Park Kyoung Sook, Kang Ea Wha, Chang Tae Ik, Jo Wonji, Park Jung Tak, Yoo Tae-Hyun, Kang Shin-Wook, Han Seung Hyeok
Department of Internal Medicine, National Health Insurance Service Ilsan Hospital, Goyang, Republic of Korea.
Department of Internal Medicine, Institute of Kidney Disease Research, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Kidney Res Clin Pract. 2021 Sep;40(3):445-456. doi: 10.23876/j.krcp.21.044. Epub 2021 Jul 30.
The use of newly developed mixed-dilution hemodiafiltration (HDF) can supplement the weaknesses of pre- and postdilution HDF. However, it is unclear whether mixed-HDF performs well compared to predilution HDF.
We conducted a prospective, open-labeled, randomized controlled trial from two hemodialysis centers in Korea. Between January 2017 and September 2019, 60 patients who underwent chronic hemodialysis were randomly assigned at a 1:1 ratio to receive either predilution HDF (n = 30) or mixed-HDF (n = 30) for 6 months. We compared convection volume, changes in small- and medium-sized molecule clearance, high-sensitive C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) level, and dialysis-related parameters between the two dialysis modalities.
A mean effective convection volume of 41.0 ± 10.3 L/session in the predilution HDF group and 51.5 ± 9.0 L/session in the mixed-HDF group was obtained by averaging values of three time-points. The difference in effective convection volume between the groups was 10.5 ± 1.3 L/session. This met the preset noninferiority criteria, suggesting that mixed-HDF was noninferior to predilution HDF. Moreover, the β2-microglobulin reduction rate was greater in the mixed-HDF group than in the predilution HDF group, while mixed-HDF provided greater transmembrane pressure. There were no significant between-group differences in Kt/V urea levels, changes in predialysis hs-CRP levels, proportions of overhydration, or blood pressure values. Symptomatic intradialytic hypotension episodes and other adverse events occurred similarly in the two groups.
Use of mixed-HDF was comparable to predilution HDF in terms of delivered convection volume and clinical parameters. Moreover, mixed-HDF provided better β2-microglobulin clearance than predilution HDF.
新开发的混合稀释血液透析滤过(HDF)的应用可以弥补前稀释和后稀释HDF的不足。然而,与前稀释HDF相比,混合HDF的效果是否良好尚不清楚。
我们在韩国的两个血液透析中心进行了一项前瞻性、开放标签、随机对照试验。在2017年1月至2019年9月期间,60例接受慢性血液透析的患者按1:1比例随机分组,分别接受前稀释HDF(n = 30)或混合HDF(n = 30)治疗6个月。我们比较了两种透析方式的对流体积、中小分子清除率的变化、高敏C反应蛋白(hs-CRP)水平以及透析相关参数。
通过对三个时间点的值进行平均,前稀释HDF组的平均有效对流体积为41.0±10.3L/次,混合HDF组为51.5±9.0L/次。两组之间的有效对流体积差异为10.5±1.3L/次。这符合预设的非劣效性标准,表明混合HDF不劣于前稀释HDF。此外,混合HDF组的β2-微球蛋白降低率高于前稀释HDF组,而混合HDF提供了更高的跨膜压力。两组之间在Kt/V尿素水平、透析前hs-CRP水平的变化、水负荷过重比例或血压值方面没有显著差异。两组中症状性透析中低血压发作和其他不良事件的发生情况相似。
在输送的对流体积和临床参数方面,混合HDF的使用与前稀释HDF相当。此外,混合HDF比前稀释HDF提供更好的β2-微球蛋白清除率。