Fluid Status in Peritoneal Dialysis Patients: The European Body Composition Monitoring (EuroBCM) Study Cohort

BACKGROUND: Euvolemia is an important adequacy parameter in peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients. However, accurate tools to evaluate volume status in clinical practice and data on volume status in PD patients as compared to healthy population, and the associated factors, have not been available so far. METHODS: We used a bio-impedance spectroscopy device, the Body Composition Monitor (BCM) to assess volume status in a cross-sectional cohort of prevalent PD patients in different European countries. The results were compared to an age and gender matched healthy population. RESULTS: Only 40% out of 639 patients from 28 centres in 6 countries were normovolemic. Severe fluid overload was present in 25.2%. There was a wide scatter in the relation between blood pressure and volume status. In a multivariate analysis in the subgroup of patients from countries with unrestricted availability of all PD modalities and fluid types, older age, male gender, lower serum albumin, lower BMI, diabetes, higher systolic blood pressure, and use of at least one exchange per day with the highest hypertonic glucose were associated with higher relative tissue hydration. Neither urinary output nor ultrafiltration, PD fluid type or PD modality were retained in the model (total R² of the model = 0.57). CONCLUSIONS: The EuroBCM study demonstrates some interesting issues regarding volume status in PD. As in HD patients, hypervolemia is a frequent condition in PD patients and blood pressure can be a misleading clinical tool to evaluate volume status. To monitor fluid balance, not only fluid output but also dietary input should be considered. Close monitoring of volume status, a correct dialysis prescription adapted to the needs of the patient and dietary measures seem to be warranted to avoid hypervolemia

Automated individualization of dialysate sodium concentration reduces intradialytic plasma sodium changes in hemodialysis

International audienceIn standard care, hemodialysis patients are often treated with a center-specific fixed dialysate sodium concentration, potentially resulting in diffusive sodium changes for patients with plasma sodium concentrations below or above this level. While diffusive sodium load may be associated with thirst and higher interdialytic weight gain, excessive diffusive sodium removal may cause intradialytic symptoms. In contrast, the new hemodialysis machine option "Na control" provides automated individualization of dialysate sodium during treatment with the aim to reduce such intradialytic sodium changes without the need to determine the plasma sodium concentration. This proof-of-principle study on sodium control was designed as a monocentric randomized controlled crossover trial: 32 patients with residual diuresis of ≤1000 mL/day were enrolled to be treated by high-volume post-dilution hemodiafiltration (HDF) for 2 weeks each with "Na control" (individually and automatically adjusted dialysate sodium concentration) versus "standard fixed Na" (fixed dialysate sodium 138 mmol/L), in randomized order. Pre- and post-dialytic plasma sodium concentrations were determined at bedside by direct potentiometry. The study hypothesis consisted of 2 components: the mean plasma sodium change between the start and end of the treatment being within ±1.0 mmol/L for sodium-controlled treatments, and a lower variability of the plasma sodium changes for "Na control" than for "standard fixed Na" treatments. Three hundred seventy-two treatments of 31 adult chronic hemodialysis patients (intention-to-treat population) were analyzed. The estimate for the mean plasma sodium change was -0.53 mmol/L (95% confidence interval: [-1.04; -0.02] mmol/L) for "Na control" treatments and -0.95 mmol/L (95% CI: [-1.76; -0.15] mmol/L) for "standard fixed Na" treatments. The standard deviation of the plasma sodium changes was 1.39 mmol/L for "Na control" versus 2.19 mmol/L for "standard fixed Na" treatments (P = 0.0004). Whereas the 95% CI for the estimate for the mean plasma sodium change during "Na control" treatments marginally overlapped the lower border of the predefined margin ±1.0 mmol/L, the variability of intradialytic plasma sodium changes was lower during "Na control" versus "standard fixed Na" treatments. Thus, automated dialysate sodium individualization by "Na control" approaches isonatremic dialysis in the clinical setting

RESIDUAL RENAL FUNCTION AND EFFECT OF LOW-SODIUM SOLUTION ON BLOOD PRESSURE IN PERITONEAL DIALYSIS PATIENTS

Background: Residual renal function (RRF) affects sodium and fluid balance. The aim of this analysis was to examine the impact of RRF on the effect of a sodium-reduced peritoneal dialysis fluid (PDF) on blood pressure (BP). Methods: This is a post-hoc analysis of a prospective, randomized, controlled double-blind clinical trial with 82 patients o n continuous ambulatory PD (CAPD) treated with a low-sodium (125 mmol/L Na) or a standard-sodium (134 mmol/L Na) PDF. Subgroups according to glomerular filtration rate (GFR) at baseline ( 6 mL/min/1.73 m(2)) were analyzed for BP and antihypertensive medication. Results: In the low-GFR group on low-sodium PDF (N = 26), systolic BP was reduced from 152 +/- 24 mmHg at baseline to 137 +/- 21 mmHg at week 12, diastolic BP from 90 +/- 16 mmHg to 83 +/- 11 mmHg. In the low-GFR group on standard-sodium PDF and in the high-GFR group on both PDF types, only minor changes were observed. For the low-GFR subgroup, the confounder-adjusted mean study group difference in systolic BP at week 12 between low-sodium and standard-sodium PDF was -16.9 (95% confidence interval [CI] -27.2 to -6.6) mmHg, for diastolic BP, it was-7.0 (95% CI -12.6 to -1.4) mmHg. In both GFR subgroups, more patients had a reduced daily dose of antihypertensive medication and fewer patients an increased daily dose in the low-sodium compared with the standard-sodium group at week 12. Conclusions: The reduction of BP with a sodium-reduced PDF seems to be more effective in patients with no or low RRF than in patients with residual capacity of renal sodium and fluid control

Baseline hydration status in incident peritoneal dialysis patients: the initiative of patient outcomes in dialysis (IPOD-PD study)

Non-euvolaemia in peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients is associated with elevated mortality risk. There is an urgent need to collect data to help us understand the association between clinical practices and hydration and nutritional status, and their effects on patient outcome. The aim of this prospective international, longitudinal observational cohort study is to follow up the hydration and nutritional status, as measured by bioimpedance spectroscopy using the body composition monitor (BCM) of incident PD patients for up to 5 years. Measures of hydration and nutritional status and of clinical, biochemical and therapy-related data are collected directly before start of PD treatment, at 1 and 3 months, and then every 3 months. This paper presents the protocol and a pre-specified analysis of baseline data of the cohort. A total of 1092 patients (58.1% male, 58.0 +/- 15.3 years) from 135 centres in 32 countries were included. Median fluid overload (FO) was 2.0 L (males) and 0.9 L (females). Less than half of the patients were normohydrated (38.7%), whereas FO > 1.1 L was seen in 56.5%. Systolic and diastolic blood pressure were 139.5 +/- 21.8 and 80.0 +/- 12.8 mmHg, respectively, and 25.1% of patients had congestive heart failure [New York Heart Association (NYHA) 1 or higher]. A substantial number of patients judged to be not overhydrated on clinical judgement appeared to be overhydrated by BCM measurement. Overhydration at baseline was independently associated with male gender and diabetic status. The majority of patients starting on PD are overhydrated already at start of PD. This may have important consequences on clinical outcomes and preservation of residual renal function. Substantial reclassification of hydration status by BCM versus on a clinical basis was necessary, especially in patients who were not overtly overhydrated. Both clinical appreciation and bioimpedance should be combined in clinical decision-making on hydration status

Performance, clinical effectiveness, and safety of immunoadsorption in a wide range of indications

Immunoadsorption is well known to selectively remove immunoglobulins and immune complexes from plasma and is applied in a variety of autoimmune diseases and for desensitization before, or at acute rejection after organ transplantation. Performance, safety, and clinical effectiveness of immunoadsorption were the aim of this study. This prospective, noninterventional, multicentre cohort study included patients treated with immunoadsorption (Immunosorba or GLOBAFFIN adsorbers) for any indication. Clinical effectiveness was assessed after termination of the patient's individual treatment schedule. Eighty‐one patients were included, 69 were treated with Immunosorba, 11 with GLOBAFFIN, one patient with both adsorbers. A majority of patients was treated for neurological indications, dilated cardiomyopathy, and before or after kidney or heart transplantation. Mean IgG reduction from pre‐ to post‐treatment was 69.9% ± 11.5% for Immunosorba and 74.1% ± 5.0% for GLOBAFFIN, respectively. The overall IgG reduction over a complete treatment block was 68%–93% with Immunosorba and 62%–90% with GLOBAFFIN depending on the duration of the overall treatment. After termination of the immunoadsorption therapy, an improvement of clinical status was observed in 63.0%, stabilization of symptoms in 29.6%, and a deterioration in 4.9% of patients. Changes in fibrinogen, thrombocytes, and albumin were mostly classified as noncritical. Overall, the treatments were well tolerated. Immunoadsorption in routine clinical practice with both GLOBAFFIN and Immunosorba has been safely performed, was well tolerated by patients, and effective in lowering immunoglobulins with an improvement or maintenance of clinical status, thus represents an additional therapeutic option for therapy refractory immune disorders

Effects of high-volume online mixed-hemodiafiltration on anemia management in dialysis patients.

BackgroundAnemia is a major comorbidity of patients with end-stage renal disease and poses an enormous economic burden to health-care systems. High dose erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) have been associated with unfavorable clinical outcomes. We explored whether mixed-dilution hemodiafiltration (Mixed-HDF), based on its innovative substitution modality, may improve anemia outcomes compared to the traditional post-dilution hemodiafiltration (Post-HDF).MethodsWe included 174 adult prevalent dialysis patients (87 on Mixed-HDF, 87 on Post-HDF) treated in 24 NephroCare dialysis centers between January 2010 and August 2016 into this retrospective cohort study. All patients were dialyzed three times per week and had fistula/graft as vascular access. Patients were matched at baseline and followed over a one-year period. The courses of hemoglobin levels (Hb) and monthly ESA consumption were compared between the two groups with linear mixed models.ResultsMean baseline Hb was 11.9±1.3 and 11.8±1.1g/dl in patients on Mixed- and Post-HDF, respectively. While Hb remained stable in patients on Mixed-HDF, it decreased slightly in patients on Post-HDF (at month 12: 11.8±1.2 vs 11.1±1.2g/dl). This tendency was confirmed by our linear mixed model (p = 0.0514 for treatment x time interaction). Baseline median ESA consumption was 6000 [Q1:0;Q3:16000] IU/4 weeks in both groups. Throughout the observation period ESA doses tended to be lower in the Mixed-HDF group (4000 [Q1:0;Q3:16000] vs 8000 [Q1:0;Q3:20000] IU/4 weeks at month 12; p = 0.0791 for treatment x time interaction). Sensitivity analyses, adjusting for differences not covered by matching at baseline, strengthened our results (Hb: p = 0.0124; ESA: p = 0.0687).ConclusionsResults of our explorative study suggest that patients on Mixed-HDF may have clinical benefits in terms of anemia management. This may also have a beneficial economic impact. Future studies are needed to confirm our hypothesis-generating results and to provide additional evidence on the potential beneficial effects of Mixed-HDF

The relationship of NT-proBNP and dialysis parameters with outcome of incident haemodialysis patients: results from the Membrane Permeability Outcome Study

&lt;b&gt;&lt;i&gt;Background/Aims:&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/b&gt; The association of raised levels of natriuretic peptides with elevated risk of mortality was investigated in the present analysis of the Membrane Permeability Outcome study. &lt;b&gt;&lt;i&gt;Methods:&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/b&gt; N-terminal probrain type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) was measured in 618 incident haemodialysis patients, randomised to either high-flux or low-flux. Characteristics of patients with NT-proBNP levels below or above the median were descriptively analysed and survival analysis was performed. &lt;b&gt;&lt;i&gt;Results:&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/b&gt; Median NT-proBNP value was 2,124 pg/ml, with 1,854 pg/ml in the high-flux and 2,919 pg/ml in the low-flux group. Survival probability was lowest in patients with both a history of cardiovascular disease and NT-proBNP values above the median (p &lt; 0.001). A multivariate Cox proportional hazard model showed interaction between presence of cardiovascular diseases and NT-proBNP levels above the median. &lt;b&gt;&lt;i&gt;Conclusions:&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/b&gt; NT-proBNP is an independent predictor of mortality also in incident haemodialysis patients. Lower concentrations associated with high-flux dialysis suggest a possible biological link to improved survival in this group.</jats:p