Damien Ashby1, Richard Corbett1, Neill Duncan1. 1. West London Renal and Transplant Centre, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, Hammersmith Hospital, London, United Kingdom.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Excessive ultrafiltration is associated with intra-dialytic symptoms, loss of residual function, and mortality in haemodialysis patients. A major contributor to excessive ultrafiltration is within-individual variation in pre-dialysis weight and the concept of achieving a fixed target weight by the end of each dialysis session. Haemodialysis protocols which allow variable post-dialysis weight have not been proposed. METHODS: Weight variation was observed in haemodialysis patients and healthy controls to estimate the proportion of pre-dialysis weight variation which could be considered natural variation. These estimates were used to derive a novel protocol for setting ultrafiltration, which was evaluated by mathematical modelling. RESULTS: Amongst 20 haemodialysis patients, mean (SD) pre-dialysis weight was 102.74 (0.94)% of target weight after a 2-day gap and 103.50 (0.94)% after a 3-day gap. Amongst 10 healthy individuals, mean (SD) daily weight was 100.0 (0.71)% of average weight. A 4-component model of pre-dialysis weight was derived using these estimates, in which the best estimate of pre-dialysis excess fluid is the midpoint of excess weight and average fluid gain, and used to propose a novel protocol for ultrafiltration setting. In simulations, the novel protocol reduced ultrafiltration variation by more than half (standard deviation 0.6 vs. 1.3% of target weight, p < 0.001), without increasing the variation in post-dialysis fluid excess. Excessive ultrafiltration rates (over 13 mL/h/kg) were far less frequent using this protocol (2.6% vs. 7.5% of sessions, p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Considering natural weight variation allows the development of a novel protocol for ultrafiltration in which target weight does not have to be achieved precisely: it is therefore a soft target. This protocol, which is predicted to substantially reduce excessive ultrafiltration variation, is a zero-cost intervention with the potential to improve symptoms and clinical outcome for haemodialysis patients.
INTRODUCTION: Excessive ultrafiltration is associated with intra-dialytic symptoms, loss of residual function, and mortality in haemodialysis patients. A major contributor to excessive ultrafiltration is within-individual variation in pre-dialysis weight and the concept of achieving a fixed target weight by the end of each dialysis session. Haemodialysis protocols which allow variable post-dialysis weight have not been proposed. METHODS: Weight variation was observed in haemodialysis patients and healthy controls to estimate the proportion of pre-dialysis weight variation which could be considered natural variation. These estimates were used to derive a novel protocol for setting ultrafiltration, which was evaluated by mathematical modelling. RESULTS: Amongst 20 haemodialysis patients, mean (SD) pre-dialysis weight was 102.74 (0.94)% of target weight after a 2-day gap and 103.50 (0.94)% after a 3-day gap. Amongst 10 healthy individuals, mean (SD) daily weight was 100.0 (0.71)% of average weight. A 4-component model of pre-dialysis weight was derived using these estimates, in which the best estimate of pre-dialysis excess fluid is the midpoint of excess weight and average fluid gain, and used to propose a novel protocol for ultrafiltration setting. In simulations, the novel protocol reduced ultrafiltration variation by more than half (standard deviation 0.6 vs. 1.3% of target weight, p < 0.001), without increasing the variation in post-dialysis fluid excess. Excessive ultrafiltration rates (over 13 mL/h/kg) were far less frequent using this protocol (2.6% vs. 7.5% of sessions, p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Considering natural weight variation allows the development of a novel protocol for ultrafiltration in which target weight does not have to be achieved precisely: it is therefore a soft target. This protocol, which is predicted to substantially reduce excessive ultrafiltration variation, is a zero-cost intervention with the potential to improve symptoms and clinical outcome for haemodialysis patients.
Authors: Susan B Racette; Edward P Weiss; Kenneth B Schechtman; Karen Steger-May; Dennis T Villareal; Kathleen A Obert; John O Holloszy Journal: Obesity (Silver Spring) Date: 2008-06-12 Impact factor: 5.002
Authors: Jeffrey J Sands; Len A Usvyat; Terry Sullivan; Jonathan H Segal; Paul Zabetakis; Peter Kotanko; Franklin W Maddux; Jose A Diaz-Buxo Journal: Hemodial Int Date: 2014-01-27 Impact factor: 1.812
Authors: Thomas A Mavrakanas; Allan D Sniderman; Paul E Barré; Murray Vasilevsky; Ahsan Alam Journal: Am J Nephrol Date: 2016-04-12 Impact factor: 3.754
Authors: Karumathil M Murali; Judy Mullan; Steven Roodenrys; Hicham C Hassan; Kelly Lambert; Maureen Lonergan Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-01-29 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Matthew J Tugman; Julia H Narendra; Quefeng Li; Yueting Wang; Alan L Hinderliter; Steven M Brunelli; Jennifer E Flythe Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Commun Date: 2019-07-19