Factors associated with parathyroid hormone control in haemodialysis patients with secondary hyperparathyroidism treated with cinacalcet in real-world clinical practice: Mimosa study.

BACKGROUND: Secondary hyperparathyroidism (SHPT) is frequent in haemodialysis (HD) patients. Oral cinacalcet-hydrochloride (HCl) decreases parathyroid hormone (PTH); however, real-life PTH data, according to Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) guidelines, are still lacking. Our goal is to assess the percentage of cinacalcet-HCl-treated HD patients with controlled SHPT (PTH <9× upper limit of the normal range) after 12 months (M12) of treatment. METHODS: This is a retrospective observational study in HD patients with SHPT treated by cinacalcet-HCl between 2005 and 2015 and dialysed in seven French HD centres using the same database (Hemodial™). RESULTS: The study included 1268 patients with a mean (standard deviation) follow-up of 21 ± 12 months. Their mean dialysis vintage was 4.3 ± 5.6 years. PTH values were available and exploitable at M12 in 50% of them (645 patients). Among these patients, 58.9% had controlled (mean PTH of 304 ± 158 pg/mL) and 41.1% uncontrolled SHPT (mean PTH of 1084 ± 543) at M12. At the baseline, patients with controlled SHPT were older (66 ± 15 versus 61 ± 17 years), and had lower PTH (831 ± 346 versus 1057 ± 480 pg/mL) and calcaemia (2.18 ± 0.2 versus 2.22 ± 0.19 mmol/L) than uncontrolled patients. In multivariate analysis, these three factors still remained significantly associated with controlled SHPT. CONCLUSION: In this real-life study, 41.1% of HD patients with SHPT treated with cinacalcet-HCl remained with a PTH above the KDIGO recommended target after 12 months of treatment. Apart from the possibility of non-compliance, the severity of SHPT appears to be a major factor determining the response to cinacalcet-HCl treatment, reinforcing the importance of treating SHPT at earlier stages.

Regional citrate anticoagulation during hemodialysis: a simplified procedure using Duocart biofiltration.

BACKGROUND: Regional citrate anticoagulation during hemodialysis is promising, but its clinical implementation is routinely cumbersome because a continuous adjustment of calcium infusion at the dialyzer outlet is needed. Duocart biofiltration (DCB) is a new hemodialysis method using a calcium and magnesium-free dialysate containing only sodium chloride and bicarbonate combined with the infusion into the venous line of a solution containing the ionic complement (K, Ca, Mg) and glucose. Since the dialysate is calcium- and magnesium-free and infusion rate of the solution containing calcium is automatically determined by the dialysis delivery system according to the on-line measured value of ionic dialysance, DCB seems a technique especially suitable for citrate anticoagulation procedure. METHODS: Thirty DCB sessions were performed in 10 patients with increased risk of bleeding. A commercially available mixture of trisodium citrate, citric acid and glucose was infused into the arterial line at a rate equal to 3% of dialyzer blood flow. The ionic complement (K: 48 mM, Ca: 42 mM, Mg: 14 mM, glucose: 110 mM) was infused at a rate equal to 1/24 ionic dialysance value automatically determined each 15 min by the dialysis monitor. DCB sessions were compared to 21 conventional bicarbonate hemodialysis (BHD) sessions with low-molecular-weight heparin anticoagulation. RESULTS: Whole blood activated clotting time (WBACT) measured in the venous line (before infusion of ionic complement) was 200% of the WBACT value in the arterial line. Clotting and citrate-related adverse events were not observed. Postdialysis compression time of the arteriovenous access is significantly (p<0.001) shorter after DCB sessions (3.9+/-1.1 min) compared with BHD sessions (8.7+/-4.6 min). CONCLUSION: Citrate anticoagulation during Duocart biofiltration is effective, safe and suitable for routine use because calcium infusion rate is automatically adjusted without the need of monitoring degree of anticoagulation and level of ionized calcium.

Ionic dialysance vs urea clearance in the absence of cardiopulmonary recirculation.

BACKGROUND: Several studies have shown a slight discrepancy between ionic dialysance (D) and dialyser urea clearance (UK), even in the absence of access recirculation. As it has been suggested that this discrepancy could be due to the cardiopulmonary recirculation, we studied the relationship between these two parameters in a particular dialysis setting without cardiopulmonary recirculation. METHODS: Paired measurement of urea clearance and ionic dialysance were performed in five patients without arterio-venous access who were dialysed via an internal jugular vein twin catheter. Fifty paired measurements were used for statistical analysis. Vascular access recirculation was assessed by an ultrasound dilution technique. The measured value of ionic dialysance was corrected (D(0)) for the effect of vascular access recirculation and was compared with instant urea clearance calculated from the dialysate side. RESULTS: The difference between the paired measurements of D(0) and UK (n=50) was equal to 0.6+/-16.9 ml/min (NS). With a statistical power of 90% and taking into account this standard deviation, this study might have shown a difference of at least 10.9 ml/min. The correlation was highly significant (P<0.0001). The discrepancy of the two parameters varied with dialysis efficiency, with a decreasing D(0):UK ratio for the higher dialysis efficiency. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with our previous results obtained in patients dialysed on arterio-venous access and performed with similar methods, the relationship between D(0) and UK is modified. This difference between D(0) and UK gets lower in patients dialysed on central catheters and this variance is in accordance with that expected when the influence of the cardiopulmonary recirculation on the measurement of ionic dialysance is taken into account. The limits of agreement (+/-2 SD) between D(0) and UK (+/-34 ml/min, Bland-Altman analysis) were higher than expected and raised questions about the accuracy of the measurement of each parameter via a central venous catheter.

Detection of vascular access stenosis by measurement of access blood flow from ionic dialysance.

BACKGROUND/AIM: The measurement of the vascular access blood flow rate (Q(a)) in chronic hemodialyzed patients was proposed to predict access thrombosis. We have recently presented a new method based on the measurements of ionic dialysance at normal and reversed positions of the blood lines. We evaluate the reliability of the measurement of Q(a) by this method in detecting significant access stenoses. METHODS: Twenty-five patients on chronic hemodialysis and having a vascular access cannulated with two needles were studied. The Q(a) was evaluated by the Diascan ionic dialysance (Q(a-id)) method and by the ultrasound dilution technique (Q(a-us); Transonic) during the same dialysis session. The measurements were available for 23 patients. In addition, the patients had ultrasonography of their fistula followed by angiography, if a stenosis was detected. RESULTS: Q(a-id) and Q(a-us) were not significantly different, showing a difference in Q(a) at 32 +/- 469 ml/min. Q(a-id) was significantly different between patients with or without stenosis (508 +/- 241 vs. 1,125 +/- 652 ml/min, p < 0.05). Among patients with a Q(a) <500 ml/min by Q(a-id), 5 had a stenosis detected by ultrasonography (sensitivity 83%), and 3 had no stenosis (false-positive rate 18%). Of these 3 patients, 2 had a thrombotic event at 1 and 3 months, suggesting that a more sensitive detection of stenosis for this range of Q(a) is needed and that a Q(a) <500 ml/min has a higher power to predict thromboses than a stenosis by ultrasonography. CONCLUSIONS: The measurement of the access flow rate by the Q(a-id) method has a clinical relevance to the detection of vascular access stenosis. An intervention program based on the Q(a-id) has to be evaluated.