Indiana University Medical School, Indianapolis, IN.
Department of Nephrology and Hypertension, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH.
Am J Kidney Dis. 2016 Nov;68(5S1):S51-S58. doi: 10.1053/j.ajkd.2016.05.020.
Although intensive hemodialysis (HD) can address important clinical problems, increasing treatment also introduces risks. In this review, we assess risks pertaining to 6 domains: vascular access complications, infection, mortality, loss of residual kidney function, solute balance, and patient and care partner burden. In the Frequent Hemodialysis Network (FHN) trials, short daily and nocturnal schedules increased the incidence of access complications, although the incidence of access loss was not statistically higher. Observational studies indicate that infection-related hospitalization is an ongoing challenge with short daily HD. Excess risk may be catalyzed by poor infection control practices in the home setting in which intensive HD is typically delivered, but with fixed probability of bacterial contamination per cannulation, greater treatment frequency necessarily increases the risk for infectious complications. Buttonhole cannulation may increase the risk for metastatic infections. However, intensive HD in the home setting is associated with lower risk for infection than peritoneal dialysis. Data regarding mortality are equivocal. With extended follow-up of individuals in the FHN trials, short daily HD was associated with lower risk relative to the usual schedule, whereas nocturnal HD was associated with higher risk. In many, but not all, observational studies, short daily HD has been associated with lower risk than both in-center HD and peritoneal dialysis; however, observational studies are subject to unmeasured confounding. Intensive HD can accelerate the loss of residual kidney function in new dialysis patients with substantial urine output and can deplete solutes (eg, phosphorus) to the extent that supplementation is necessary. Finally, intensive HD may increase burden on patients and caregivers, possibly leading to technique failure. Some of these problems might be addressed with careful monitoring, so that relevant interventions (eg, antibiotics, retraining, and respite care) can be delivered. Ultimately, intensive HD is not a panacea for end-stage renal disease. Potential benefits and risks of treatment should be jointly considered.
尽管强化血液透析(HD)可以解决重要的临床问题,但增加治疗也会带来风险。在这篇综述中,我们评估了与 6 个领域相关的风险:血管通路并发症、感染、死亡率、残余肾功能丧失、溶质平衡以及患者和护理人员负担。在频繁血液透析网络(FHN)试验中,短时间每日和夜间方案增加了通路并发症的发生率,尽管通路丧失的发生率没有统计学上更高。观察性研究表明,短时间每日 HD 存在与感染相关的住院治疗持续存在的挑战。风险增加可能是由于在家中进行强化 HD 时,感染控制实践不佳,但每次插管的细菌污染概率固定,治疗频率增加必然会增加感染并发症的风险。扣眼穿刺可能会增加转移性感染的风险。然而,家庭环境中的强化 HD 与腹膜透析相比,感染风险较低。关于死亡率的数据尚无定论。随着 FHN 试验中个体的随访时间延长,短时间每日 HD 与常规方案相比,风险较低,而夜间 HD 与更高的风险相关。在许多但不是所有的观察性研究中,短时间每日 HD 与中心 HD 和腹膜透析相比,风险较低;然而,观察性研究易受未测量的混杂因素影响。强化 HD 可能会加速新透析患者具有大量尿液的残余肾功能丧失,并耗尽溶质(如磷),以至于需要补充。最后,强化 HD 可能会增加患者和护理人员的负担,可能导致技术失败。一些问题可能通过仔细监测得到解决,以便可以提供相关干预措施(例如,抗生素、再培训和休息护理)。最终,强化 HD 并不是治疗终末期肾病的万灵药。治疗的潜在益处和风险应共同考虑。