BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown that micrometer-sized air bubbles are introduced into the patient during hemodialysis. The aim of this study was to investigate, in vitro, the influence of dialysis filters on the generation of air bubbles. METHODS: Three different kind of dialyzers were tested: one high-flux FX80 dry filter (Fresenius Medical Care AG&Co. KGaA, Bad Homburg, Germany), one low-flux F8HPS dry filter (Fresenius Medical Care AG&Co. KGaA, Bad Homburg, Germany) and a wet-stored APS-18u filter (Asahi Kasei Medical, Tokyo, Japan). The F8HPS was tested with pump flow ranging between 100 to 400 ml/min. The three filters were compared using a constant pump flow of 300 ml/min. Measurements were performed using an ultrasound Doppler instrument. RESULTS: In 90% of the series, bubbles were measured after the outlet line of the air trap without triggering an alarm. There were significantly more bubbles downstream than upstream of the filters F8HPS and FX80, while there was a significant reduction using the APS-18u. There was no reduction in the number of bubbles after passage through the air trap versus before the air trap (after the dialyzer). Increased priming volume reduced the extent of bubbles in the system. CONCLUSIONS: Data indicate that the air trap does not prevent air microemboli from entering the venous outlet part of the dialysis tubing (entry to the patient). More extended priming of the dialysis circuit may reduce the extent of microemboli that originate from dialysis filters. A wet filter may be favorable instead of dry-steam sterilized filters.
BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown that micrometer-sized air bubbles are introduced into the patient during hemodialysis. The aim of this study was to investigate, in vitro, the influence of dialysis filters on the generation of air bubbles. METHODS: Three different kind of dialyzers were tested: one high-flux FX80 dry filter (Fresenius Medical Care AG&Co. KGaA, Bad Homburg, Germany), one low-flux F8HPS dry filter (Fresenius Medical Care AG&Co. KGaA, Bad Homburg, Germany) and a wet-stored APS-18u filter (Asahi Kasei Medical, Tokyo, Japan). The F8HPS was tested with pump flow ranging between 100 to 400 ml/min. The three filters were compared using a constant pump flow of 300 ml/min. Measurements were performed using an ultrasound Doppler instrument. RESULTS: In 90% of the series, bubbles were measured after the outlet line of the air trap without triggering an alarm. There were significantly more bubbles downstream than upstream of the filters F8HPS and FX80, while there was a significant reduction using the APS-18u. There was no reduction in the number of bubbles after passage through the air trap versus before the air trap (after the dialyzer). Increased priming volume reduced the extent of bubbles in the system. CONCLUSIONS: Data indicate that the air trap does not prevent air microemboli from entering the venous outlet part of the dialysis tubing (entry to the patient). More extended priming of the dialysis circuit may reduce the extent of microemboli that originate from dialysis filters. A wet filter may be favorable instead of dry-steam sterilized filters.
Authors: Junko Goto; Ulf Forsberg; Per Jonsson; Kenichi Matsuda; Bo Nilsson; Kristina Nilsson Ekdahl; Michael Y Henein; Bernd G Stegmayr Journal: Int J Artif Organs Date: 2020-12-18 Impact factor: 1.595