Feliciani Annalisa, Riva Maria Alessandra, Zerbi Simona, Ruggiero Pio, Plati Anna Rita, Cozzi Giorgio, Pedrini Luciano A
Department of Nephrology and Dialysis, Ospedale Bolognini, 24068-SERIATE, Bergamo, Italy.
Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2007 Jun;22(6):1672-9. doi: 10.1093/ndt/gfm023. Epub 2007 Mar 8.
Improvement in the uraemic toxicity profile obtained with the application of convective and mixed dialysis techniques has stimulated the development of more efficient strategies. Our study was a prospective randomized evaluation of the clinical and technical characteristics of two new haemodiafiltration (HDF) strategies, mixed HDF and mid-dilution HDF, which have recently been proposed with the aim of increasing efficiency and safety with respect to the standard traditional HDF infusion modes.
Ten stable patients on renal replacement therapy (mean age 64.7 +/- 8.2 years) were submitted in randomized sequence to one mid-week session of mid-dilution HDF and one of mixed HDF with trans-membrane pressure feedback control. All sessions were carried out under similar operating conditions and involved monitoring pressure within the internal dialyser compartments and calculating the rheological and hydraulic indexes. Efficiency in removing urea, phosphate and beta2-microglobulin (beta2-m) was tested.
In mixed HDF, safer and more effective flux/pressure conditions resulted in better preservation of the hydraulic and solute membrane permeability (mean in vivo ultrafiltration coefficient 36.9 +/- 3.9 vs 20.1 +/- 3.3 ml/h/mmHg) and ensured higher volume exchange (38.7 +/- 4.2 vs 35.3 +/- 6.5 l/session, P = 0.02) and greater efficiency in removing small and middle molecules (mean urea clearance: 274 +/- 42 vs 264 +/- 47 ml/min, P = 0.028; eKt/V: 1.78 +/- 0.22 vs 1.71 +/- 0.26, P = 0.036; mean phosphate clearance: 138 +/- 16 vs 116 +/- 45 ml/min, P = 0.2; mean beta2-m clearance: 81 +/- 13 vs 59 +/- 13 ml/min, P = 0.001).
Mixed HDF was the most efficient technique in the highest range of safe operating conditions. In mid-dilution HDF, high pressures generated inside the dialyser compromised membrane permeability and limited the total infusion rate, resulting in an overall reduction in solute removal.
对流和混合透析技术应用后尿毒症毒性特征的改善推动了更高效策略的发展。我们的研究是对两种新的血液透析滤过(HDF)策略,即混合HDF和中稀释HDF的临床和技术特征进行前瞻性随机评估,这两种策略最近被提出,旨在相对于标准传统HDF输注模式提高效率和安全性。
10名接受肾脏替代治疗的稳定患者(平均年龄64.7±8.2岁)按随机顺序接受一次中周时段的中稀释HDF治疗和一次采用跨膜压力反馈控制的混合HDF治疗。所有治疗均在相似的操作条件下进行,包括监测透析器内部隔室的压力并计算流变学和水力指标。测试了清除尿素、磷酸盐和β2-微球蛋白(β2-m)的效率。
在混合HDF中,更安全有效的通量/压力条件导致更好地保留水力和溶质膜通透性(平均体内超滤系数36.9±3.9对20.1±3.3 ml/h/mmHg),并确保更高的容量交换(38.7±4.2对35.3±6.5 l/次,P = 0.02)以及更高的清除小分子和中分子的效率(平均尿素清除率:274±42对264±47 ml/min,P = 0.028;eKt/V:1.78±0.22对1.71±0.26,P = 0.036;平均磷酸盐清除率:138±16对116±45 ml/min,P = 0.2;平均β2-m清除率:81±13对59±13 ml/min,P = 0.001)。
混合HDF是在最高安全操作条件范围内最有效的技术。在中稀释HDF中,透析器内部产生的高压损害了膜通透性并限制了总输注速率,导致溶质清除总体减少。