Arterial line pressure control enhanced extracorporeal blood flow prescription in hemodialysis patients

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In hemodialysis, extracorporeal blood flow (Qb) recommendation is 300–500 mL/min. To achieve the best Qb, we based our prescription on dynamic arterial line pressure (DALP).</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This prospective study included 72 patients with catheter Group 1 (G1), 1877 treatments and 35 arterio-venous (AV) fistulae Group 2 (G2), 1868 treatments. The dialysis staff was trained to prescribe Qb sufficient to obtain DALP between -200 to -250 mmHg. We measured ionic clearance (IK: mL/min), access recirculation, DALP (mmHg) and Qb (mL/min). Six prescription zones were identified: from an optimal A zone (Qb > 400, DALP -200 to -250) to zones with lower Qb E (Qb < 300, DALP -200 to -250) and F (Qb < 300, DALP > -199).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Treatments distribution in A was 695 (37%) in G1 vs. 704 (37.7%) in G2 (<it>P </it>= 0.7). In B 150 (8%) in G1 vs. 458 (24.5%) in G2 (<it>P </it>< 0.0001). Recirculation in A was 10.0% (Inter quartile rank, IQR 6.5, 14.2) in G1 vs. 9.8% (IQR 7.5, 14.1) in G2 (<it>P </it>= 0.62). IK in A was 214 ± 34 (G1) vs. 213 ± 35 (G2) (<it>P </it>= 0.65). IK Anova between G2 zones was: A vs. C and D (<it>P </it>< 0.000001). Staff prescription adherence was 81.3% (G1) vs. 84.1% (G2) (<it>P </it>= 0.02).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>In conclusion, an optimal Qb can de prescribed with DALP of -200 mmHg. Staff adherence to DLAP treatment prescription could be reached up to 81.3% in catheters and 84.1% in AV fistulae.</p

Should the Arteriovenous Fistula Be Created before Starting Dialysis?: A Decision Analytic Approach

Background: An arteriovenous fistula (AVF) is considered the vascular access of choice, but uncertainty exists about the\ud optimal time for its creation in pre-dialysis patients. The aim of this study was to determine the optimal vascular access\ud referral strategy for stage 4 (glomerular filtration rate ,30 ml/min/1.73 m2) chronic kidney disease patients using a decision\ud analytic framework.\ud Methods: A Markov model was created to compare two strategies: refer all stage 4 chronic kidney disease patients for an\ud AVF versus wait until the patient starts dialysis. Data from published observational studies were used to estimate the\ud probabilities used in the model. A Markov cohort analysis was used to determine the optimal strategy with life expectancy\ud and quality adjusted life expectancy as the outcomes. Sensitivity analyses, including a probabilistic sensitivity analysis, were\ud performed using Monte Carlo simulation.\ud Results: The wait strategy results in a higher life expectancy (66.6 versus 65.9 months) and quality adjusted life expectancy\ud (38.9 versus 38.5 quality adjusted life months) than immediate AVF creation. It was robust across all the parameters except\ud at higher rates of progression and lower rates of ischemic steal syndrome.\ud Conclusions: Early creation of an AVF, as recommended by most guidelines, may not be the preferred strategy in all predialysis\ud patients. Further research on cost implications and patient preferences for treatment options needs to be done\ud before recommending early AVF creation

Rationale and design of BISTRO: a randomized controlled trial to determine whether bioimpedance spectroscopy guided fluid management maintains residual kidney function in incident haemodialysis patients

Background: Preserved residual kidney function (RKF) and normal fluid status are associated with better patient outcomes in incident haemodialysis patients. The objective of this trial is to determine whether using bioimpedance technology in prescribing the optimal post-dialysis weight can reduce the rate of decline of RKF and potentially improve patient outcomes. Methods/Design: 516 patients commencing haemodialysis, aged >18 with RKF of > 3 ml/min/1.73 m2 or a urine volume >500 ml per day or per the shorter inter-dialytic period will be consented and enrolled into a pragmatic, open label, randomized controlled trial. The intervention is incorporation of bioimpedance spectroscopy (BI) determination of normally hydrated weight to set a post-dialysis target weight that limits volume depletion, compared to current standard practice. Clinicians and participants will be blinded to BI measures in the control group and a standardized record capturing management of fluid status will be used in all participants. Primary outcome is preservation of residual kidney function assessed as time to anuria (≤100 ml/day or ≤200 ml urine volume in the short inter-dialytic period). A sample size of 516 was based upon a cumulative incidence of 30% anuria in the control group and 20% in the treatment group and 11% competing risks (death, transplantation) over 10 months, with up to 2 years follow-up. Secondary outcomes include rate of decline in small solute clearance, significant adverse events, hospitalization, loss of vascular access, cardiovascular events and interventions, dialysis efficacy and safety, dialysis-related symptoms and quality of life. Economic evaluation will be carried out to determine the cost-effectiveness of the intervention. Analyses will be adjusted for patient characteristics and dialysis unit practice patterns relevant to fluid management. Discussion: This trial will establish the added value of undertaking BI measures to support clinical management of fluid status and establish the relationship between fluid status and preservation of residual kidney function in incident haemodialysis patients. Trial registration: ISCCTN Number: 11342007, completed 26/04/2016; NIHR Portfolio number: CPMS31766; Sponsor: Keele University Keywords: Fluid status, Body composition, Residual kidney function, Haemodialysis, Bioimpedance, Fluid management, Health economic