Using more frequent haemodialysis to manage volume overload in dialysis patients with heart failure, obesity or pregnancy.

Managing dialysis in patients with heart failure, pregnancy or obesity is complex. More frequent haemodialysis 5-6 days/week in randomized clinical trials has shown benefits for controlling volume overload, blood pressure and phosphorus, reducing left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH), and improving patient tolerance to therapy. Therapy prescriptions were guided by volume of urea cleared, time-integrated fluid loading control and increased phosphate-ß2 microglobulin removal, with greater treatment frequency to address clinical efficacy targets. Case studies in all three categories show that treatment with more frequent haemodialysis in low-dialysate flow systems (Qd <200 mL/min, dialysate of 25-30 L/session, 5-7 days/week for 2.5-3.0 h/session) improves control of heart failure. In pregnancy, treatment 7 days/week with 30 L and 3 h/session of dialysis enabled successful delivery of infants at 32-34 weeks, with all doing well 2-5 years after birth. Obese patients with a body mass index (BMI) >35 achieved control of volume, blood pressure and uraemic symptoms compared to their prior 3 times/week in-centre haemodialysis. Greater application of more frequent haemodialysis should be considered, particularly in high-risk populations, to improve clinical care.

Integrated care: enhancing transition from renal replacement therapy options to home haemodialysis.

Transition is an intrinsic process in the life of a patient with kidney disease and should be planned and anticipated when possible. A single therapy option might not be adequate across a patient's entire lifespan and many patients will require a switch in their treatment modality to adapt the treatment to their clinical and psychosocial needs. There are several reasons behind changing a patient's treatment modality, and the consequences of each decision should be evaluated, considering both short- and long-term benefits and risks. Dialysis modality transition is not only to allow for technical optimization or improved patient survival, the patient's experience associated with the transition should also be taken into account. Transition should not be considered as treatment failure, but rather as an expected progression in the patient's treatment options.

Nocturnal home hemodialysis with low-flow dialysate: Retrospective analysis of the first European patients.

INTRODUCTION: Despite mounting evidence that increased frequency and duration of hemodialysis (HD) improves outcomes, less than 1% of HD patients worldwide receive nocturnal hemodialysis (NHD). Many perceived barriers exist to providing NHD and increasing its provision. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of nocturnal therapy using a low-flow dialysate system in 4 European centers for a minimum of 12 months, with data collected on patient demographics, training times, safety features, medications, and biochemical parameters at baseline and at 6 and 12 months. FINDINGS: Data were collected on 21 patients, with 12-month analysis available for 20 patients. Mean dialysis duration was 28 hours per week, with most dialysis on an alternate night regimen using 50-60 L of dialysate per session. All vascular access types were represented, and low molecular weight heparin was used as a bolus. All biochemical parameters met European standards, with a trend for improvement in standardized Kt/V, phosphate, hemoglobin, and albumin. There was a significant reduction in phosphate binder usage and a reduction in blood pressure medication. Training time was 9.6 sessions for independence at home, with 2 additional sessions to transition to NHD. Additional safety features included an alarmed drip tray under the cycler and moisture sensors under the venous needle (all patients used dual-cannulation technique). No patient safety events were reported. DISCUSSION: These data support the use of a low-flow dialysate system for provision of NHD at home. Biochemical parameters were good, medication burden was reduced at 12 months, and all patients received more than double the duration of HD provided in standard in-center units. While patient numbers were small, low-flow dialysis in this cohort was both effective and safe. Use of this alternative HD system could reduce some of the barriers to NHD, increasing the uptake of therapy in Europe, and improving long-term patient outcomes.

Renal Association Clinical Practice Guideline on Haemodialysis.

This guideline is written primarily for doctors and nurses working in dialysis units and related areas of medicine in the UK, and is an update of a previous version written in 2009. It aims to provide guidance on how to look after patients and how to run dialysis units, and provides standards which units should in general aim to achieve. We would not advise patients to interpret the guideline as a rulebook, but perhaps to answer the question: "what does good quality haemodialysis look like?"The guideline is split into sections: each begins with a few statements which are graded by strength (1 is a firm recommendation, 2 is more like a sensible suggestion), and the type of research available to back up the statement, ranging from A (good quality trials so we are pretty sure this is right) to D (more like the opinion of experts than known for sure). After the statements there is a short summary explaining why we think this, often including a discussion of some of the most helpful research. There is then a list of the most important medical articles so that you can read further if you want to - most of this is freely available online, at least in summary form.A few notes on the individual sections: 1. This section is about how much dialysis a patient should have. The effectiveness of dialysis varies between patients because of differences in body size and age etc., so different people need different amounts, and this section gives guidance on what defines "enough" dialysis and how to make sure each person is getting that. Quite a bit of this section is very technical, for example, the term "eKt/V" is often used: this is a calculation based on blood tests before and after dialysis, which measures the effectiveness of a single dialysis session in a particular patient. 2. This section deals with "non-standard" dialysis, which basically means anything other than 3 times per week. For example, a few people need 4 or more sessions per week to keep healthy, and some people are fine with only 2 sessions per week - this is usually people who are older, or those who have only just started dialysis. Special considerations for children and pregnant patients are also covered here. 3. This section deals with membranes (the type of "filter" used in the dialysis machine) and "HDF" (haemodiafiltration) which is a more complex kind of dialysis which some doctors think is better. Studies are still being done, but at the moment we think it's as good as but not better than regular dialysis. 4. This section deals with fluid removal during dialysis sessions: how to remove enough fluid without causing cramps and low blood pressure. Amongst other recommendations we advise close collaboration with patients over this. 5. This section deals with dialysate, which is the fluid used to "pull" toxins out of the blood (it is sometimes called the "bath"). The level of things like potassium in the dialysate is important, otherwise too much or too little may be removed. There is a section on dialysate buffer (bicarbonate) and also a section on phosphate, which occasionally needs to be added into the dialysate. 6. This section is about anticoagulation (blood thinning) which is needed to stop the circuit from clotting, but sometimes causes side effects. 7. This section is about certain safety aspects of dialysis, not seeking to replace well-established local protocols, but focussing on just a few where we thought some national-level guidance would be useful. 8. This section draws together a few aspects of dialysis which don't easily fit elsewhere, and which impact on how dialysis feels to patients, rather than the medical outcome, though of course these are linked. This is where home haemodialysis and exercise are covered. There is an appendix at the end which covers a few aspects in more detail, especially the mathematical ideas. Several aspects of dialysis are not included in this guideline since they are covered elsewhere, often because they are aspects which affect non-dialysis patients too. This includes: anaemia, calcium and bone health, high blood pressure, nutrition, infection control, vascular access, transplant planning, and when dialysis should be started.

Home hemodialysis treatment and outcomes: retrospective analysis of the Knowledge to Improve Home Dialysis Network in Europe (KIHDNEy) cohort.

BACKGROUND: Utilization of home hemodialysis (HHD) is low in Europe. The Knowledge to Improve Home Dialysis Network in Europe (KIHDNEy) is a multi-center study of HHD patients who have used a transportable hemodialysis machine that employs a low volume of lactate-buffered, ultrapure dialysate per session. In this retrospective cohort analysis, we describe patient factors, HHD prescription factors, and biochemistry and medication use during the first 6 months of HHD and rates of clinical outcomes thereafter. METHODS: Using a standardized digital form, we recorded data from 7 centers in 4 Western European countries. We retained patients who completed ≥6 months of HHD. We summarized patient and HHD prescription factors with descriptive statistics and used mixed modeling to assess trends in biochemistry and medication use. We also estimated long-term rates of kidney transplant and death. RESULTS: We identified 129 HHD patients; 104 (81%) were followed for ≥6 months. Mean age was 49 years and 66% were male. Over 70% of patients were prescribed 6 sessions per week, and the mean treatment duration was 15.0 h per week. Median HHD training duration was 2.5 weeks. Mean standard Kt/Vurea was nearly 2.7 at months 3 and 6. Pre-dialysis biochemistry was generally stable. Between baseline and month 6, mean serum bicarbonate increased from 23.1 to 24.1 mmol/L (P = 0.01), mean serum albumin increased from 36.8 to 37.8 g/L (P = 0.03), mean serum C-reactive protein increased from 7.3 to 12.4 mg/L (P = 0.05), and mean serum potassium decreased from 4.80 to 4.59 mmol/L (P = 0.01). Regarding medication use, the mean number of antihypertensive medications fell from 1.46 agents per day at HHD initiation to 1.01 agents per day at 6 months (P < 0.001), but phosphate binder use and erythropoiesis-stimulating agent dose were stable. Long-term rates of kidney transplant and death were 15.3 and 5.4 events per 100 patient-years, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Intensive HHD with low-flow dialysate delivers adequate urea clearance and good biochemical outcomes in Western European patients. Intensive HHD coincided with a large decrease in antihypertensive medication use. With relatively rapid training, HHD should be considered in more patients.

Acute kidney injury in patients with decompensated heart failure.

Decompensated heart failure is one of the leading causes of acute hospital admission in the UK. Worsening renal function, essentially reflecting acute kidney injury, is frequently encountered in such patients and is associated with significantly worse outcome. Recognition and appropriate management of such patients is vital.

Spontaneous gall bladder haemorrhage in a renal dialysis patient following haemodialysis with tinzaparin.

Spontaneous gall bladder haemorrhage is a rare and serious occurrence with a few cases reported in the literature in haemodialysis patients. This report describes this complication following dialysis with a low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) tinzaparin. This patient presented with acute right upper quadrant pain and intermittent haematemesis following 4 hours of haemodialysis. Despite being well established on dialysis, LMWH had only been used once previously. There was no history of trauma or pre-existing gall bladder pathology and no clinical or biochemical evidence of inflammation or infection. Computed tomography (CT) scan revealed an extensive gall bladder haemorrhage. The patient was treated conservatively with analgesia, and blood transfusion and symptoms settled without intervention. This case report highlights a rare site of bleeding following LMWH use in a haemodialysis patient.