes, on-line hemofiltration (HF) and on-line hemodiafiltration (HDF), regarding cardiovascular tolerance and effects on blood pressure, when applied under similar conditions in stable dialysis patients., Methods: 39 clinically stable dialysis patients were treated with HD for 6 months (run-in period), followed by HF and HDF in random order for 2x6 months. Similar biocompatibility (same membrane and fluid quality), similar treatment time and urea Kt/V were achieved using AK100/200 ULTRA machines, polyamide membranes in low-flux and high-flux versions and appropriate adjustment of blood flow rate (Qb) and dilution ratio (Qb/Qinf). Predilution was used for HDF (target dilution ratio = 2/1 ) as well as for HF (target dilution ratio = 1/1)., Results: 30 patients completed the study; 5 dropped out for non-study related reasons and 4 for non-compliance. Treatment with HF in comparison to HDF showed fewer hypotension episodes during the sessions per patient and month (HF: 0.5, HDF 1.1; p = 0.017), less plasma expander administration per patient and month (HF: 35.9 ml, HDF: 103.1 ml; p = 0.035), fewer episodes of intra-session headache (HF: 0.1, HDF: 0.4; p = 0.06), and higher pre-session MAP (HF: 98.4 mmHg, HDF: 93.8 mmHg; p = 0.037). No significant difference was found in inter-treatment weight gain, post-session MAP, or pre-session plasma sodium., Conclusions: HF and HDF provide good control of intra-session symptoms and blood pressure in stable patients. Treatment with HF resulted in a significant reduction in intra-session hypotension and a slight but significant increase in pre-session MAP, caused by an increase in systolic BP without any effect on the prevalence of hypertension or the dose of antihypertensive drugs, all compared to HDF.