A comparison of methods for determining urea distribution volume for routine use in on-line monitoring of haemodialysis adequacy.

BACKGROUND: The availability of haemodialysis machines equipped with on-line clearance monitoring (OCM) allows frequent assessment of dialysis efficiency and adequacy without the need for blood samples. Accurate estimation of the urea distribution volume 'V' is required for Kt/V calculated from OCM to be consistent with conventional blood sample-based methods. METHODS: Ten stable HD patients were monitored monthly for 6 months. Time-averaged OCM clearance (K(OCM)) and pre- and post-dialysis blood samples were collected at each monitored session. The second generation Daugirdas formula was used to calculate the single-pool variable volume Kt/V, (Kt/V)(D). Values of V to allow comparison between OCM and blood-based Kt/V were determined from Watson's formula (V(Watson)), bioimpedance spectroscopy (V(BIS)), classical urea kinetic modelling (V(UKM_C)) and a simple computation of V (V(UKM_S)) from the blood-based Kt/V and K(OCM)t. RESULTS: Comparison of K(OCM)t/V with (Kt/V)(D) shows that using V(Watson) leads to significant systematic underestimation of dialysis dose. K(OCM)t/V(BIS) agrees with (Kt/V)(D) to within +/- 10%. K(OCM)t/V(UKM_S) is, by definition, identical to (Kt/V)(D) when initially calculated. However, if a historical value of V is used, agreement between K(OCM)t/V and (Kt/V)(D) over 6 months varies by 5% for V(BIS) and 10% for V(UKM_S). CONCLUSIONS: When investigating the effect of different treatment strategies on dialysis efficiency, any estimate of V can be used provided it is constant, as K is the relevant parameter. When frequent supervision of actual dialysis dose is required, the greatest consistency between K(OCM)t/V and the reference, Kt/V(D), over time is achieved with V(BIS).

Determination of urea distribution volume for Kt/V assessed by conductivity monitoring.

BACKGROUND: Kt/V can be calculated continuously during dialysis without blood samples using the ionic dialysance method. Unlike the usual method using blood samples, a precise value for the patients' urea distribution volume is required. This study compared different methods for the determination of urea distribution volume (V) to evaluate their use in Kt/V measurement, based on conductivity monitoring. METHODS: Ten patients were studied during 40 dialysis sessions. Total body water and V were determined using bioimpedance spectroscopy (BIS), anthropometric data, and blood-based kinetic data. Ionic dialysance was measured by conductivity monitoring. RESULTS: Total body water measured by bioimpedance was determined as VBIS= 37.0 +/- 7.1 L or 49.6 +/- 4.4% of body weight. V determined using ionic dialysance as input to urea kinetic modeling (UKM) was found to correlate well with total body water (VKecn= 36.4 +/- 5.2 L). All anthropometric equations overestimated measured V: VWatson= 40.7 +/- 3.9 L, VHume= 41.8 +/- 2.5 L, VChertow= 44.6 +/- 3.3 L, and VChumlea= 43.1 +/- 2.9 L. Single-pool Kt/V obtained by kinetic modeling was used as reference (Kt/V)SPVV= 1.49 +/- 0.15. Using different Vs as the V component in the ionic dialysance Kt/V, we obtained: Kecn*t/VWatson= 1.34 +/- 0.12, Kecn*t/VBIS= 1.51 +/- 0.21 and Kecn*t/VKecn= 1.52 +/- 0.18. CONCLUSION: The single-pool Kt/V calculated using the ionic dialysance method agreed with the conventional blood sample method provided that V was calculated using BIS or urea kinetics. V by either method was reproducible and varied little in an individual patient. Monthly determination of V allows determination of Kt/V for each dialysis session by ionic dialysance.