Temporal changes in dialysate [Na+] prescription from 1996 to 2018 and their clinical significance as judged from a meta-regression of clinical trials

Low dialysate sodium levels for chronic haemodialysis

BACKGROUND

Cardiovascular (CV) disease is the leading cause of death in dialysis patients and is strongly associated with fluid overload and hypertension. It is plausible that low dialysate sodium ion concentration [Na+] may decrease total body sodium content, thereby reducing fluid overload and hypertension and ultimately reducing CV morbidity and death. This is an update of a review first published in 2019.

OBJECTIVES

This review evaluated the harms and benefits of using a low (< 138 mM) dialysate [Na+] for maintenance haemodialysis (HD) patients.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 1 October 2024 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), both parallel and cross-over, of low (< 138 mM) versus neutral (138 to 140 mM) or high (> 140 mM) dialysate [Na+] for maintenance HD patients were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently screened studies for inclusion and extracted data. Statistical analyses were performed using the random-effects model, and results expressed as risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous outcomes, and mean differences (MD) or standardised MD (SMD) for continuous outcomes, with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Confidence in the evidence was assessed using Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 17 studies randomising 509 patients, with data available for 452 patients after dropouts. All but three studies evaluated a fixed concentration of low dialysate [Na+], with one using profiled dialysate [Na+] and two using individualised dialysate [Na+]. Five were parallel group studies, and 12 were cross-over studies. Of the latter, only six used a washout between intervention and control periods. Most studies were short-term with a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 4 (4 to 16) weeks. Two were of a single HD session and two of a single week's HD. Seven studies were conducted prior to 2000, and six reported the use of obsolete HD practices. Other than for indirectness arising from older studies, risks of bias in the included studies were generally low. Compared to neutral or high dialysate [Na+] (≥ 138 mM), low dialysate [Na+] (< 138 mM) reduces interdialytic weight gain (14 studies, 515 participants: MD -0.36 kg, 95% CI -0.50 to -0.22; high certainty evidence) and antihypertensive medication use (5 studies, 241 participants: SMD -0.37, 95% CI -0.64 to -0.1; high certainty evidence), and probably reduces left ventricular mass index (2 studies, 143 participants: MD -7.65 g/m2, 95% CI -14.48 to -0.83; moderate certainty evidence), predialysis mean arterial pressure (MAP) (5 studies, 232 participants: MD -3.39 mm Hg, 95% CI -5.17 to -1.61; moderate certainty evidence), postdialysis MAP (5 studies, 226 participants: MD -3.17 mm Hg, 95% CI -4.68 to 1.67; moderate certainty evidence), predialysis serum [Na+] (11 studies, 435 participants: MD -1.26 mM, 95% CI -1.81 to -0.72; moderate certainty evidence) and postdialysis serum [Na+] (6 studies, 188 participants: MD -3.09 mM, 95% CI -4.29 to -1.88; moderate certainty evidence). Compared to neutral or high dialysate [Na+], low dialysate [Na+] probably increases intradialytic hypotension events (13 studies, 15,764 HD sessions: RR 1.58, 95% 1.25 to 2.01; moderate certainty evidence) and intradialytic cramps (10 studies, 14,559 HD sessions: RR 1.84, 95% 1.29 to 2.64; moderate certainty evidence). Effect size for important outcomes were generally greater with low dialysate [Na+] compared to high compared with neutral dialysate [Na+], although formal hypothesis testing identifies that the difference was only certain for postdialysis serum [Na+]. Compared to neutral or high dialysate [Na+], it is uncertain whether low dialysate [Na+] affects intradialytic or interdialytic MAP, and dietary salt intake. It is also uncertain whether low dialysate [Na+] changed extracellular fluid status, venous tone, arterial vascular resistance, left ventricular volumes, or fatigue. Studies did not examine CV or all-cause death, CV events, or hospitalisation.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Low dialysate [Na+] reduces intradialytic weight gain and probably blood pressure, which are effects directionally associated with improved outcomes. However, the intervention probably increases intradialytic hypotension and probably reduces serum [Na+], effects that are associated with an increased risk of death. The effect of the intervention on overall patient health and well-being is unknown. Further evidence is needed in the form of longer-term studies in contemporary settings, evaluating end-organ effects in small-scale mechanistic studies using optimal methods, and clinical outcomes in large-scale multicentre RCTs.

Modifiable Factors Associated with Prolonged Dialysis Recovery Time and Fatigue in Hemodialysis Patients

Key Points

A negative change in serum sodium during a dialysis session is an independent factor associated with prolonged dialysis recovery time. Lower hemoglobin is an independent factor associated with fatigue in hemodialysis patients. Hemodiafiltration use in patients age ≥85 years is associated with a longer dialysis recovery time.

Background

Dialysis recovery time (DRT) and fatigue are two important patient-reported outcomes that highly affect hemodialysis patients' well-being and survival. This study aimed to identify all modifiable dialysis-related factors, associated with DRT and fatigue, that could be addressed in future clinical trials.

Methods

This multicenter observational study included adult patients, undergoing chronic hemodialysis for >3 months during December 2023. Patients admitted to hospital, with cognitive problems or active cancer were excluded. DRT was determined by asking over six sessions: How long did it take you to recover from your last dialysis session? Fatigue was assessed using the French-validated Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology-Hemodialysis fatigue scale. Logistic regression analysis assessed the association between DRT >12 hours and fatigue score ≥4 with all dialysis-related factors. A subanalysis of DRT-related factors was performed for very elderly patients aged 85 years and above.

Results

A total of 536 patients and 2967 sessions were analyzed. The mean age was 68.1±14.3 years, 60.9% were male, 33.2% had diabetes, and 63.3% were on hemodiafiltration. The median dialysate sodium was 138 (136–140). The median DRT was 140 (45–440) minutes, and 14.9% of patients had DRT >12 hours. Fatigue score was 3.1±2.3, 18% had no fatigue, and 37.7% had a score ≥4. DRT was significantly associated with fatigue score. In multivariable regression analysis, intradialytic reduction in serum sodium and frequency of dialysis were significantly associated with DRT. Factors associated with fatigue included female sex and lower hemoglobin. In patients aged 85 years and above, hemodiafiltration was associated with prolonged DRT.

Conclusions

Modifiable factors associated with prolonged DRT are not exactly similar to those associated with fatigue. Intradialytic reduction in serum sodium and low frequency of dialysis are two independent factors associated with longer DRT, with hemodiafiltration associated with longer recovery in very elderly patients. The hemoglobin level is the modifiable independent factor associated with fatigue. These modifiable factors can be addressed in future interventional trials to improve patients' outcomes.

Dialysate Sodium Lowering in Maintenance Hemodialysis: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Key Points

Treatment to dialysate sodium 135 versus 138 mEq/L led to no difference in the rate of change in intradialytic hypotension, but symptoms were greater in the low arm. Use of a dialysate sodium concentration of 135 versus 138 mEq/L led to a small reduction in interdialytic weight gain, but had no effect on predialysis BP. Raising dialysate sodium concentration from 135 to 140 mEq/L reduced intradialytic hypotension and was associated with a marked increase in BP.

Background

Lowering dialysate sodium concentration may improve volume and BP control in patients on maintenance hemodialysis.

Methods

We randomized 42 participants 2:1 to dialysate sodium 135 versus 138 mEq/L for 6 months. This was followed by a 12-week extension phase in which sodium was increased to 140 mEq/L in low-arm participants. The primary outcome was intradialytic hypotension (IDH). Secondary outcomes included dialysis disequilibrium symptoms, emergency room visits/hospitalizations, interdialytic weight gain, and BP. Longitudinal changes across arms were analyzed using linear mixed regression.

Results

Treatment to dialysate sodium 135 versus 138 mEq/L was not associated with a difference in a change in the rate of IDH (mean change [95% confidence interval], 2.8 [0.8 to 9.5] versus 2.7 [1.1 to 6.2] events per 100 treatments per month); ratio of slopes 0.96 (0.26 to 3.61) or emergency room visits/hospitalizations (7.3 [2.3 to 12.4] versus 6.7 [2.9 to 10.6] events per 100 patient-months); difference 0.6 (−6.9 to 5.8). Symptom score was unchanged in the 135 mEq/L arm (0.7 [−1.4 to 2.7]) and decreased in the 138 mEq/L arm ([5.0 to 8.5 to 2.0]; difference 6.0 [2.1 to 9.8]). Interdialytic weight gain declined in the 135 mEq/L arm and was unchanged in the 138 mEq/L arm (−0.3 [−0.5 to 0.0] versus 0.3 [0.0 to 0.6] kg over 6 months; difference [−0.6 (−0.1 to −1.0)] kg). In the extension phase, raising dialysate sodium concentration from 135 to 140 mEq/L was associated with an increase in interdialytic weight gain (0.2 [0.1 to 0.3] kg) and predialysis BP (7.0 [4.8 to 9.2]/3.9 [2.6 to 5.1] mm Hg) and a reduction in IDH (odds ratio, 0.66 [0.45 to 0.97]).

Conclusions

Use of a dialysate sodium concentration of 135 as compared with 138 mEq/L was associated with a small reduction in interdialytic weight gain without affecting IDH or predialysis BP, but with an increase in symptoms. Raising dialysate sodium concentration from 135 to 140 mEq/L was associated with a reduction in IDH, small increase in interdialytic weight gain, and marked increase in predialysis BP.

Clinical Trial registration number

NCT03144817 .

Effect of Dialysate and Plasma Sodium on Mortality in a Global Historical Hemodialysis Cohort

SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT

This large observational cohort study aimed to investigate the relationship between dialysate and plasma sodium concentrations and mortality among maintenance hemodialysis patients. Using a large multinational cohort of 68,196 patients, we found that lower dialysate sodium concentrations (≤138 mmol/L) were independently associated with higher mortality compared with higher dialysate sodium concentrations (>138 mmol/L). The risk of death was lower among patients exposed to higher dialysate sodium concentrations, regardless of plasma sodium levels. These results challenge the prevailing assumption that lower dialysate sodium concentrations improve outcomes in hemodialysis patients. The study confirms that until robust evidence from randomized trials that are underway is available, nephrologists should remain cautious in reconsideration of dialysate sodium prescribing practices to optimize cardiovascular outcomes and reduce mortality in this population.

BACKGROUND

Excess mortality in hemodialysis (HD) patients is largely due to cardiovascular disease and is associated with abnormal fluid status and plasma sodium concentrations. Ultrafiltration facilitates the removal of fluid and sodium, whereas diffusive exchange of sodium plays a pivotal role in sodium removal and tonicity adjustment. Lower dialysate sodium may increase sodium removal at the expense of hypotonicity, reduced blood volume refilling, and intradialytic hypotension risk. Higher dialysate sodium preserves blood volume and hemodynamic stability but reduces sodium removal. In this retrospective cohort, we aimed to assess whether prescribing a dialysate sodium ≤138 mmol/L has an effect on survival outcomes compared with dialysate sodium >138 mmol/L after adjusting for plasma sodium concentration.

METHODS

The study population included incident HD patients from 875 Fresenius Medical Care Nephrocare clinics in 25 countries between 2010 and 2019. Baseline dialysate sodium (≤138 or >138 mmol/L) and plasma sodium (<135, 135-142, >142 mmol/L) concentrations defined exposure status. We used multivariable Cox regression model stratified by country to model the association between time-varying dialysate and plasma sodium exposure and all-cause mortality, adjusted for demographic and treatment variables, including bioimpedance measures of fluid status.

RESULTS

In 2,123,957 patient-months from 68,196 incident HD patients with on average three HD sessions per week dialysate sodium of 138 mmol/L was prescribed in 63.2%, 139 mmol/L in 15.8%, 140 mmol/L in 20.7%, and other concentrations in 0.4% of patients. Most clinical centers (78.6%) used a standardized concentration. During a median follow-up of 40 months, one third of patients ( n =21,644) died. Dialysate sodium ≤138 mmol/L was associated with higher mortality (multivariate hazard ratio for the total population (1.57, 95% confidence interval, 1.25 to 1.98), adjusted for plasma sodium concentrations and other confounding variables. Subgroup analysis did not show any evidence of effect modification by plasma sodium concentrations or other patient-specific variables.

CONCLUSIONS

These observational findings stress the need for randomized evidence to reliably define optimal standard dialysate sodium prescribing practices.

Personalizing electrolytes in the dialysis prescription: what, why and how?

Maintenance hemodialysis patients suffer from multiple comorbidities and treatment-related complications. A personalized approach to hemodialysis prescription could reduce some of these burdens by preventing complications such as excessive changes in blood pressure, arrhythmias, post-dialysis fatigue and decreased quality of life. A patient-centered approach to dialysate electrolyte concentrations represents one such opportunity. In addition to modifications in dialysate electrolyte concentrations, consideration of individual factors such as patients' serum concentrations, medication profiles, nutritional status and comorbidities is critical to tailoring hemodialysis prescriptions to optimize patient outcomes. The development of personalized dialysis treatment depends on the collection of comprehensive patient data, advances in technology, resource allocation and patient involvement in decision-making. This review discusses how the treatment of maintenance hemodialysis patients could benefit from individualized changes in certain dialysis fluid components.

A randomized controlled trial of two dialysate sodium concentrations in hospitalized hemodialysis patients

BACKGROUND

Several large dialysis organizations have lowered the dialysate sodium concentration (DNa) in an effort to ameliorate hypervolemia. The implications of lower DNa on intra-dialytic hypotension (IDH) during hospitalizations of hemodialysis (HD) patients is unclear.

METHODS

In this double-blind, single center, randomized controlled trial (RCT), hospitalized maintenance HD patients were randomized to receive higher (142 mmol/L) or lower (138 mmol/L) DNa for up to six sessions. Blood pressure (BP) was measured in a standardized fashion pre-HD, post-HD and every 15 min during HD. The endpoints were: (i) the average decline in systolic BP (pre-HD minus lowest intra-HD, primary endpoint) and (ii) the proportion of total sessions complicated by IDH (drop of ≥20 mmHg from the pre-HD systolic BP, secondary endpoint).

RESULTS

A total of 139 patients completed the trial, contributing 311 study visits. There were no significant differences in the average systolic blood pressure (SBP) decline between the higher and lower DNa groups (23 ± 16 versus 26 ± 16 mmHg; P = 0.57). The proportion of total sessions complicated by IDH was similar in the higher DNa group, compared with the lower DNa group [54% versus 59%; odds ratio 0.72; 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.36-1.44; P = 0.35]. In post hoc analyses adjusting for imbalances in baseline characteristics, higher DNa was associated with 8 mmHg (95% CI 2-13 mmHg) less decline in SBP, compared with lower DNa. Patient symptoms and adverse events were similar between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In this RCT for hospitalized maintenance of HD patients, we found no difference in the absolute SBP decline between those who received higher versus lower DNa in intention-to-treat analyses. Post hoc adjusted analyses suggested a lower risk of IDH with higher DNa; thus, larger, multi-center studies to confirm these findings are warranted.