BACKGROUND: On-line hemodiafiltration (HDF) represents the supreme blood purification modality for end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients. Large-volume infusion of on-line prepared substitution fluid may, however, expose patients to inflammatory contaminants. As a result, on-line HDF might aggravate chronic inflammation, which correlates with malnutrition, cardiovascular disease, and mortality among ESRD patients. METHODS: In a multicenter cross-over study, 27 ESRD patients were randomly assigned to treatment with on-line HDF and low-flux hemodialysis (HD). After 6 months, patients were crossed to the other treatment modality, and treatment continued for another 6 months. Both on-line HDF and low-flux HD were conducted with polysulfone membranes and ultrapure dialysis fluid. Samples were drawn at the end of each treatment period. RESULTS:Inflammatory parameters were elevated in the study population when compared to healthy controls. Induction of interleukin-1 receptor antagonist (IL-1Ra) and tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-alpha) was comparable for on-line HDF and low-flux HD, and there was no intradialytic increase in cytokine production. As a result, interleukin-6 (IL-6) plasma levels did not differ significantly between the two treatment modalities. Similarly, no difference between on-line HDF and low-flux HD was observed for C-reactive protein (CRP) and albumin. Markers of endothelial cell activation (soluble intercellular and vascular cell adhesion molecules sICAM-1 and sVCAM-1) as well as the cardiovascular risk marker cardiac troponin T (cTnT) remained elevated compared to healthy subjects, but showed no difference between the two treatment modalities. CONCLUSIONS: On-line HDF, as the most effective renal replacement therapy, does not provoke inflammatory response and is both safe and highly biocompatible.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: On-line hemodiafiltration (HDF) represents the supreme blood purification modality for end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients. Large-volume infusion of on-line prepared substitution fluid may, however, expose patients to inflammatory contaminants. As a result, on-line HDF might aggravate chronic inflammation, which correlates with malnutrition, cardiovascular disease, and mortality among ESRDpatients. METHODS: In a multicenter cross-over study, 27 ESRDpatients were randomly assigned to treatment with on-line HDF and low-flux hemodialysis (HD). After 6 months, patients were crossed to the other treatment modality, and treatment continued for another 6 months. Both on-line HDF and low-flux HD were conducted with polysulfone membranes and ultrapure dialysis fluid. Samples were drawn at the end of each treatment period. RESULTS: Inflammatory parameters were elevated in the study population when compared to healthy controls. Induction of interleukin-1 receptor antagonist (IL-1Ra) and tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-alpha) was comparable for on-line HDF and low-flux HD, and there was no intradialytic increase in cytokine production. As a result, interleukin-6 (IL-6) plasma levels did not differ significantly between the two treatment modalities. Similarly, no difference between on-line HDF and low-flux HD was observed for C-reactive protein (CRP) and albumin. Markers of endothelial cell activation (soluble intercellular and vascular cell adhesion molecules sICAM-1 and sVCAM-1) as well as the cardiovascular risk marker cardiac troponin T (cTnT) remained elevated compared to healthy subjects, but showed no difference between the two treatment modalities. CONCLUSIONS: On-line HDF, as the most effective renal replacement therapy, does not provoke inflammatory response and is both safe and highly biocompatible.
Authors: Ayşe Ağbaş; Nur Canpolat; Salim Çalışkan; Alev Yılmaz; Hakan Ekmekçi; Mark Mayes; Helen Aitkenhead; Franz Schaefer; Lale Sever; Rukshana Shroff Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-06-18 Impact factor: 3.240