| Literature DB >> 28219329 |
Gerke Veenstra1,2,3, Andrius Pranskunas4, Inga Skarupskiene4, Vidas Pilvinis4, Marc H Hemmelder5, Can Ince6,7, E Christiaan Boerma5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hemodialysis (HD) with ultrafiltration (UF) in chronic renal replacement therapy is associated with hemodynamic instability, morbidity and mortality. Sublingual Sidestream Dark Field (SDF) imaging during HD revealed reductions in microcirculatory blood flow (MFI). This study aims to determine underlying mechanisms.Entities:
Keywords: Hemodialysis; Microcirculation; Microvascular alterations; Negative fluid balance; Ultrafiltration rate
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28219329 PMCID: PMC5319109 DOI: 10.1186/s12882-017-0483-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Nephrol ISSN: 1471-2369 Impact factor: 2.388
Fig. 1Study design. HD hemodialysis, UF ultrafiltration, BVM blood volume monitoring
Baseline characteristics phase I and II
| Variables | All ( | LT ( | NL ( |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Men, % | 57 | 42 | 89 | 0.04 |
| Age, years | 64 [53–74] | 60 [49–70] | 69 [55–78] | 0.29 |
| Years on HD | 3 [1–6] | 3 [1–7] | 3 [1–5] | 0.94 |
| Remaining diuresis, l/24 h | 0.2 [0–0.5] | 0.3 [0–0.6] | 0.2 [0–0.4] | 0.60 |
| Weight, kg | 78 [67–87] | 73 [66–79] | 85 [88–92] | 0.03 |
| BMI, kg/m2 | 26 [24–28] | 27 [23–30] | 26 [25–28] | 0.94 |
| UF volume, l | 2.3 [1.3–3.2] | 2.6 [1.6–3.3] | 1.7 [1.2–2.1] | 0.10 |
| Cause of ESRD, % | ||||
| Diabetes | 32 | 21 | 56 | |
| Hypertension | 18 | 26 | 0 | |
| ADPKD | 7 | 5 | 11 | 0.27 |
| ATN | 14 | 16 | 11 | |
| Miscellaneous | 29 | 32 | 22 | |
| Drugs, % | ||||
| ß-blocker | 61 | 42 | 67 | 1.0 |
| ACE inhibitor | 61 | 74 | 33 | 0.1 |
| Calcium antagonist | 47 | 58 | 22 | 0.09 |
LT Lithuania, NL Netherlands, HD hemodialysis, BMI body mass index, UF ultrafiltration, ESRD end stage renal disease, ADKPD autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease, ATN acute tubular necrosis, ACE angiotensin converting enzyme
Results phase I (n = 28). Hemodynamic and microcirculatory variables of small vessels (<20 μm) before and after hemodialysis in combination with linear ultrafiltration
| Variables | Baseline | Post HD/UF |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Mean arterial pressure, mmHg | 93 [76–111] | 96 [84–110] | 0.39 |
| Heartrate, beats/min | 69 [62–80] | 73 [60–84] | 0.24 |
| SpO2, % | 97 [96–98] | 98 [98–99] | 0.009 |
| MFI, AU | 3 [2.8–3] | 3 [2.8–3] | 0.55 |
| TVD, mm/mm2 | 22.2 [18–29.8] | 22.7 [19.9–29] | 0.11 |
| PPV, % | 98 [96–100] | 98 [96–99] | 0.35 |
HD hemodialysis, UF ultrafiltration, SpO peripheral oxygen saturation, MFI microvascular flow index, AU arbitrary units, TVD total vessel density, PVD perfused vessel density, PPV percentage of perfused vessel
Results phase II (n = 9). Laboratory data, microcirculatory variables of small vessels (<20 μm) and bioelectrical impedance analysis before and after intervention
| Variables | Baseline | Post-intervention |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| UF isolated | |||
| UF | - | 1.7 [1.2–2] | |
| UF rate, l/h | - | 1.7 [1.2–2]† | |
| MFI, AU | 2.8 [2.5–2.9] | 2.5 [2.2–2.8] | 0.03 |
| TVD, mm/mm2 | 17.7 [16.5–18.4] | 18.7 [16.1–20.3] | 0.26 |
| Hematocrit, % | 37 [35–39] | 39 [36–44] | 0.11 |
| NT-pro-BNP, pmol/l | 599 [215–1702] | 580 [158–1440] | 0.01 |
| Troponine T, ng/l | 90 [60–150] | 87 [56–130] | 0.08 |
| BCM overhydration, l | 1.4 [0.6–3.2] | 0.3 [−0.1–0.8] | 0.02 |
| HD isolated | |||
| UF | – | 0 [0–0] | |
| UF rate, l/h | – | 0 [0–0]† | |
| MFI, AU | 2.8 [2.5–2.9] | 2.8 [2.7–2.9] | 0.61 |
| TVD, mm/mm2 | 17.7 [16.5–18.4] | 18.6 [14.6–19.7] | 0.86 |
| Hematocrit, % | 37 [35–39] | NA | |
| NT-pro-BNP, pmol/l | 599 [215–1702] | NA | |
| Troponine T, ng/l | 90 [60–150] | NA | |
| BCM overhydration, l | 1.4 [0.6–3.2] | NA | |
| HD + linear UF | |||
| UF | 1.7 [1.2–2.1] | ||
| UF rate, l/h | 0.42 [0.3–5.1]† | ||
| MFI, AU | 2.9 [2.5–3] | 2.6 [2.2–2.9] | 0.12 |
| TVD, mm/mm2 | 17.8 [16.6–18.8] | 19.8 [17.9–21.5] | 0.07 |
| Hematocrit, % | 38 [35–40] | 40 [35–41] | 0.18 |
| T-pro-BNP, pmol/l | 618 [279–1926] | 536 [167–1003] | 0.01 |
| Troponine T, ng/l | 94 [61–179] | 84 [62–139] | 0.02 |
| BCM overhydration, l | 1.8 [0.5–5.3] | 0.3 [−0.9–3.2] | 0.02 |
| HD + BVM-guided UF | |||
| UF | 2.0 [1.5–2.1] | ||
| UF rate, l/h | 0.5 [0.39–0.52]† | ||
| MFI, AU | 2.8 [2.5–3] | 2.8 [1.9–2.9] | 0.06 |
| TVD, mm/mm2 | 18.8 [16.8–20.6] | 18.2 [16.9–20.6] | 0.77 |
| Hematocrit, % | 37 [34–39] | 39 [35–42] | 0.12 |
| NT-pro-BNP, pmol/l | 574 [229–2011] | 511 [172–1163] | 0.01 |
| Troponine T, ng/l | 81 [54–379] | 79 [54–387] | 0.12 |
| BCM overhydration, l | 2.4 [1.5–5.1] | 0.2 [−0.9–4.2] | 0.04 |
UF ultrafiltration, HD hemodialysis, BVM blood volume monitoring, MFI microvascular flow index, TVD total vessel density, PPV percentage of perfused vessels, NT-pro-BNP n-terminal pro b-type natriuretic peptide, BCM body composition monitoring † p < 0.001 across different HD/UF modalities
Fig. 2Distribution of post-intervention microvascular alterations per quartile of pre-intervention microvascular blood flow. P-value across groups
Fig. 3a. Correlation in microvascular alterations between pre- and post-intervention. b. Correlation in body-composition-monitoring-derived overhydration between pre- and post-intervention