Effects of low- and high-flux dialyzers on oxidative stress and insulin resistance

The use of a low-flux hemo-dialyzer is associated with impaired platelet aggregation in patients undergoing chronic hemodialysis

In patients with chronic hemodialysis (HD), both abnormal thrombotic and bleeding events are commonly observed. Uremic platelet dysfunction is one of the important attributing factors. Moreover, HD may also result in aggregation dysfunction of platelets during the therapeutic procedure. However, how the HD process affects platelet and coagulation function is unknown and dialyzer membrane flux could have an impact on it. We aimed to compare the impacts of low-flux and high-flux HD on the platelet function of patients undergoing chronic HD. This was a cross-sectional study conducted in the HD unit of E-Da hospital in Taiwan. A total of 78 patients with maintenance HD three times per week for more than one year, including 40 with high- and 38 with low-flux hemodialysis, were recruited. Their platelet functions were evaluated using an in vitro platelet function analyzer (PFA-100) before and after the HD session. Of the 78 patients undergoing HD, 60 (76%) had prolonged pre-dialysis collagen/epinephrine (CEPI) and collagen/adenosine diphosphate closure times. Those receiving low-flux dialyzer had a significant increase in CEPI closure time (pre-dialysis 212.3 ± 62.1 seconds. post-dialysis 241.5 ± 64.3 seconds, P = .01), but not collagen/adenosine diphosphate closure time, after HD. After adjusting confounding factors, only the low-flux dialyzer demonstrated an independent association with the prolonged CEPI closure time after HD therapy (odds ratio = 23.31, 95% CI: 1.94-280.61, P = .01). We observed that impaired platelet aggregation is prevalent in patients undergoing chronic HD. Therefore, the use of low-flux dialyzers may further worsen platelet aggregation after dialysis. Patients with uremic bleeding diathesis should take precautions. We suggest that further studies using flow cytometry should be conducted to explore the mechanism of dialysis flux and platelet activity during HD.

Effect of changing treatment to high-flux hemodialysis (HFHD) on mortality in patients with long-term low flux hemodialysis (LFHD): a propensity score matched cohort study

Background

The purpose of this study was to explore the effect of changing treatment to high-flux hemodialysis (HFHD) on mortality rate in patients with long-term low flux hemodialysis (LFHD).

Methods

The patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) who underwent LFHD with dialysis age more than 36 months and stable condition in our hospital before December 31, 2014 were included in this study. They were divided into control group and observation group. Propensity score matched method was used to select patients in the control group. The hemodialysis was performed 3 times a week for 4 h. The deadline for follow-up is December 31, 2018. End-point event is all-cause death. The survival rates of the two groups were compared and multivariate Cox regression analysis was carried out.

Results

K-M survival analysis showed that the 1-year, 2-year, 3-year and 4-year survival rates of HFHD group were 98, 96, 96 and 96%, respectively. The 1-year, 2-year, 3-year and 4-year survival rates of LFHD group were 95, 85, 80 and 78%, respectively. Log-rank test showed that the survival rate of HFHD group was significantly higher than that of LFHD group (x²= 7.278, P = 0.007). Multivariate Cox regression analysis showed that male, age, hemoglobin and low-throughput dialysis were independent predictors of death (P < 0.05). Compared with LFHD, HFHD can significantly reduce the mortality risk ratio of patients, as high as 86%.

Conclusion

The prognosis of patients with ESRD who performed long-term LFHD can be significantly improved after changing to HFHD.

Proteomics investigation of the changes in serum proteins after high- and low-flux hemodialysis

PURPOSE

This study aimed to use proteomics methods to investigate the changes in serum protein levels after high- and low-flux hemodialysis (HD).

METHODS

Before and after HD, serum samples were obtained from two selected patients who were treated with a Polyflux 140 H high-flux dialyzer and a Polyflux 14 L low-flux dialyzer during two continuous therapy sessions. Liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) was performed to identify the proteins.

RESULTS

A total of 212 and 203 serum proteins were identified after high-flux and low-flux HD, respectively. After high-flux HD, 21 proteins increased, and 132 proteins decreased. After low-flux HD, 87 proteins increased, and 45 proteins decreased. High-flux HD led to a significantly greater reduction in protein levels than low-flux HD (0.73 ± 0.13 vs. 0.84 ± 0.18, p = .00). Among the increased and decreased proteins, the isoelectric point (pI) values mainly ranged from 5 to 7, and the molecular weights (Mws) were mostly smaller than 30 kDa. The serum proteins showed no difference in pI or Mw for high- and low-flux HD. Gene ontology (GO) analysis showed that the detected proteins were related to immune system processes and complement activation.

CONCLUSIONS

Serum protein levels differentially changed after high- and low-flux HD. Long-term effects should be observed in future studies.

Insulin and glucose-lowering agents for treating people with diabetes and chronic kidney disease

BACKGROUND

Diabetes is the commonest cause of chronic kidney disease (CKD). Both conditions commonly co-exist. Glucometabolic changes and concurrent dialysis in diabetes and CKD make glucose-lowering challenging, increasing the risk of hypoglycaemia. Glucose-lowering agents have been mainly studied in people with near-normal kidney function. It is important to characterise existing knowledge of glucose-lowering agents in CKD to guide treatment.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the efficacy and safety of insulin and other pharmacological interventions for lowering glucose levels in people with diabetes and CKD.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 12 February 2018 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 Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs looking at head-to-head comparisons of active regimens of glucose-lowering therapy or active regimen compared with placebo/standard care in people with diabetes and CKD (estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) < 60 mL/min/1.73 m2) were eligible.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Four authors independently assessed study eligibility, risk of bias, and quality of data and performed data extraction. Continuous outcomes were expressed as post-treatment mean differences (MD). Adverse events were expressed as post-treatment absolute risk differences (RD). Dichotomous clinical outcomes were presented as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-four studies (128 records, 13,036 participants) were included. Nine studies compared sodium glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors to placebo; 13 studies compared dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors to placebo; 2 studies compared glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) agonists to placebo; 8 studies compared glitazones to no glitazone treatment; 1 study compared glinide to no glinide treatment; and 4 studies compared different types, doses or modes of administration of insulin. In addition, 2 studies compared sitagliptin to glipizide; and 1 study compared each of sitagliptin to insulin, glitazars to pioglitazone, vildagliptin to sitagliptin, linagliptin to voglibose, and albiglutide to sitagliptin. Most studies had a high risk of bias due to funding and attrition bias, and an unclear risk of detection bias.Compared to placebo, SGLT2 inhibitors probably reduce HbA1c (7 studies, 1092 participants: MD -0.29%, -0.38 to -0.19 (-3.2 mmol/mol, -4.2 to -2.2); I2 = 0%), fasting blood glucose (FBG) (5 studies, 855 participants: MD -0.48 mmol/L, -0.78 to -0.19; I2 = 0%), systolic blood pressure (BP) (7 studies, 1198 participants: MD -4.68 mmHg, -6.69 to -2.68; I2 = 40%), diastolic BP (6 studies, 1142 participants: MD -1.72 mmHg, -2.77 to -0.66; I2 = 0%), heart failure (3 studies, 2519 participants: RR 0.59, 0.41 to 0.87; I2 = 0%), and hyperkalaemia (4 studies, 2788 participants: RR 0.58, 0.42 to 0.81; I2 = 0%); but probably increase genital infections (7 studies, 3086 participants: RR 2.50, 1.52 to 4.11; I2 = 0%), and creatinine (4 studies, 848 participants: MD 3.82 μmol/L, 1.45 to 6.19; I2 = 16%) (all effects of moderate certainty evidence). SGLT2 inhibitors may reduce weight (5 studies, 1029 participants: MD -1.41 kg, -1.8 to -1.02; I2 = 28%) and albuminuria (MD -8.14 mg/mmol creatinine, -14.51 to -1.77; I2 = 11%; low certainty evidence). SGLT2 inhibitors may have little or no effect on the risk of cardiovascular death, hypoglycaemia, acute kidney injury (AKI), and urinary tract infection (low certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether SGLT2 inhibitors have any effect on death, end-stage kidney disease (ESKD), hypovolaemia, fractures, diabetic ketoacidosis, or discontinuation due to adverse effects (very low certainty evidence).Compared to placebo, DPP-4 inhibitors may reduce HbA1c (7 studies, 867 participants: MD -0.62%, -0.85 to -0.39 (-6.8 mmol/mol, -9.3 to -4.3); I2 = 59%) but may have little or no effect on FBG (low certainty evidence). DPP-4 inhibitors probably have little or no effect on cardiovascular death (2 studies, 5897 participants: RR 0.93, 0.77 to 1.11; I2 = 0%) and weight (2 studies, 210 participants: MD 0.16 kg, -0.58 to 0.90; I2 = 29%; moderate certainty evidence). Compared to placebo, DPP-4 inhibitors may have little or no effect on heart failure, upper respiratory tract infections, and liver impairment (low certainty evidence). Compared to placebo, it is uncertain whether DPP-4 inhibitors have any effect on eGFR, hypoglycaemia, pancreatitis, pancreatic cancer, or discontinuation due to adverse effects (very low certainty evidence).Compared to placebo, GLP-1 agonists probably reduce HbA1c (7 studies, 867 participants: MD -0.53%, -1.01 to -0.06 (-5.8 mmol/mol, -11.0 to -0.7); I2 = 41%; moderate certainty evidence) and may reduce weight (low certainty evidence). GLP-1 agonists may have little or no effect on eGFR, hypoglycaemia, or discontinuation due to adverse effects (low certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether GLP-1 agonists reduce FBG, increase gastrointestinal symptoms, or affect the risk of pancreatitis (very low certainty evidence).Compared to placebo, it is uncertain whether glitazones have any effect on HbA1c, FBG, death, weight, and risk of hypoglycaemia (very low certainty evidence).Compared to glipizide, sitagliptin probably reduces hypoglycaemia (2 studies, 551 participants: RR 0.40, 0.23 to 0.69; I2 = 0%; moderate certainty evidence). Compared to glipizide, sitagliptin may have had little or no effect on HbA1c, FBG, weight, and eGFR (low certainty evidence). Compared to glipizide, it is uncertain if sitagliptin has any effect on death or discontinuation due to adverse effects (very low certainty).For types, dosages or modes of administration of insulin and other head-to-head comparisons only individual studies were available so no conclusions could be made.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence concerning the efficacy and safety of glucose-lowering agents in diabetes and CKD is limited. SGLT2 inhibitors and GLP-1 agonists are probably efficacious for glucose-lowering and DPP-4 inhibitors may be efficacious for glucose-lowering. Additionally, SGLT2 inhibitors probably reduce BP, heart failure, and hyperkalaemia but increase genital infections, and slightly increase creatinine. The safety profile for GLP-1 agonists is uncertain. No further conclusions could be made for the other classes of glucose-lowering agents including insulin. More high quality studies are required to help guide therapeutic choice for glucose-lowering in diabetes and CKD.

The influence of mortality rate from membrane flux for end-stage renal disease: A meta-analysis

To evaluate the influence of the high-flux hemodialysis (HFHD) and the low-flux hemodialysis (LFHD) on mortality rate for end-stage renal disease (ESRD). Four electronic databases including PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrails were searched to identify relevant randomized clinical trials up to 31 August 2015. Seven studies enrolling a total of 4412 patients were included in this meta-analysis. For all-cause mortality comparing with LFHD, the result showed that there were significant difference (RR=0.75; 95% CI [0.60-0.94]; I²=84%; P<0.00001). For death due to infection comparing with LFHD, the result showed that there was no significant difference (RR=0.92; 95% CI [0.75-1.13]; I²=0%; P=0.86). For cardiovascular mortality, the overall meta-analysis result showed that there was a significant difference between the HFHD versus the LFHD (RR=0.75; 95% CI [0.60-0.94]; I²=55%; P=0.11). Publication bias was not detected by funnel plot. Based on these results, our study suggests that the HFHD has superior effectiveness over LFHD for long-term survival in ESRD.

The effect of two different high-flux dialysis membranes on insulin resistance in non-diabetic end-stage renal disease patients

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of two different types of high-flux dialysis membranes on insulin resistance among patients who are receiving hemodialysis (HD) due to end-stage renal failure (ESRF).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Forty-six (21 female, 25 male) patients were included in the study, who were on HD treatment due to stage-5 chronic renal failure. Prior to the study, fasting insulin resistance via Homeostasis Model Assessment-Insulin Resistance (HOMA-IR) and fractioned urea clearance (Kt/V) values were calculated using the urokinetic model. The polysulfone (PS) dialysis membrane of all patients included in the study was replaced with "polyarylethersulfone, polyvinylpyrrolidone, polyamide (PPP)" high-flux membrane that has the same surface area over 12 weeks. At the end of the 12-week period, HOMA and Kt/V values were recalculated.

RESULTS

At the end of the 12-week period, Kt/V values rose statistically significant from 1.575 to 1.752 (p = 0.002). HOMA-IR values declined, though not statistically significant, from 3.268 to 2.926 (p = 0.085). PPP high-flux membrane increased the Kt/V values significantly compared to the PS membrane, while it decreased the insulin resistance and increased insulin sensitivity.

CONCLUSION

The two different types of high-flux dialysis membranes used for HD have different effects on insulin sensitivity. Compared to the PS membrane, PPP high-flux membrane decreased insulin resistance by increasing insulin sensitivity among non-diabetic ESRF patients.

The role of technological progress vs. accidental discoveries and clinical experience

The 50^th anniversary of dialysotherapy celebrated by nephrologists around the world in 2012 provided an opportunity for discussion on the role of clinical experience in relation to technological progress in the evolution of dialysis, especially of recently observed inadequate decrease in mortality/morbidity rates of patients on chronic dialysis. My report, based on almost 50 years of career in nephrology, refers the evolution of dialysis, from catharsis to modern dialysotherapy with special attention devoted to nowadays gravely underestimated role of clinical experience and personalized professional care for patients.

Convective therapies versus low-flux hemodialysis for chronic kidney failure: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Although convective therapies have gained popularity for the optimal removal of uremic solutes, their benefits and potential risks have not been fully elucidated. We conducted a meta-analysis of all randomized controlled trials comparing convective therapies with low-flux hemodialysis in patients with chronic kidney failure.

METHODS

We performed a literature search using MEDLINE (inception-December 2012), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov, scientific abstracts from meetings and bibliographies of retrieved articles. Randomized controlled trials comparing the effect of convective therapies including high-flux hemodialysis, hemofiltration or hemodiafiltration versus low-flux hemodialysis were included. Random-effects model meta-analyses were used to examine continuous and binary outcomes.

RESULTS

Sixty-five (29 crossover and 36 parallel-arm) trials were identified (n = 12 182). Convective therapies resulted in a decrease in all-cause mortality [relative risk (RR) 0.88; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76, 1.02, P = 0.09], cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.84; 95% CI 0.71, 0.98, P = 0.03), all-cause hospitalization (RR 0.91; 95% CI 0.82, 1.01; P = 0.08) and therapy-related hypotension (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.35, 0.87, P = 0.01). Convective therapies also resulted in an increase in the clearance of several low-molecular-weight (urea, creatinine and phosphate), middle-sized (β-2 microglobulin and leptin) and protein-bound (homocysteine, advanced glycation end-products and pentosidine) solutes and a decrease in inflammatory markers (interleukin-6). There was no impact of convective therapies on cardiac morphological and functional parameters, and blood pressure and anemia parameters.

CONCLUSIONS

Although convective therapies are associated with improved clearance of uremic solutes, the potential long-term benefits of specific convective modalities require further study.

High-flux versus low-flux membranes for end-stage kidney disease

BACKGROUND

Clinical practice guidelines regarding the use of high-flux haemodialysis membranes vary widely.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to analyse the current evidence reported for the benefits and harms of high-flux and low-flux haemodialysis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched Cochrane Renal Group's specialised register (July 2012), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (1948 to March 2011), and EMBASE (1947 to March 2011) without language restriction.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared high-flux haemodialysis with low-flux haemodialysis in people with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) who required long-term haemodialysis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted independently by two authors for study characteristics (participants and interventions), risks of bias, and outcomes (all-cause mortality and cause-specific mortality, hospitalisation, health-related quality of life, carpal tunnel syndrome, dialysis-related arthropathy, kidney function, and symptoms) among people on haemodialysis. Treatment effects were expressed as a risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD), with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using the random-effects model.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 33 studies that involved 3820 participants with ESKD. High-flux membranes reduced cardiovascular mortality (5 studies, 2612 participants: RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.99) but not all-cause mortality (10 studies, 2915 participants: RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.04) or infection-related mortality (3 studies, 2547 participants: RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.14). In absolute terms, high-flux membranes may prevent three cardiovascular deaths in 100 people treated with haemodialysis for two years. While high-flux membranes reduced predialysis beta-2 microglobulin levels (MD -12.17 mg/L, 95% CI -15.83 to -8.51 mg/L), insufficient data were available to reliably estimate the effects of membrane flux on hospitalisation, carpal tunnel syndrome, or amyloid-related arthropathy. Evidence for effects of high-flux membranes was limited by selective reporting in a few studies. Insufficient numbers of studies limited our ability to conduct subgroup analyses for membrane type, biocompatibility, or reuse. In general, the risk of bias was either high or unclear in the majority of studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

High-flux haemodialysis may reduce cardiovascular mortality in people requiring haemodialysis by about 15%. A large well-designed RCT is now required to confirm this finding.

The effect of high-flux hemodialysis on hemoglobin concentrations in patients with CKD: results of the MINOXIS study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Hemodialysis treatment induces markers of inflammation and oxidative stress, which could affect hemoglobin levels and the response to erythropoietin use. This study sought to determine whether high-flux dialysis would help improve markers of renal anemia, inflammation, and oxidative stress compared with low-flux dialysis.

DESIGN, SETTINGS, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

In a prospective, controlled study, 221 patients undergoing maintenance hemodialysis and receiving darbepoetin-alfa treatment (mean age, 66 years; 55% male) from 19 centers were screened in a 20-week run-in period of low-flux hemodialysis with a synthetic dialysis membrane. Thereafter, 166 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive a synthetic high-flux membrane or to continue on low-flux dialysis for 52 weeks. Data on myeloperoxidase, oxidized LDL, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, and the Malnutrition Inflammation Score were collected at baseline and after 52 weeks; routine laboratory data, such as hemoglobin, ferritin, and albumin, and the use of darbepoetin-alfa, were also measured in the run-in period. Results After 52 weeks, the low-flux and the high-flux groups did not differ with respect to hemoglobin (mean ± SD, 11.7±0.9 g/dl versus 11.7±1.1 g/dl; P=0.62) or use of darbepoetin-alfa (mean dosage ± SD, 29.8±24.8 μg/wk versus 26.0±31.1 μg/wk; P=0.85). Markers of inflammation, oxidative stress, or nutritional status also did not differ between groups.

CONCLUSION

Over 1 year, high-flux dialysis had no superior effects on hemoglobin levels or markers of inflammation, oxidative stress, and nutritional status. These data do not support the hypothesis that enhanced convective toxin removal would improve patient outcome.

The influence of hemodialysis membrane permeability on serum paraoxonase-1 activity and oxidative status parameters

We aimed to measure oxidative stress parameters and paraoxonase-1 (PON-1) enzyme activities in chronic hemodialysis (HD) patients and to investigate whether HD membrane permeability has any influence on those measures. Forty-seven HD patients and 24 controls were enrolled. At the first step of the study, all HD patients had undergone HD treatment via "low-flux" membranes for 4 weeks. At the second step of the study, the membranes were switched to "high-flux" membranes and HD treatments were also performed via "high-flux" membranes for 4 weeks. Blood samples were withdrawn after completion of 4 weeks treatment for each membrane. Total oxidant status (TOS), total antioxidant status (TAS), and paraoxonase and arylesterase activities were measured in blood samples of the patients and the controls. TOS and oxidative stress index (OSI) of both membranes were higher than controls (all, P < 0.05), while TAS and paraoxonase and arylesterase activities were lower (all P < 0.05). Paraoxonase (P < 0.05, r = -0.437 and P < 0.05, r = -0.453, respectively) and arylesterase (P < 0.05, r = -0.333 and P < 0.05, r = -0.371, respectively) activities of "low-flux" and "high-flux" membranes were inversely correlated with OSI. There were no significant differences between "low-flux" and "high-flux" membranes in regard to oxidative stress parameters or PON-1 enzyme activities (all, P > 0.05). HD patients have increased oxidative stress and decreased serum PON-1 activities inversely correlated with oxidative stress. Membrane permeability seems to have no influence on oxidative stress parameters and PON-1 enzyme activities.

Effect of membrane permeability on inflammation and arterial stiffness: a randomized trial

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Both larger molecule removal and dialyzer biocompatibility have been implicated in the high-flux hemodialysis (HD)-associated favorable outcome. In an attempt to delineate the effect of membrane permeability, we performed a randomized, crossover study to compare the inflammatory biomarkers, lipid profile, and aortic pulse wave velocity (PWV) of two dialyzers that are composed of identical membranes but with different flux characteristics.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

Stable patients who had anuria and were on low-flux polysulfone membrane were randomly allocated either to HD with high-flux polyamide membrane (group A; 22 patients) or to HD with low-flux polyamide membrane (group B; 24 patients) for 24 weeks, then they were started on 24 weeks of the alternative HD treatment. Apart from the dialyzer, the dialysis prescription remained unchanged.

RESULTS

Nineteen patients from group A and 23 patients from group B completed the study. Predialysis beta(2)-microglobulin levels decreased significantly when using the high-flux polyamide membrane. No difference between membranes was observed for serum albumin, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, fibrinogen, IL-6, triglycerides, HDL cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, and lipoprotein(a) during the study. A significant increase in aortic PWV, a marker of aortic stiffness, was noted after patients switched from high-flux to low-flux polyamide membranes. Similarly, the rate of change in aortic PWV was significantly decreased with the use of the high-flux polyamide membrane.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that dialysis with polyamide membranes with different flux characteristics did not modify the inflammatory indices and lipid profile in stable HD patients; however, a seemingly beneficial effect on aortic stiffness was noted for patients who were maintained on high-flux polyamide membrane.