Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Introduction:

Dialysis adequacy is traditionally measured by monthly blood urea sampling and calculating sessional Kt/Vurea. Modern dialysis machines can estimate clearances each session, so we wished to compare online measurements with standard Kt/Vurea.

Methods:

Urea clearance was estimated by intermittent changes in effective ionic dialysance and by continuous ultraviolet light absorption spent during the mid-week dialysis session. Total body water was calculated by the Watson equation and measured by multifrequency bioimpedance.

Results:

We compared Kt/Vurea measurements in 162 patients with online assessments: 38 by ultraviolet absorption and 124 by effective ionic dialysance (50 Fresenius 4008 and 74 Fresenius 5008). All online measurements overestimated single-pool Kt/Vurea (ultraviolet absorption mean bias 0.25 ± 0.24, effective ionic dialysance 4008H 0.25 ± 0.21 and 5008H 0.20 ± 0.25; p < 0.001). However, there was no difference between dual-pool Kt/V and ultraviolet absorbance (1.28 ± 0.26 vs 1.29 ± 0.27) or by effective ionic dialysance with the 4008 (1.40 ± 0.26 vs 1.46 ± 0.33), although the effective ionic dialysance 5008 overestimated clearance (1.39 ± 0.27 vs 1.31 ± 0.22; p < 0.01). Similarly, with dual-pool Kt/Vurea, the mean bias for ultraviolet absorption was 0.08 ± 0.35, for effective ionic dialysance (EID) 4008 was 0.13 ± 0.55 and for EID 5008 was −0.2 ± 0.36. Hence, the mean bias was greater with the EID 5008 compared to ultraviolet absorption (0.08 ± 0.35 vs −0.2 ± 0.36 vs p < 0.01).

Conclusions:

Online measurements allow dialysis adequacy to be measured every session. We found that although online clearances overestimated single-pool Kt/Vurea measurements, there were no significant differences between the continuous ultraviolet light absorbance method and intermittent effective ionic dialysance.

Keywords

Haemodialysis sodium clearance adequacy bioimpedance urea

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Davison

AM.

European best practice guidelines for hemodialysis (part 1). Nephrol Dial Transplant 2002; 17(Suppl. 7): S16–S31.

Coyne

Delmez

Spence

et al . Impaired delivery of hemodialysis prescriptions: an analysis of causes and an approach to evaluation. J Am Soc Nephrol 1997; 8: 1315–1318.

Press

Benz

RL.

Quantifying the role of factors that limit attainment of K/DOQI urea reduction ratio dialytic goal. Clin Nephrol 2006; 66: 98–102.

Kuhlmann

Goldau

Samadi

et al . Accuracy and safety of online clearance monitoring based on conductivity variation. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2001; 16: 1053–1058.

Racki

Zaputović

Maleta

et al . Assessment of hemodialysis adequacy by ionic dialysance: comparison to standard method of urea removal. Ren Fail 2005; 27: 601–604.

Sternby

Urea sensors – a world of possibilities. Adv Ren Replace Ther 1999; 6: 265–272.

Castellarnau

Werner

Günthner

et al . Real-time Kt/V determination by ultraviolet absorbance in spent dialysate: technique validation. Kidney Int 2010; 78(9): 920–925.

Sherman

Cody

Rogers

et al . Accuracy of the urea reduction ratio in predicting dialysis delivery. Kidney Int 1995; 47: 319–321.

Depner

Estimation of Kt/V from the URR for varying levels of dialytic weight loss: a bedside graphic aid. Semin Dial 1993; 6: 242.

10.

Hemodialysis Adequacy 2006 Work Group. Clinical practice guidelines for hemodialysis adequacy, update 2006. Am J Kidney Dis 2006; 48(1 Suppl. 1): S2–S90.

11.

Flaningan

Fangman

Lim

Quantitating hemodialysis: a comparison of three kinetic models. Am J Kidney Dis 1991; 17: 295–302.

12.

Bankhead

Toto

Star

Accuracy of urea removal estimated by kinetic models. Kidney Int 1995; 48: 785–793.

13.

Daugirdas

. Second generation logarithmic estimates of single-pool variable volume Kt/V: an analysis of error. J Am Soc Nephrol 1993; 4: 1205–1213.

14.

Uhlin

Fridolin

Magnusson

et al . Dialysis dose (Kt/V) and clearance variation sensitivity using measurement of ultraviolet-absorbance (on-line), blood urea, dialysate urea and ionic dialysance. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2006; 21(8): 2225–2231.

15.

Babb

Maurer

Popovich

et al . The determination of membrane permeabilities and solute diffusivities with applications to hemodialysis. Chem Eng Progr Symp Ser 1968; 84(64): 59–68.

16.

Steil

Kaufman

Morris

et al . In vivo verification of an automatic noninvasive system for real time Kt evaluation. ASAIO J 1993; 39(3): M348–M352.

17.

Polaschegg

HD.

Automatic, noninvasive intradialytic clearance measurement. Int J Artif Organs 1993; 16(4): 185–191.

18.

Watson

Batt

Total body water volumes for adult males and females estimated from simple anthropometric measurements. Am J Clin Nutr 1981; 33: 27–39.

19.

Goldau

Kuhlmann

Samadi

et al . Ionic dialysance measurement is urea distribution volume dependent: a new approach to better results. Artif Organs 2002; 26(4): 321–332.

20.

Vernon

Peasegood

Riddell

et al . Dialyzers designed to increase internal filtration do not result in significantly increased platelet activation and thrombin generation. Nephron Clin Pract 2011; 117(4): c403–c408.

21.

Davenport

Low-molecular-weight heparin as an alternative anticoagulant to unfractionated heparin for routine outpatient haemodialysis treatments. Nephrology 2009; 14(5): 455–461.

22.

Fürstenberg

Davenport

Comparison of multifrequency bioelectrical impedance analysis and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry assessments in outpatient haemodialysis patients. Am J Kidney Dis 2011; 57(1): 123–129.

23.

Tangvoraphonkchai

Davenport

Do bioimpedance measurements of over-hydration accurately reflect post-haemodialysis weight changes?

Nephron 2016; 133(4): 247–252.

24.

Lowrie

Laird

Parker

et al . Effect of the hemodialysis prescription of patient morbidity: report from the National Cooperative Dialysis Study. New Engl J Med 1981; 305(20): 1176–1181.

25.

Gotch

FA.

Kt/V is the best dialysis dose parameter. Blood Purif 2000; 18: 276–285.

26.

Maduell

Ramos

Varas

et al . Hemodialysis patients receiving a greater Kt dose than recommended have reduced mortality and hospitalization risk. Kidney Int 2016; 90(6): 1332–1341.

27.

Lindley

Chamney

Wuepper

et al . A comparison of methods for determining urea distribution volume for routine use in on-line monitoring of haemodialysis adequacy. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2009; 24(1): 211–216.

28.

Wuepper

Tattersall

Kraemer

et al . Determination of urea distribution volume for Kt/V assessed by conductivity monitoring. Kidney Int 2003; 64: 2262–2271.

29.

Davenport

Differences in prescribed Kt/V and delivered haemodialysis dose–why obesity makes a difference to survival for haemodialysis patients when using a ‘one size fits all’ Kt/V target. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2013; 28(Suppl. 4): iv219–iv223.

30.

Davenport

Hussain Sayed

Fan

The effect of racial origin on total body water volume in peritoneal dialysis patients. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2011; 6(10): 2492–2498.

31.

Persaud

Thomas

Davenport

Indirect ion selective electrode methods potentially overestimate peritoneal dialysate sodium losses. Ther Apher Dial 2014; 18(4): 321–325.

32.

Ekbal

Consalus

Persaud

et al . Reliability of delivered dialysate sodium concentration. Hemodial Int 2016; 20(Suppl. 1): S2–S6.

33.

Eknoyan

Beck

Cheung

et al . Effect of dialysis dose and membrane flux in maintenance hemodialysis. N Engl J Med 2002; 347(25): 2010–2019.

Comparison of methods to estimate haemodialysis urea clearance

Abstract

Introduction:

Methods:

Results:

Conclusions:

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References