Low dialysate sodium in children and young adults on maintenance hemodialysis: a prospective, randomized, crossover study

BACKGROUND

The optimal dialysate sodium concentration (dNa) in children on hemodialysis (HD) is unknown. The aim of this study was to compare the effect on interdialytic weight gain (IDWG) and blood pressure (BP) of a low (135 mmol/l) and standard dNa (138 mmol/l) in children and young adults on maintenance HD.

METHODS

This prospective single-blind randomized crossover study consisted of a randomized sequence of two phases: "standard dNa" of 138 mmol/L and "low dNa" of 135 mmol/L. Each phase lasted 4 weeks. Inclusion criteria were age < 25 years, hypertension, pre-HD serum Na (sNa) ≥ 130 mmol/L, and occurrence of symptoms in less than 25% of sessions. Primary outcomes were pre-HD systolic and diastolic BP and IDWG.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients were recruited, mean age 17.8 ± 4.4 years. Pre-HD SBP and DBP were not different between the two treatments. Mean IDWG was significantly lower with low dNa than with standard dNa: 2.12 ± 1.39% vs. 2.77 ± 1.53%, respectively (p = 0.008). The first-hour refill index (a volume index based on blood-volume monitoring) was significantly lower with dNa 135 mmol/L (p = 0.018). The mean Na gradient (dNa-sNa) was - 2.53 ± 2.4 mmol/L with dNa 135 mmol/L and 0.17 ± 2.8 mmol/L with dNa 138 mmol/L (p = 0.0001). The incidence of symptomatic sessions was similar (1.0% vs. 1.0%).

CONCLUSIONS

In a selected population of hypertensive pediatric and young adult HD patients, a dNa of 135 mmol/L was associated with a significant reduction of IDWG compared with a dNa of 138 mmol/L. Furthermore, long-term studies are needed to investigate the effect of lowering dNa on BP. A higher resolution version of the Graphical abstract is available as Supplementary information.

Executive summary of the Korean Society of Nephrology 2021 clinical practice guideline for optimal hemodialysis treatment

The Korean Society of Nephrology (KSN) has published a clinical practice guideline (CPG) document for maintenance hemodialysis (HD). The document, 2021 Clinical Practice Guideline on Optimal HD Treatment, is based on an extensive evidence-oriented review of the benefits of preparation, initiation, and maintenance therapy for HD, with the participation of representative experts from the KSN under the methodologists' support for guideline development. It was intended to help clinicians participating in HD treatment make safer and more effective clinical decisions by providing user-friendly guidelines. We hope that this CPG will be meaningful as a recommendation in practice, but not on a regulatory rule basis, as different approaches and treatments may be used by health care providers depending on the individual patient's condition. This CPG consists of eight sections and 15 key questions. Each begins with statements that are graded by the strength of recommendations and quality of the evidence. Each statement is followed by a summary of the evidence supporting the recommendations. There are also a link to full-text documents and lists of the most important reports so that the readers can read further (most of this is available online).

Executive Summary of the Korean Society of Nephrology 2021 Clinical Practice Guideline for Optimal Hemodialysis Treatment

The Korean Society of Nephrology (KSN) has published a clinical practice guideline (CPG) document for maintenance hemodialysis (HD). The document, 2021 Clinical Practice Guideline on Optimal HD Treatment, is based on an extensive evidence-oriented review of the benefits of preparation, initiation, and maintenance therapy for HD, with the participation of representative experts from the KSN under the methodologists’ support for guideline development. It was intended to help clinicians participating in HD treatment make safer and more effective clinical decisions by providing user-friendly guidelines. We hope that this CPG will be meaningful as a recommendation in practice, but not on a regulatory rule basis, as different approaches and treatments may be used by health care providers depending on the individual patient’s condition. This CPG consists of eight sections and 15 key questions. Each begins with statements that are graded by the strength of recommendations and quality of the evidence. Each statement is followed by a summary of the evidence supporting the recommendations. There is also a link to full-text documents and lists of the most important reports so that the readers can read further (most of this is available online).

Integrated strategies to prevent intradialytic hypotension: research protocol of the DialHypot study, a prospective randomised clinical trial in hypotension-prone haemodialysis patients

INTRODUCTION

In patients on maintenance haemodialysis (HD), intradialytic hypotension (IDH) is a clinical problem that nephrologists and dialysis nurses face daily in their clinical routine. Despite the technological advances in the field of HD, the incidence of hypotensive events occurring during a standard dialytic treatment is still very high. Frequently recurring hypotensive episodes during HD sessions expose patients not only to severe immediate complications but also to a higher mortality risk in the medium term. Various strategies aimed at preventing IDH are currently available, but there is lack of conclusive data on more integrated approaches combining different interventions.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a prospective, randomised, open-label, crossover trial (each subject will be used as his/her own control) that will be performed in two distinct phases, each of which is divided into several subphases. In the first phase, 27 HD sessions for each patient will be used, and will be aimed at the validation of a new ultrafiltration (UF) profile, designed with an ascending/descending shape, and a standard dialysate sodium concentration. In the second phase, 33 HD sessions for each patient will be used and will be aimed at evaluating the combination of different UF and sodium profiling strategies through individualised dialysate sodium concentration.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The trial protocol has been reviewed and approved by the local Institutional Ethics Committee (Comitato Etico AVEN, prot. 43391 22.10.19). The results of the trial will be presented at local and international conferences and submitted for publication to a peer-reviewed journal.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT03949088).

Uncertainties in BP management in dialysis patients

Hypertension in dialysis patients is extremely common. In this article, we review the current evidence for blood pressure (BP) goals in hemodialysis patients, and consider the effectiveness of interventions by which BP may be lowered, including manipulation of dietary and dialysate sodium; optimization of extracellular water; prolongation of dialysis time; and antihypertensive medication. Although two meta-analyses suggest lowering BP using antihypertensive drugs might be beneficial in reducing cardiovascular events and mortality, there are insufficient rigorously designed trials in hypertensive hemodialysis populations to determine preferred antihypertensive drug classes. We suggest aiming for predialysis systolic BP between 130 and 159 mm Hg, while at the same time acknowledge the significant limitations of the data upon which it is based. We conclude by summarizing current knowledge as regards management of hypertension in the peritoneal dialysis population and make recommendations for future research in this field.

Effect of Improving Volume Overload on Home Blood Pressure Variability in Hemodialysis Patients

Blood pressure variability is an independent predictor of adverse clinical events in hemodialysis patients. Volume overload is one of the most important factors affecting blood pressure homeostasis. In the present study, we explored the effects of dry weight reduction on home blood pressure variability in volume overload hemodialysis patients. Hemodialysis patients with volume overload had their dry weight gradually decreased under the guidance of bioimpedance methods, which was represented by calf-bioimpedance ratio (Calf-BR). Home blood pressure was measured on waking up and at bedtime for 1 week at baseline and at the end of the two-month study. Coefficient of variation was used to define home blood pressure variability. Thirty-eight hemodialysis patients had their dry weight significantly decreased from 60.7 ± 11.3 to 59.6 ± 10.7 kg (P = 0.003) accompanied with a significant reduction in calf-BR (0.828 ± 0.023 vs. 0.786 ± 0.020, P<0.001). The systolic and diastolic blood pressure decreased significantly. Moreover, the whole-day, morning, and evening systolic blood pressure variability gradually and significantly decreased by the end of the study (5.6 ± 2.1% versus 4.0 ± 1.7%, P<0.001; 7.7 ± 3.5% vs. 6.3 ± 2.7%, P = 0.005; 7.5 ± 2.8% vs. 5.9 ± 2.3%, P = 0.002, respectively). Diastolic blood pressure variability parameters were unchanged. The interdialytic weight gain and the incidence of adverse events were similar throughout the study period. Gradual dry weight reduction by bioimpedance methods improved home blood pressure variability in hemodialysis patients with chronic fluid overload.

Impact of Dialysate Sodium Concentration Lowering on Home Blood Pressure Variability in Hemodialysis Patients

Blood pressure variability is an independent risk factor for mortality and cardiovascular events in hemodialysis patients. Dialysate sodium concentration may not only have effects on blood pressure but also on blood pressure variability. We investigated whether dialysate sodium concentration lowering could decrease home blood pressure variability in hemodialysis patients. Forty-three hemodialysis patients at their dry weight assessed by bioimpedance methods with pre-dialysis serum sodium >136 mmol/L were recruited. Firstly, patients underwent a 1-month standard dialysis with dialysate sodium concentration of 138 mmol/L, and then the dialysate sodium concentration was decreased to 136 mmol/L for 8 weeks. Home blood pressure was assessed on waking up and at bedtime for 1 week. Coefficient of variation was used to define home blood pressure variability. After the intervention, whole-day systolic blood pressure variability decreased from 5.7 ± 2.6% to 4.3 ± 1.7% and evening systolic blood pressure variability decreased from 7.9 ± 4.1% to 6.2 ± 3.1%. Morning systolic blood pressure variability had a reduction from 7.8 ± 2.4% to 5.9 ± 3.3% but did not achieve statistical significance (P = 0.077). Whole-day, morning and evening systolic blood pressure were decreased significantly. Less changes were observed in diastolic blood pressure parameters. Interdialytic weight gain mildly but significantly decreased. Volume parameters, dietary sodium intake and incidence of adverse events were similar throughout the study period. Lowering dialysate sodium concentration could improve home blood pressure variability among hemodialysis patients who had achieved their dry weight.

Why does the choice of dialysate sodium concentration remain controversial?

The choice of the ideal dialysate sodium concentration remains controversial. Most dialysis centers have a standard dialysate concentration. In theory, choosing a dialysate sodium concentration lower than serum sodium should result in an additional loss of sodium by diffusion with a reduction in the prevalence of hypertension and interdialytic weight gains (IDWGs) on one hand, but with potential increased risk of intradialytic hypotension and cramps on the other hand, and the opposite effects may accompany the choice of dialysate sodium concentrations greater than serum concentration. Although most studies have reported a reduction in IDWG with lower dialysate sodium concentrations, the effects on blood pressure control, and adverse intradialytic events have been variable. Different outcomes between studies may be partially explained by patient selection, with differences in dietary sodium intake, urinary sodium losses, and sodium stores in the body. In addition, multicenter trials potentially introduce additional confounders, including differences in local quality control of delivered dialysate sodium concentration and sodium measurements. Although there may be advantages for lower dialysate sodium concentration, observational studies have reported a survival advantage for higher dialysate sodium concentrations for those patients with lower serum sodium concentrations pre-dialysis. As there is no current consensus for a universal dialysate sodium concentration, attention has turned to considering an individualized approach to choosing a dialysate sodium concentration.

The influence of time point of blood pressure measurement on the outcome in hemodialysis patients

The blood pressure (BP) behaviors of hemodialysis (HD) population presented a unique pattern much different from that of the general population. This pattern is composed of chronic BP burden over interdialytic period and acute BP fluctuation during dialysis sessions. Peridialysis, interdialysis, and intradialysis are three routinely used time points to capture this complex BP behavior. However, BP at each time point was measured in various forms and conveyed different prognostic information. The measurement and interpretation of the tide-like BP behavior in HD population posed great challenge. In this review, we focused on the prognostic information of the BP behavior at each time point in HD patients and further discussed the optimal measurement of this unique BP behavior to best capture the BP-outcome association.

Epidemiology, diagnosis and management of hypertension among patients on chronic dialysis

The diagnosis and management of hypertension among patients on chronic dialysis is challenging. Routine peridialytic blood pressure recordings are unable to accurately diagnose hypertension and stratify cardiovascular risk. By contrast, blood pressure recordings taken outside the dialysis setting exhibit clear prognostic associations with survival and might facilitate the diagnosis and long-term management of hypertension. Once accurately diagnosed, management of hypertension in individuals on chronic dialysis should initially involve non-pharmacological strategies to control volume overload. Accordingly, first-line strategies should focus on achieving dry weight, individualizing dialysate sodium concentrations and ensuring dialysis sessions are at least 4 h in duration. If blood pressure remains unresponsive to volume management strategies, pharmacological treatment is required. The choice of appropriate antihypertensive regimen should be individualized taking into account the efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetic properties of the antihypertensive medications as well as any comorbid conditions and the overall risk profile of the patient. In contrast to their effects in the general hypertensive population, emerging evidence suggests that β-blockers might offer the greatest cardioprotection in hypertensive patients on dialysis. In this Review, we discuss estimates of the epidemiology of hypertension in the dialysis population as well as the challenges in diagnosing and managing hypertension among these patients.

Comparison of Prescribed and Measured Dialysate Sodium: A Quality Improvement Project

BACKGROUND

There is controversy regarding the optimal dialysate sodium concentration for hemodialysis patients. Dialysate sodium concentrations of 134 to 138 mEq/L may decrease interdialytic weight gain and improve hypertension control, whereas a higher dialysate sodium concentration may offer protection to patients with low serum sodium concentrations and hypotension. We conducted a quality improvement project to explore the hypothesis that prescribed and delivered dialysate sodium concentrations may differ significantly.

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional quality improvement project.

SETTING & PARTICIPANTS

333 hemodialysis treatments in 4 facilities operated by Dialysis Clinic, Inc.

QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PLAN

Measure dialysate sodium to assess the relationships of prescribed and measured dialysate sodium concentrations.

OUTCOMES

Magnitude of differences between prescribed and measured dialysate sodium concentrations.

MEASUREMENTS

Dialysate sodium measured pre- and late dialysis.

RESULTS

The least square mean of the difference between prescribed minus measured dialysate sodium concentration was -2.48 (95% CI, -2.87 to -2.10) mEq/L. Clinics with a greater number of different dialysate sodium prescriptions (clinic 1, n=8; clinic 2, n=7) and that mixed dialysate concentrates on site had greater differences between prescribed and measured dialysate sodium concentrations. Overall, 57% of measured dialysate sodium concentrations were within ±2 mEq/L of the prescribed dialysate sodium concentration. Differences were greater at higher prescribed dialysate sodium concentrations.

LIMITATIONS

We only studied 4 facilities and dialysate delivery machines from 2 manufacturers. Because clinics using premixed dialysate used the same type of machine, we were unable to independently assess the impact of these factors. Pressures in dialysate delivery loops were not measured.

CONCLUSIONS

There were significant differences between prescribed and measured dialysate sodium concentrations. This may have beneficial or deleterious effects on clinical outcomes, as well as confound results from studies assessing the relationships of dialysate sodium concentrations to outcomes. Additional studies are needed to identify factors that contribute to differences between prescribed and measured dialysate sodium concentrations. Quality assurance and performance improvement (QAPI) programs should include measurements of dialysate sodium.

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.

Dialysate sodium prescription and blood pressure in hemodialysis patients

BACKGROUND

Diffusive sodium removal has been recommended to control hypertension in hemodialysis patients. Recent evidence on hospitalizations and mortality, however, challenged the benefit of lower dialysate sodium prescriptions and ignited a debate in the dialysis community. We therefore studied the relationship between dialysate sodium and blood pressure over the longer term.

METHODS

We used multiply adjusted linear mixed models to estimate the association between dialysate sodium and predialysis systolic blood pressure (SBP) as well as change in SBP (delta SBP; postdialysis minus predialysis) in 23,962 patients from the international Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study.

RESULTS

We found that 43% of hemodialysis facilities had variable (individualized) dialysate sodium prescriptions (125-155 mEq/L), whereas 57% had uniform dialysate sodium prescriptions (135-145 mEq/L) for ≥90% patients. Between-group comparisons of these 2 facility types suggested that dialysate sodium, when variably prescribed, might have been used to modify predialysis SBP (P interaction = 0.01) and perhaps delta SBP levels (P interaction = 0.08). Within facilities not prone to indication bias, because dialysate sodium was not variable, higher uniform dialysate sodium (per 2 mEq/L) was associated with slightly higher SBP (+0.9 mm Hg, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.1-1.6 among all patients; +1.7 mm Hg, 95% CI = 0.1-3.2 among patients not treated with blood pressure medication) and no increase in delta SBP.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients assigned to hemodialysis facilities with uniformly higher dialysate sodium do not have markedly higher predialysis SBP, providing rather limited support for lowering dialysate sodium to control hypertension, particularly in view of hospitalization and mortality risks associated with lower dialysate sodium.