Literature DB >> 23176401

Can dialysis modality influence quality of life in chronic hemodialysis patients? Low-flux hemodialysis versus high-flux hemodiafiltration: a cross-over study.

Konstantia Kantartzi1, Stelios Panagoutsos, Efthemia Mourvati, Athanasios Roumeliotis, Konstantinos Leivaditis, Vassilios Devetzis, Ploumis Passadakis, Vassilios Vargemezis.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Hemodiafiltration with online preparation of the substitution [online high-flux hemodiafiltration (OHDF)] and hemodiafiltration with prepared bags of substitution (HDF) are important, recently widely used renal replacement therapies in patients with end-stage renal disease. However, there is little information on the comparative impacts of these modalities versus conventional low-flux hemodialysis (HD) on the quality of life (QoL) of HD patients. This study investigates the effect of dialysis modality on QoL in chronic HD patients.
METHODS: In this prospective, randomized, cross-over, open label study, 24 patients were enrolled. Their age were 62 ± 13.34 years (mean ± SD), with the duration of dialysis of 31 ± 23.28 months (mean ± SD). Five of the patients were women. QoL was measured by the Short-Form Health Survey with 36 questions (SF-36) and subscale scores were calculated. Each patient received HD, OHDF, and HDF for 3 months, with the dialysis modality subsequently being altered. They completed the questionnaire of QoL at the end of each period.
RESULTS: There were statistical significant differences in QoL for the total SF-36 [36.1 (26.7-45.7) and 40.7 (30.2-62.8)], for classic low-flux HD and high-flux hemodiafiltration, for bodily pain [45 (26.9-66.9) and 55 (35.6-87.5)], and for role limitations due to emotional functioning [0 (0-33.3) and 33.3 (0-100)], respectively. The scores did not differ significantly between the two types of hemodiafiltration.
CONCLUSIONS: Our study indicates that QoL differs significantly among patients receiving low-flux HD and high-flux hemodiafiltration, on total SF-36, bodily pain, and role limitations due to emotional functioning. Convective modalities may offer better QoL than diffusive HD.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23176401     DOI: 10.3109/0886022X.2012.743858

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ren Fail        ISSN: 0886-022X            Impact factor:   2.606


  9 in total

1.  Online-haemodiafiltration vs. conventional haemodialysis: a cross-over study.

Authors:  Guillaume Jean; Jean-Marc Hurot; Patrik Deleaval; Brice Mayor; Christie Lorriaux
Journal:  BMC Nephrol       Date:  2015-05-09       Impact factor: 2.388

2.  A Randomized, Single-Blind, Crossover Trial of Recovery Time in High-Flux Hemodialysis and Hemodiafiltration.

Authors:  James R Smith; Norica Zimmer; Elizabeth Bell; Bernard G Francq; Alex McConnachie; Robert Mactier
Journal:  Am J Kidney Dis       Date:  2016-12-23       Impact factor: 8.860

3.  Randomized controlled trial of medium cut-off versus high-flux dialyzers on quality of life outcomes in maintenance hemodialysis patients.

Authors:  Jeong-Hoon Lim; Yeongwoo Park; Ju-Min Yook; Soon-Youn Choi; Hee-Yeon Jung; Ji-Young Choi; Sun-Hee Park; Chan-Duck Kim; Yong-Lim Kim; Jang-Hee Cho
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-05-08       Impact factor: 4.379

4.  Quality of Life and Hemodynamic Effects of Switching From Hemodialysis to Hemodiafiltration: A Canadian Controlled Cohort Study.

Authors:  Isabelle Ethier; Immaculate Nevis; Rita S Suri
Journal:  Can J Kidney Health Dis       Date:  2021-11-15

5.  Executive Summary of the Korean Society of Nephrology 2021 Clinical Practice Guideline for Optimal Hemodialysis Treatment.

Authors:  Ji Yong Jung; Kyung Don Yoo; Eunjeong Kang; Hee Gyung Kang; Su Hyun Kim; Hyoungnae Kim; Hyo Jin Kim; Tae-Jin Park; Sang Heon Suh; Jong Cheol Jeong; Ji-Young Choi; Young-Hwan Hwang; Miyoung Choi; Yae Lim Kim; Kook-Hwan Oh
Journal:  Kidney Res Clin Pract       Date:  2021-12-10

6.  Korean Society of Nephrology 2021 Clinical Practice Guideline for Optimal Hemodialysis Treatment.

Authors:  Ji Yong Jung; Kyung Don Yoo; Eunjeong Kang; Hee Gyung Kang; Su Hyun Kim; Hyoungnae Kim; Hyo Jin Kim; Tae-Jin Park; Sang Heon Suh; Jong Cheol Jeong; Ji-Young Choi; Young-Hwan Hwang; Miyoung Choi; Yae Lim Kim; Kook-Hwan Oh
Journal:  Kidney Res Clin Pract       Date:  2021-12-10

7.  CONVINCE in the context of existing evidence on haemodiafiltration.

Authors:  Robin W M Vernooij; Michiel L Bots; Giovanni F M Strippoli; Bernard Canaud; Krister Cromm; Mark Woodward; Peter J Blankestijn
Journal:  Nephrol Dial Transplant       Date:  2022-05-25       Impact factor: 7.186

Review 8.  Executive summary of the Korean Society of Nephrology 2021 clinical practice guideline for optimal hemodialysis treatment.

Authors:  Ji Yong Jung; Kyung Don Yoo; Eunjeong Kang; Hee Gyung Kang; Su Hyun Kim; Hyoungnae Kim; Hyo Jin Kim; Tae-Jin Park; Sang Heon Suh; Jong Cheol Jeong; Ji-Young Choi; Young-Hwan Hwang; Miyoung Choi; Yae Lim Kim; Kook-Hwan Oh
Journal:  Korean J Intern Med       Date:  2022-06-03       Impact factor: 3.165

9.  Effect of online hemodiafiltration compared with hemodialysis on quality of life in patients with ESRD: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials.

Authors:  Tatsuya Suwabe; Francisco J Barrera-Flores; Rene Rodriguez-Gutierrez; Yoshifumi Ubara; Kenmei Takaichi
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-10-18       Impact factor: 3.240

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.