Basile Carlo, Casino Francesco Gaetano, Kalantar-Zadeh Kamyar
Clinical Research Branch, Division of Nephrology, Miulli General Hospital, 70121, Acquaviva delle Fonti, Italy.
Dialysis Centre SM2, Potenza, Italy.
J Nephrol. 2017 Aug;30(4):521-529. doi: 10.1007/s40620-017-0391-0. Epub 2017 Mar 23.
Most people who make the transition to maintenance dialysis therapy are treated with a fixed dose thrice-weekly hemodialysis regimen without considering their residual kidney function (RKF). The RKF provides effective and naturally continuous clearance of both small and middle molecules, plays a major role in metabolic homeostasis, nutritional status, and cardiovascular health, and aids in fluid management. The RKF is associated with better patient survival and greater health-related quality of life, although these effects may be confounded by patient comorbidities. Preservation of the RKF requires a careful approach, including regular monitoring, avoidance of nephrotoxins, gentle control of blood pressure to avoid intradialytic hypotension, and an individualized dialysis prescription including the consideration of incremental hemodialysis. There is currently no standardized method for applying incremental hemodialysis in practice. Infrequent (once- to twice-weekly) hemodialysis regimens are often used arbitrarily, without knowing which patients would benefit the most from them or how to escalate the dialysis dose as RKF declines over time. The recently heightened interest in incremental hemodialysis has been hindered by the current limitations of the urea kinetic models (UKM) which tend to overestimate the dialysis dose required in the presence of substantial RKF. This is due to an erroneous extrapolation of the equivalence between renal urea clearance (Kru) and dialyser urea clearance (Kd), correctly assumed by the UKM, to the clinical domain. In this context, each ml/min of Kd clears the urea from the blood just as 1 ml/min of Kru does. By no means should such kinetic equivalence imply that 1 ml/min of Kd is clinically equivalent to 1 ml/min of urea clearance provided by the native kidneys. A recent paper by Casino and Basile suggested a variable target model (VTM) as opposed to the fixed model, because the VTM gives more clinical weight to the RKF and allows less frequent hemodialysis treatments at lower RKF. The potentially important clinical and financial implications of incremental hemodialysis render it highly promising and warrant randomized controlled trials.
大多数开始维持性透析治疗的患者接受的是固定剂量的每周三次血液透析方案,而未考虑其残余肾功能(RKF)。残余肾功能可有效且自然地持续清除小分子和中分子物质,在代谢稳态、营养状况和心血管健康方面发挥重要作用,并有助于体液管理。尽管这些影响可能会因患者的合并症而混淆,但残余肾功能与患者更好的生存率和更高的健康相关生活质量相关。保留残余肾功能需要谨慎对待,包括定期监测、避免肾毒素、温和控制血压以避免透析中低血压,以及制定个体化透析方案,包括考虑递增血液透析。目前在实践中没有应用递增血液透析的标准化方法。不频繁(每周一到两次)的血液透析方案常常被随意使用,而不知道哪些患者会从中获益最大,也不知道随着残余肾功能随时间下降如何增加透析剂量。最近对递增血液透析的兴趣增加受到了尿素动力学模型(UKM)当前局限性的阻碍,该模型往往高估了存在大量残余肾功能时所需的透析剂量。这是由于将UKM正确假设的肾尿素清除率(Kru)和透析器尿素清除率(Kd)之间的等效性错误地外推到了临床领域。在这种情况下,每毫升/分钟的Kd从血液中清除尿素的方式与1毫升/分钟的Kru相同。但这种动力学等效性绝不应意味着1毫升/分钟的Kd在临床上等同于天然肾脏提供的1毫升/分钟的尿素清除率。卡西诺和巴西莱最近的一篇论文提出了一种可变目标模型(VTM),以取代固定模型,因为可变目标模型更重视残余肾功能,并允许在残余肾功能较低时减少血液透析治疗的频率。递增血液透析潜在的重要临床和经济意义使其极具前景,值得进行随机对照试验。