Bioimpedance spectroscopy-guided fluid management in peritoneal dialysis patients with residual kidney function: A randomized controlled trial

Volume Assessment in Patients Undergoing Long-Term Dialysis

Accurate assessment of fluid status is a priority for patients with kidney failure undergoing long-term dialysis. There is wide variation in current volume-related practices between dialysis units and an urgent need to develop better evidence to guide practice. Clinical decisions relating to volume management are implicitly based on assessment of volume status, and there are numerous different but imperfect methods of assessment. Isotope-based dilutions are impractical for clinical use and may not be a gold standard for patients with kidney failure. Individual trends in body weight and BP have been used as a pragmatic surrogate marker for volume status. Probing the target weight based on BP is still widely practiced but may pose risks related to volume depletion and accelerated loss of residual kidney function. Clinical signs, such as elevated jugular venous pressure and leg edema, are readily accessible but have poor diagnostic accuracy and wide interobserver variability that limit their reproducibility for volume assessment in clinical trials. Lung ultrasound and bioelectrical impedance analysis have a sound scientific rationale for the assessment of extracellular volume and are appropriately associated with clinical outcomes, but neither approach has demonstrated convincingly favorable clinical outcomes in clinical trials. Other technologies for volume assessment exist but require further assessment in clinical trials. Advancements in clinical care can be made with existing technologies through comparative effectiveness trials of different fluid management strategies, routine and standardized measurement of volumetric parameters and individual patient preferences, and innovative integration of existing volume assessment methods. A systematic and globally coordinated approach to improving volume assessment and management is required to improve outcomes in patients receiving long-term dialysis.

Bioimpedance spectroscopy: Is a picture worth a thousand words?

Volume status can be difficult to assess in dialysis patients. Peripheral edema, elevated venous pressure, lung crackles, and hypertension are taught as signs of fluid overload, but sensitivity and specificity are poor. Bioimpedance technology has evolved from early single frequency to multifrequency machines which apply spectroscopic analysis (BIS), modeling data to physics-based mixture theory. Bioimpedance plots can aid the evaluation of hydration status and body composition. The challenge remains how to use this information to manage dialysis populations, particularly as interventions to improve over hydration, sarcopenia, and adiposity are not without side effects. It is therefore of no surprise that validation studies for BIS use in peritoneal dialysis patients are limited, and results from clinical trials are inconsistent and conflicting. Despite these limitations, BIS has clinical utility with potential to accurately evaluate small changes in body tissue components. This article explains the information a BIS plot ("picture") can provide and how it can contribute to the overall clinical assessment of a patient. However, it remains the role of the clinician to integrate information and devise treatment strategies to optimize competing patient risks, fluid and nutrition status, effects of high glucose PD fluids on membrane function, and quality of life issues.

Clinical guideline on adequacy and prescription of peritoneal dialysis

In recent years, the meaning of adequacy in peritoneal dialysis has changed. We have witnessed a transition from an exclusive achievement of specific objectives -namely solute clearances and ultrafiltration- to a more holistic approach more focused to on the quality of life of these patients. The purpose of this document is to provide recommendations, updated and oriented to social and health environment, for the adequacy and prescription of peritoneal dialysis. The document has been divided into three main sections: adequacy, residual kidney function and prescription of continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis and automated peritoneal dialysis. Recently, a guide on the same topic has been published by a Committee of Experts of the International Society of Peritoneal Dialysis (ISPD 2020). In consideration of the contributions of the group of experts and the quasi-simultaneity of the two projects, references are made to this guide in the relevant sections. We have used a systematic methodology (GRADE), which specifies the level of evidence and the strength of the proposed suggestions and recommendations, facilitating future updates of the document.

Effect of bioelectrical impedance technology on the prognosis of dialysis patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Managing patient 'dry weight' according to clinical standards has deficiencies. Research has focused on the effectiveness of using bioelectrical impedance technology for fluid management in dialysis patients. Whether bioelectrical impedance monitoring can improve dialysis patients prognoses remain controversial. We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to determine whether bioelectrical impedance was effective in improving dialysis patients prognoses. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality (13.6 ± 9.1 months). Secondary outcomes were left ventricular mass index (LVMI), arterial stiffness assessed using Pulse Wave Velocity (PWV), and N-terminal brain natriuretic peptide precursor (NT-proBNP). Of 4,641 citations retrieved, we identified 15 eligible trials involving 2763 patients divided into experimental (n = 1386) and control (n = 1377) groups. In 14 studies with mortality data, the meta-analysis showed that bioelectrical impedance intervention reduced the risk of all-cause mortality (rate ratios [RR]: 0.71; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.51, 0.99; p = .05; I2 = 1%). Subgroup analysis of patients on hemodialysis (RR: 0.72; 95% CI: 0.42, 1.22; p = .22) and peritoneal dialysis (RR: 0.62; 95% CI: 0.35, 1.07; p = .08) showed no significant mortality difference between intervention and control groups. It reduced the risk of all-cause mortality in the Asian population (RR: 0.52; p = .02), and reduced NT-proBNP (mean difference [MD]: -1495.73; p = 0.002; I²=0%) and PWV (MD: -1.55; p = .01; I²=89%). Bioelectrical impedance intervention reduced the LVMI in hemodialysis patients (MD: -12.69; p < .0001; I²=0%). Our analysis shows that in dialysis patients, bioelectrical impedance technology intervention could reduce, but not eliminate, the risk of all-cause mortality. Overall, this technology can improve the prognosis of dialysis patients.

Bioimpedance-Guided Monitoring of Volume Status in Patients With Kidney Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background and Objective

Bioimpedance technologies are increasingly used to determine fluid status in patients with chronic kidney disease and those with end-stage kidney disease on dialysis. We aimed to determine whether this technology improves clinical outcomes as compared with usual care.

Methods

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of trials, comparing fluid management guided by bioimpedance technologies to standard of care in patients with chronic kidney disease. Our primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included blood pressure control, all-cause hospitalization, major adverse cardiovascular events, and change in left ventricular mass index.

Results

Our search identified 819 citations of which 12 randomized controlled trials were included (2420 patients). No studies of non-dialysis-dependent chronic kidney disease patients met inclusion criteria. Mean age was 55 years and mean follow-up was 1 year. There was a statistically significant difference in all-cause mortality between both arms studied (risk ratio [RR] 0.64, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.44, 0.99). Better blood pressure control was observed in the bioimpedance arm of the included articles, weighted mean differences (WMD) -3.13 mm Hg (95% CI: -5.73, -0.53 mm Hg) for systolic blood pressure and WMD -2.50 mm Hg (95% CI: -4.36, -0.64 mm Hg) for diastolic blood pressure. No difference was observed concerning the other outcomes.

Conclusions

Among patients on maintenance dialysis, bioimpedance-guided volume management showed decreased all-cause mortality and blood pressure but no significant difference in all-cause hospitalization, major adverse cardiac event, or change in left ventricular mass index. This may be due to a younger population sample than previous articles. Moreover, our study identified a knowledge gap by highlighting the lack of studies evaluating this technology in non-dialysis-dependent chronic kidney disease patients.

Bioimpedance Indices of Fluid Overload and Cardiorenal Outcomes in Heart Failure and Chronic Kidney Disease: a Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Bioimpedance-based estimates of fluid overload have been widely studied and systematically reviewed in populations of those undergoing dialysis, but data from populations with heart failure or nondialysis chronic kidney disease (CKD) have not.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We conducted a systematic review of studies using whole-body bioimpedance from populations with heart failure and nondialysis CKD that reported associations with mortality, cardiovascular outcomes and/or CKD progression. We searched MEDLINE, Embase databases and the Cochrane CENTRAL registry from inception to March 14, 2022. We identified 31 eligible studies: 20 heart failure and 11 CKD cohorts, with 2 studies including over 1000 participants. A wide range of various bioimpedance methods were used across the studies (heart failure: 8 parameters; CKD: 6). Studies generally reported positive associations, but between-study differences in bioimpedance methods, fluid overload exposure definitions and modeling approaches precluded meta-analysis. The largest identified study was in nondialysis CKD (Chronic Renal Insufficiency Cohort, 3751 participants), which reported adjusted hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) for phase angle < 5.59 vs ≥ 6.4 of 2.02 (1.67-2.43) for all-cause mortality; 1.80 (1.46-2.23) for heart failure events; and 1.78 (1.56-2.04) for CKD progression.

CONCLUSIONS

Bioimpedance indices of fluid overload are associated with risk of important cardiorenal outcomes in heart failure and CKD. Facilitation of more widespread use of bioimpedance requires consensus on the optimum device, standardized analytical methods and larger studies, including more detailed characterization of cardiac and renal phenotypes.

Bioimpedance Guided Fluid Management in Peritoneal Dialysis: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) devices can help assess volume overload in patients receiving maintenance peritoneal dialysis. However, the effects of BIA on the short-term hard end points of peritoneal dialysis lack consistency. This study aimed to test whether BIA-guided fluid management could improve short-term outcomes in patients on peritoneal dialysis.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

A single-center, open-labeled, randomized, controlled trial was conducted. Patients on prevalent peritoneal dialysis with volume overload were recruited from July 1, 2013 to March 30, 2014 and followed for 1 year in the initial protocol. All participants with volume overload were 1:1 randomized to the BIA-guided arm (BIA and traditional clinical methods) and control arm (only traditional clinical methods). The primary end point was all-cause mortality and secondary end points were cardiovascular disease mortality and technique survival.

RESULTS

A total of 240 patients (mean age, 49 years; men, 51%; diabetic, 21%, 120 per group) were enrolled. After 1-year follow-up, 11(5%) patients died (three in BIA versus eight in control) and 21 patients were permanently transferred to hemodialysis (eight in BIA versus 13 in control). The rate of extracellular water/total body water decline in the BIA group was significantly higher than that in the control group. The 1-year patient survival rates were 96% and 92% in BIA and control groups, respectively. No significant statistical differences were found between patients randomized to the BIA-guided or control arm in terms of patient survival, cardiovascular disease mortality, and technique survival (P>0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Although BIA-guided fluid management improved the fluid overload status better than the traditional clinical method, no significant effect was found on 1-year patient survival and technique survival in patients on peritoneal dialysis.

Assessment of Hydration Status in Peritoneal Dialysis Patients: Validity, Prognostic Value, Strengths, and Limitations of Available Techniques

BACKGROUND

The majority of patients undergoing peritoneal dialysis (PD) suffer from volume overload and this overhydration is associated with increased mortality. Thus, optimal assessment of volume status in PD is an issue of paramount importance. Patient symptoms and physical signs are often unreliable indexes of true hydration status.

SUMMARY

Over the past decades, a quest for a valid, reproducible, and easily applicable technique to assess hydration status is taking place. Among existing techniques, inferior vena cava diameter measurements with echocardiography and natriuretic peptides such as brain natriuretic peptide and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide were not extensively examined in PD populations; while having certain advantages, their interpretation are complicated by the underlying cardiac status and are not widely available. Bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) techniques are the most studied tool assessing volume overload in PD. Volume overload assessed with BIA has been associated with technique failure and increased mortality in observational studies, but the results of randomized trials on the value of BIA-based strategies to improve volume-related outcomes are contradictory. Lung ultrasound (US) is a recent technique with the ability to identify volume excess in the critical lung area. Preliminary evidence in PD showed that B-lines from lung US correlate with echocardiographic parameters but not with BIA measurements. This review presents the methods currently used to assess fluid status in PD patients and discusses existing data on their validity, applicability, limitations, and associations with intermediate and hard outcomes in this population. Key Message: No method has proved its value as an intervening tool affecting cardiovascular events, technique, and overall survival in PD patients. As BIA and lung US estimate fluid overload in different compartments of the body, they can be complementary tools for volume status assessment.

Volume management as a key dimension of a high-quality PD prescription

BACKGROUND

Appropriate volume control is one of the key goals in a peritoneal dialysis (PD) prescription. As such it is an important component of the International Society of Peritoneal Dialysis (ISPD) guideline for "High-quality PD prescription" necessitating a review of the literature on volume management. The workgroup recognized the importance of including within its scope measures of volume status and blood pressure in prescribing high-quality PD therapy.

METHODS

A Medline and PubMed search for publications addressing volume status and its management in PD since the publication of the 2015 ISPD Adult Cardiovascular and Metabolic Guidelines, from October 2014 through to July 2019, was conducted.

RESULTS

There were no randomized controlled trials on blood pressure intervention and six randomized trials of bioimpedance-guided volume management. Generally, all studies were of small sample size, short duration, and used surrogate markers as primary outcomes. As a consequence, only "practice points" were drawn. High-quality goal-directed PD prescription should aim to achieve and maintain clinical euvolemia taking residual kidney function and its preservation into account, so that both fluid removal from peritoneal ultrafiltration and urine output are considered and residual kidney function is not compromised. Blood pressure should be included as a key objective parameter in assessing the quality of PD prescription but there is currently no evidence for a specific target in PD. Clinical examination remains the keystone of routine clinical care.

CONCLUSIONS

High-quality goal-directed PD prescription should include volume management as one of the key dimensions.

The Effect of Strict Volume Control Assessed by Repeated Bioimpedance Spectroscopy on Cardiac Function in Peritoneal Dialysis Patients

Adequate fluid management plays an important role in decreasing cardiovascular risk in peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients. We evaluated whether strict volume control monitored by bioimpedance spectroscopy (BIS) affects cardiac function in PD patients. This study is a secondary analysis of a multicentre, prospective, randomized, controlled trial. Fluid overload was assessed by the average overhydration/extracellular water (OH/ECW) at baseline, 6 months and 12 months. Patients were categorized as time-averaged overhydrated (TA-OH/ECW ≥15%) or normohydrated (TA-OH/ECW <15%), and echocardiographic parameters were compared between groups. Among a total of 151 patients, 120 patients exhibited time-averaged normohydration. Time-averaged overhydrated patients had a significantly higher left atrial (LA) diameter and E/e′ ratio and a lower left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction at 12 months than time-averaged normohydrated patients. LA diameter, end-systolic volume and end-diastolic volume were decreased at 12 months compared to baseline in time-averaged normohydrated patients only. TA-OH/ECW was independently associated with ejection fraction at 12 months (β = −0.190; p = 0.010). TA-OH/ECW, but not OH/ECW at 12 months, was an independent risk factor for LV dysfunction (odds ratio 4.020 [95% confidence interval 1.285–12.573]). Overhydration status based on repeated BIS measurements is an independent predictor of LV systolic function in PD patients.