Kidney Health Service, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Herston, QLD 4029, Australia.
Faculty of Medicine, University of Queensland, Herston, QLD 4006, Australia.
Med Sci (Basel). 2024 Aug 4;12(3):38. doi: 10.3390/medsci12030038.
There has been growing interest in exploring combined interventions to achieve a more effective heparin-free treatment approach.
to evaluate combination of interventions compared to standard practice (intermittent flushes) to prevent clotting and consequently reduce premature interruptions of hemodialysis.
This open-label randomized controlled trial recruited chronic hemodialysis patients with contra-indication to systemic heparinization. Participants were randomized into one of five groups to receive different strategies of heparin-free hemodialysis treatment for up to three sessions.
the successful completion of hemodialysis without clotting.
the clotting of the air traps assessed by a semi-quantitative scale, online KT/V, and safety of the interventions.
Forty participants were recruited and randomized between May and December 2020. Participants showed similar baseline biochemistry results and coagulation profiles. The highest success rates were observed in group 3 (heparin-coated dialyzers combined with intermittent flushes) (100%) and group 5 (hemodiafiltration with online predilution combined with heparin-coated dialyzers), with 91% vs. the control (intermittent flushes) (64%). Group 2 (heparin-coated dialyzers alone) had the poorest success rate, with 38% of the sessions being prematurely terminated due to clotting. KT/V and clotting scores were similar between groups. No adverse events related to the trial interventions were observed.
The proposed combination of interventions may have had additive effects, leading to less frequent clotting and the premature termination of an HD/HDF session. Our study supports the feasibility of conducting a larger randomized controlled trial focusing on the efficacy of combined interventions for heparin-free HD in patients with a high risk of bleeding.
人们越来越感兴趣地探索联合干预措施,以实现更有效的无肝素治疗方法。
评估联合干预措施与标准实践(间歇性冲洗)相比,以预防凝血,从而减少血液透析的过早中断。
这项开放标签随机对照试验招募了有全身肝素化禁忌证的慢性血液透析患者。参与者被随机分为五组中的一组,接受不同的无肝素血液透析治疗策略,最多进行三个疗程。
无凝血成功完成血液透析。
通过半定量评分、在线 KT/V 和干预措施的安全性评估空气陷阱的凝血情况。
2020 年 5 月至 12 月期间共招募了 40 名参与者并进行了随机分组。参与者的基线生化结果和凝血特征相似。最高的成功率出现在第 3 组(肝素包被透析器联合间歇性冲洗)(100%)和第 5 组(在线预稀释血液滤过联合肝素包被透析器),成功率为 91%,而对照组(间歇性冲洗)为 64%。第 2 组(单独肝素包被透析器)的成功率最低,有 38%的疗程因凝血而提前终止。各组间 KT/V 和凝血评分相似。未观察到与试验干预相关的不良事件。
所提出的联合干预措施可能具有附加效应,导致凝血较少且血液透析/血液透析滤过疗程过早终止。我们的研究支持开展更大规模的随机对照试验的可行性,该试验侧重于高出血风险患者无肝素血液透析联合干预措施的疗效。