Magdalene M Assimon1, Jennifer E Flythe. 1. aUniversity of North Carolina Kidney Center, Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, Department of Medicine, UNC School of Medicine bDepartment of Epidemiology, UNC Gillings School of Global Public Health cCecil G. Sheps Center for Health Services Research, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review critically summarizes the evidence linking ultrafiltration rates to adverse outcomes among hemodialysis patients and provides research recommendations to address knowledge gaps. RECENT FINDINGS: Growing evidence suggests that fluid-related factors play important roles in hemodialysis patient outcomes. Ultrafiltration rate - the rate of fluid removal during hemodialysis - is one such factor. Existing observational data suggest a robust association between greater ultrafiltration rates and adverse cardiovascular outcomes, and such findings are supported by plausible physiologic rationale. Potential mechanistic pathways include ultrafiltration-related ischemia to the heart, brain, and gut, and volume overload-precipitated cardiac stress from reactive measures to ultrafiltration-induced hemodynamic instability. Inter-relationships among ultrafiltration rates and other fluid measures, such as interdialytic weight gain and chronic volume expansion, render the specific role of ultrafiltration rates in adverse outcomes difficult to study. Randomized trials must be conducted to confirm epidemiologic findings and examine the effect of ultrafiltration rate reduction on clinical and patient-centered outcomes. SUMMARY: Compelling observational data demonstrate an association between more rapid ultrafiltration rates and adverse clinical outcomes. Before translating these findings into clinical practice, randomized trials are needed to verify observational data results and to identify effective strategies to mitigate ultrafiltration-related risk.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review critically summarizes the evidence linking ultrafiltration rates to adverse outcomes among hemodialysis patients and provides research recommendations to address knowledge gaps. RECENT FINDINGS: Growing evidence suggests that fluid-related factors play important roles in hemodialysis patient outcomes. Ultrafiltration rate - the rate of fluid removal during hemodialysis - is one such factor. Existing observational data suggest a robust association between greater ultrafiltration rates and adverse cardiovascular outcomes, and such findings are supported by plausible physiologic rationale. Potential mechanistic pathways include ultrafiltration-related ischemia to the heart, brain, and gut, and volume overload-precipitated cardiac stress from reactive measures to ultrafiltration-induced hemodynamic instability. Inter-relationships among ultrafiltration rates and other fluid measures, such as interdialytic weight gain and chronic volume expansion, render the specific role of ultrafiltration rates in adverse outcomes difficult to study. Randomized trials must be conducted to confirm epidemiologic findings and examine the effect of ultrafiltration rate reduction on clinical and patient-centered outcomes. SUMMARY: Compelling observational data demonstrate an association between more rapid ultrafiltration rates and adverse clinical outcomes. Before translating these findings into clinical practice, randomized trials are needed to verify observational data results and to identify effective strategies to mitigate ultrafiltration-related risk.
Authors: Christopher W McIntyre; Laura E A Harrison; M Tarek Eldehni; Helen J Jefferies; Cheuk-Chun Szeto; Stephen G John; Mhairi K Sigrist; James O Burton; Daljit Hothi; Shvan Korsheed; Paul J Owen; Ka-Bik Lai; Philip K T Li Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2010-09-28 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Manfred Hecking; Angelo Karaboyas; Rajiv Saran; Ananda Sen; Walter H Hörl; Ronald L Pisoni; Bruce M Robinson; Gere Sunder-Plassmann; Friedrich K Port Journal: Am J Kidney Dis Date: 2011-09-23 Impact factor: 8.860
Authors: R Saran; J L Bragg-Gresham; N W Levin; Z J Twardowski; V Wizemann; A Saito; N Kimata; B W Gillespie; C Combe; J Bommer; T Akiba; D L Mapes; E W Young; F K Port Journal: Kidney Int Date: 2006-04 Impact factor: 10.612
Authors: Helen J Jefferies; Bhupinder Virk; Brigitte Schiller; John Moran; Christopher W McIntyre Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2011-05-19 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: James O Burton; Helen J Jefferies; Nicholas M Selby; Christopher W McIntyre Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2009-10-01 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Robert Lockridge; Eric Weinhandl; Michael Kraus; Martin Schreiber; Leslie Spry; Prayus Tailor; Michelle Carver; Joel Glickman; Brent Miller Journal: Kidney360 Date: 2020-07-08
Authors: David F Keane; Jochen G Raimann; Hanjie Zhang; Joanna Willetts; Stephan Thijssen; Peter Kotanko Journal: Kidney Int Date: 2021-02-17 Impact factor: 10.612
Authors: Santiago Cedeño; Manuel Desco; Yasser Aleman; Nicolás Macías; Alberto Fernández-Pena; Almudena Vega; Soraya Abad; Juan Manuel López-Gómez Journal: Clin Kidney J Date: 2020-12-05
Authors: David Keane; Megan Glyde; Indranil Dasgupta; Claire Gardiner; Elizabeth Lindley; Sandip Mitra; Nicholas Palmer; Louise Dye; Mark Wright; Ed Sutherland Journal: BMC Nephrol Date: 2021-05-20 Impact factor: 2.388