The role of intra- and interdialytic sodium balance and restriction in dialysis therapies

The relationship between sodium, blood pressure and extracellular volume could not be more pronounced or complex than in a dialysis patient. We review the patients' sources of sodium exposure in the form of dietary salt intake, medication administration, and the dialysis treatment itself. In addition, the roles dialysis modalities, hemodialysis types, and dialysis fluid sodium concentration have on blood pressure, intradialytic symptoms, and interdialytic weight gain affect patient outcomes are discussed. We review whether sodium restriction (reduced salt intake), alteration in dialysis fluid sodium concentration and the different dialysis types have any impact on blood pressure, intradialytic symptoms, and interdialytic weight gain.

Conductivity variations and changes in serum sodium concentration during dialysis related to monitor switching

INTRODUCTION

The sodium gradient during hemodialysis sessions is one of the key factors in sodium balance in patients with dialysis-dependent chronic kidney disease; however, until the appearance of the new monitors with sodium modules, the differences between prescribed and measured sodium have been understudied. The present study aimed to compare the impact on the measured conductivity and the initial and final plasma sodium after changing the 5008 Cordiax to the new 6008 Cordiax monitor.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

106 patients on hemodialysis were included. Each patient underwent 2 dialysis sessions in which only the monitor was varied. The variables collected were dialysate, sodium and bicarbonate prescribed, real conductivity, initial and final plasma sodium measured, and the calculated sodium gradient (ΔPNa).

RESULTS

The change of dialysis monitor showed small but statistically significant differences in the initial (138.14mmol/L with 5008 vs. 138.81mmol/L with 6008) and final plasma sodium (139.58mmol/L vs. 140.97mmol/L), as well as in the actual conductivity obtained (13.97 vs. 14.1mS/cm). The ΔPNa also increased significantly.

CONCLUSION

The change from 5008 to 6008 monitor is associated with increased conductivity, leading the patient to end the sessions with higher plasma sodium and ΔPNa. Knowing and confirming this change will allow us to individualize the sodium prescription and avoid possible undesirable effects. It could be the preliminary study to explore the new sodium biosensor incorporated into the new generation of monitors.

Results of Salt Intake Restriction Monitored with the New Sodium Control Biosensor

INTRODUCTION

Adherence to a low-sodium (Na) diet is crucial in patients under hemodialysis, as it improves cardiovascular outcomes and reduces thirst and interdialytic weight gain. Recommended salt intake is lower than 5 g/day. The new 6008 CAREsystem monitors incorporate a Na module that offers the advantage of estimating patients' salt intake. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of dietary Na restriction for 1 week, monitored with the Na biosensor.

METHODS

A prospective study was conducted in 48 patients who maintained their usual dialysis parameters and were dialyzed with a 6008 CAREsystem monitor with activation of the Na module. Total Na balance, pre-/post-dialysis weight, serum Na (sNa), changes in pre- to post-dialysis sNa (ΔsNa), diffusive balance, and systolic and diastolic blood pressure were compared twice, once after 1 week of patients' usual Na diet and again after another week with more restricted Na intake.

RESULTS

Restricted Na intake increased the percentage of patients on a low-Na diet (<85 Na mmol/day) from 8% to 44%. Average daily Na intake decreased from 149 ± 54 to 95 ± 49 mmol, and interdialytic weight gain was reduced by 460 ± 484 g per session. More restricted Na intake also decreased pre-dialysis sNa and increased both intradialytic diffusive balance and ΔsNa. In hypertensive patients, reducing daily Na by more than 3 g Na/day lowered their systolic blood pressure.

CONCLUSIONS

The new Na module allowed objective monitoring of Na intake, which in turn could permit more precise personalized dietary recommendations in patients under hemodialysis.

Practical implementation and clinical benefits of the new automated dialysate sodium control biosensor

Background

A key feature of dialysis treatment is the prescription of dialysate sodium (Na). This study aimed to describe the practical implementation of a new automated dialysate Na control biosensor and to assess its tolerance and the beneficial clinical effects of isonatraemic dialysis.

Methods

A prospective study was carried out in 86 patients who, along with their usual parameters, received the following five consecutive phases of treatment for 3 weeks each: phase 0: baseline 5008 machine; phases 1 and 2: 6008 machine without activation of the Na control biosensor and the same fixed individualized Na dialysate prescription or adjusted to obtain similar conductivity to phase 0; phases 3 and 4: activated Na control to isonatraemic dialysis (Na dialysate margins 135-141 or 134-142 mmol/L).

Results

When the Na control was activated, the few episodes of cramps or hypotension disappeared when the lower dialysate Na margin was increased by 1 or 2 mmol/L. The activated Na control module showed significant differences compared with baseline and the non-activated Na module in final serum Na values, diffusive Na balance, and changes in pre- to postdialysis plasma Na values. The mean predialysis systolic blood pressure value was significantly lower in phase 4 than in phase 1. There were no significant differences in total Na balance in the four 6008 phases evaluated.

Conclusions

The implementation of the automated dialysate Na control module is a useful new tool, which reduced the diffusive load of Na with good tolerance. The module had the advantages of reducing thirst, interdialytic weight gain and intradialytic plasma Na changes.

A first proof-of-concept for the non-invasive, time-efficient measurement of the plasma sodium concentration for individualized dialysis

Dialysis-induced changes in plasma sodium concentration may cause undesirable side effects. To prevent these, the sodium content in dialysis fluid has to be individualized based on the patient's plasma sodium concentration. In this paper, we describe a simple conductivity based method for measuring the plasma sodium concentration. The method is based on performing a bypass during which the residual volume on the dialysate side of the dialyzer at least partially adopts the sodium concentration on the blood side. The conductivity at dialysate outlet of the dialyzer after the end of bypass corresponds to the sodium concentration. We show that already 14 s of bypass are sufficient to subsequently measure a conductivity that correlates with the blood-side sodium concentration. Thus, the short bypass method allows a time saving of 88% compared to the long bypass of 120 s. In vitro experiments with bovine blood show that plasma sodium concentration can be non-invasively and time-efficiently measured during dialysis. Bland Altman analysis reveals a bias of 0.28 mmol/l and limits of agreement of -3.17 and 3.74 mmol/l for the long bypass. For the short bypass, bias is 0.09 mmol/l and limits are -3.90 and 4.08 mmol/l. Since the method presented is based on established conductivity cells, no additional sensors are required, so that the method could be easily implemented in dialysis machines. In future, performing a bypass at the beginning of a treatment may be used to adjust the composition of dialysis fluid individually for each patient.

Dialysate sodium management in hemodialysis and on-line hemodiafiltration: the single-pool kinetic model revisited

BACKGROUND

Determining the optimal dialysate sodium remains one of the challenges of hemodialysis prescription. Several arguments suggest that the dialysate sodium should be individually adjusted according to the patient's natremia. This strategy is greatly facilitated by using an algorithm. Only three such algorithms have been embedded in hemodialysis machines for the widespread generalization of this strategy in clinical routine: the Diacontrol (Hospal-Baxter Healthcare Corp., Deerfield, IL, USA), the HFR-Aequilibrium (Bellco-Medtronic, Dublin, Ireland) and the Na-control (Fresenius Medical Care, Bad-Homburg, Germany).

METHODS

Model the solute mass-transfer across the dialyzer membrane in online hemodiafiltration and adapt the Diacontrol algorithm based on a single-pool kinetic model of sodium balance for quantifying ionic balance and managing tonicity.

RESULTS

1) Substituting sodium measurements with conductivity measurements allows the control of tonicity which is a more physiological parameter than natremia. 2) Consideration of all ion exchanges as a whole and not just sodium exchange avoids some of the assumptions required by kinetic modeling of sodium balance. 3) Equations provided by the model are applicable to both hemodialysis and online hemodiafiltration. 4) The differences between this model used by Diacontrol and the models on which the other two software's (HFR-Aequilibrium and Na-control) are based are highlighted.

CONCLUSIONS

The single-pool kinetic model validated for the management of natremia in hemodialysis is also valid for the management of tonicity for both conventional hemodialysis and all online hemodiafiltration procedures.

Relationship between measured and prescribed dialysate sodium in haemodialysis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Dialysate sodium (DNa) prescription policy differs between haemodialysis (HD) units, and the optimal DNa remains uncertain. We sought to summarize the evidence on the agreement between prescribed and delivered DNa, and whether the relationship varied according to prescribed DNa.

Methods

We searched MEDLINE and PubMed from inception to 26 February 2020 for studies reporting measured and prescribed DNa. We analysed results reported in aggregate with random-effects meta-analysis. We analysed results reported by individual sample, using mixed-effects Bland–Altman analysis and linear regression. Pre-specified subgroup analyses included method of sodium measurement, dialysis machine manufacturer and proportioning method.

Results

Seven studies, representing 908 dialysate samples from 10 HD facilities (range 16–133 samples), were identified. All but one were single-centre studies. Studies were of low to moderate quality. Overall, there was no statistically significant difference between measured and prescribed DNa {mean difference = 0.73 mmol/L [95% confidence interval (CI) −1.12 to 2.58; P = 0.44]} but variability across studies was substantial (I2 = 99.3%). Among individually reported samples (n = 295), measured DNa was higher than prescribed DNa by 1.96 mmol/L (95% CI 0.23–3.69) and the 95% limits of agreement ranged from −3.97 to 7.88 mmol/L. Regression analysis confirmed a strong relationship between prescribed and measured DNa, with a slope close to 1:1 (β = 1.16, 95% CI 1.06–1.27; P &lt; 0.0001).

Conclusions

A limited number of studies suggest that, on average, prescribed and measured DNa are similar. However, between- and within-study differences were large. Further consideration of the precision of delivered DNa is required to inform rational prescribing.

Fluid and hemodynamic management in hemodialysis patients: challenges and opportunities

Fluid volume and hemodynamic management in hemodialysis patients is an essential component of dialysis adequacy. Restoring salt and water homeostasis in hemodialysis patients has been a permanent quest by nephrologists summarized by the ‘dry weight’ probing approach. Although this clinical approach has been associated with benefits on cardiovascular outcome, it is now challenged by recent studies showing that intensity or aggressiveness to remove fluid during intermittent dialysis is associated with cardiovascular stress and potential organ damage. A more precise approach is required to improve cardiovascular outcome in this high-risk population. Fluid status assessment and monitoring rely on four components: clinical assessment, non-invasive instrumental tools (e.g., US, bioimpedance, blood volume monitoring), cardiac biomarkers (e.g. natriuretic peptides), and algorithm and sodium modeling to estimate mass transfer. Optimal management of fluid and sodium imbalance in dialysis patients consist in adjusting salt and fluid removal by dialysis (ultrafiltration, dialysate sodium) and by restricting salt intake and fluid gain between dialysis sessions. Modern technology using biosensors and feedback control tools embarked on dialysis machine, with sophisticated analytics will provide direct handling of sodium and water in a more precise and personalized way. It is envisaged in the near future that these tools will support physician decision making with high potential of improving cardiovascular outcome.

Sodium and water handling during hemodialysis: new pathophysiologic insights and management approaches for improving outcomes in end-stage kidney disease

Space medicine and new technology such as magnetic resonance imaging of tissue sodium stores (²³NaMRI) have changed our understanding of human sodium homeostasis and pathophysiology. It has become evident that body sodium comprises 3 main components. Two compartments have been traditionally recognized, namely one that is circulating and systemically active via its osmotic action, and one slowly exchangeable pool located in the bones. The third, recently described pool represents sodium stored in skin and muscle interstitium, and it is implicated in cell and biologic activities via local hypertonicity and sodium clearance mechanisms. This in-depth review provides a comprehensive view on the pathophysiology and existing knowledge gaps of systemic hemodynamic and tissue sodium accumulation in dialysis patients. Furthermore, we discuss how the combination of novel technologies to quantitate tissue salt accumulation (e.g., ²³NaMRI) with devices to facilitate the precise attainment of a prescribed hemodialytic sodium mass balance (e.g., sodium and water balancing modules) will improve our therapeutic approach to sodium management in dialysis patients. While prospective studies are required, we think that these new diagnostic and sodium balancing tools will enhance our ability to pursue more personalized therapeutic interventions on sodium and water management, with the eventual goal of improving dialysis patient outcomes.

Automated individualization of dialysate sodium concentration reduces intradialytic plasma sodium changes in hemodialysis

In standard care, hemodialysis patients are often treated with a center‐specific fixed dialysate sodium concentration, potentially resulting in diffusive sodium changes for patients with plasma sodium concentrations below or above this level. While diffusive sodium load may be associated with thirst and higher interdialytic weight gain, excessive diffusive sodium removal may cause intradialytic symptoms. In contrast, the new hemodialysis machine option “Na control” provides automated individualization of dialysate sodium during treatment with the aim to reduce such intradialytic sodium changes without the need to determine the plasma sodium concentration. This proof‐of‐principle study on sodium control was designed as a monocentric randomized controlled crossover trial: 32 patients with residual diuresis of ≤1000 mL/day were enrolled to be treated by high‐volume post‐dilution hemodiafiltration (HDF) for 2 weeks each with “Na control” (individually and automatically adjusted dialysate sodium concentration) versus “standard fixed Na” (fixed dialysate sodium 138 mmol/L), in randomized order. Pre‐ and post‐dialytic plasma sodium concentrations were determined at bedside by direct potentiometry. The study hypothesis consisted of 2 components: the mean plasma sodium change between the start and end of the treatment being within ±1.0 mmol/L for sodium‐controlled treatments, and a lower variability of the plasma sodium changes for “Na control” than for “standard fixed Na” treatments. Three hundred seventy‐two treatments of 31 adult chronic hemodialysis patients (intention‐to‐treat population) were analyzed. The estimate for the mean plasma sodium change was −0.53 mmol/L (95% confidence interval: [−1.04; −0.02] mmol/L) for “Na control” treatments and −0.95 mmol/L (95% CI: [−1.76; −0.15] mmol/L) for “standard fixed Na” treatments. The standard deviation of the plasma sodium changes was 1.39 mmol/L for “Na control” versus 2.19 mmol/L for “standard fixed Na” treatments (P = 0.0004). Whereas the 95% CI for the estimate for the mean plasma sodium change during “Na control” treatments marginally overlapped the lower border of the predefined margin ±1.0 mmol/L, the variability of intradialytic plasma sodium changes was lower during “Na control” versus “standard fixed Na” treatments. Thus, automated dialysate sodium individualization by “Na control” approaches isonatremic dialysis in the clinical setting.

Why Is Your Patient Still Short of Breath? Understanding the Complex Pathophysiology of Dyspnea in Chronic Kidney Disease

Dyspnea is one of the most common symptoms associated with CKD. It has a profound influence on the quality of life of CKD patients, and its underlying causes are often associated with a negative prognosis. However, its pathophysiology is poorly understood. While hemodialysis may address fluid overload, it often does not significantly improve breathlessness, suggesting multiple and co-existing alternative issues exist. The aim of this article is to discuss the main pathophysiologic mechanisms and the most important putative etiologies underlying dyspnea in CKD patients. Congestive heart failure, unrecognized chronic lung disease, pulmonary hypertension, lung fibrosis, air microembolism, dialyzer bio-incompatibility, anemia, sodium, and fluid overload are potential frequent causes of breathing disorders in this population. However, the relative contributions in any one given patient are poorly understood. Systemic inflammation is a common theme and contributes to the development of endothelial dysfunction, lung fibrosis, anemia, malnutrition, and muscle wasting. The introduction of novel multimodal imaging techniques, including pulmonary functional magnetic resonance imaging with inhaled contrast agents, could provide new insights into the pathophysiology of dyspnea in CKD patients and ultimately contribute to improving our clinical management of this symptom.

A neglected issue in dialysis practice: haemodialysate

The intended function of dialysate fluid is to correct the composition of uraemic blood to physiologic levels, both by reducing the concentration of uraemic toxins and correcting electrolyte and acid-base abnormalities. This is accomplished principally by formulating a dialysate whose constituent concentrations are set to approximate normal values in the body. Sodium balance is the cornerstone of intradialysis cardiovascular stability and good interdialytic blood pressure control; plasma potassium concentration and its intradialytic kinetics certainly play a role in the genesis of cardiac arrhythmias; calcium is related to haemodynamic stability, mineral bone disease and also cardiac arrhythmias; the role of magnesium is still controversial; lastly, acid buffering by means of base supplementation is one of the major roles of dialysis. In conclusion, learning about the art and the science of fashioning haemodialysates is one of the best ways to further the understanding of the pathophysiologic processes underlying myriad acid-base, fluid, electrolyte as well as blood pressure abnormalities of the uraemic patient on maintenance haemodialysis.