ASN's Mission

To create a world without kidney diseases, the ASN Alliance for Kidney Health elevates care by educating and informing, driving breakthroughs and innovation, and advocating for policies that create transformative changes in kidney medicine throughout the world.

learn more

Contact ASN

1401 H St, NW, Ste 900, Washington, DC 20005

email@asn-online.org

202-640-4660

The Latest on Twitter

Kidney Week

Abstract: TH-PO359

Comparison of Removal Efficiency and Biocompatibility Between Pre- and Post-Dilution On-line Hemodiafiltration

Session Information

Category: Dialysis

  • 701 Dialysis: Hemodialysis and Frequent Dialysis

Authors

  • Sakurai, Kenji, Hashimoto Clinic, Sagamihara, KANAGAWA, Japan
  • Saito, Takeshi, Hashimoto Clinic, Sagamihara, KANAGAWA, Japan
  • Hosoya, Hiromi, Hashimoto Clinic, Sagamihara, KANAGAWA, Japan
  • Kurihara, Yoshitaka, Hashimoto Clinic, Sagamihara, KANAGAWA, Japan
  • Ishii, Daisuke, Kitasato University Hospital, Sagamihara Kanagawa, Japan
  • Yoshida, Kazunari, Department of Urology Kitasato University School of Medicine, Sagamihara, Japan
  • Kokubo, Kenichi, Kitasato University School of Allied Health Sciences, Sagamihara, kanagawa, Japan
  • Hyodo, Toru, Eijin Clinic and Cambodian Association of Nephrology, Hiratsuka, KANAGAWA, Japan
Background

In Japan in late-2016, 329,609 patients received dialysis, 24.2% of whom received hemodiafiltration (HDF). In 79% of HDF, the on-line mode is used, which is mostly performed with the pre-dilution mode (pre-HDF). However, in Europe, all HDF sessions use the post-dilution mode (post-HDF). We previously assessed differences in biocompatibility between pre- and post-HDF based on inflammatory markers and lymphocyte stimulation tests, and reported that pre-HDF is less physically stressful. Here, we used a more biocompatible hemodiafilter to study whether biocompatibility would differ between pre- and post-HDF, and assessed the solute removal efficiency of both modes.

Methods

Eight stable dialysis patients were included in this study. HDF was performed with Fineflux 210S eco (asymmetric triacetate membrane, NIPRO) at a blood flow rate of 250 mL/min and a total dialysate flow rate of 500 mL/min for 4 h/session. The substitution fluid volumes were 60 and 12 L/session for pre- and post-HDF, respectively. To test removal efficiency, urea, creatinine, b2-microglobulin (MG) (MW:11.8kDa) and a1-MG (MW:33kDa) levels were measured to determine the reduction rates. Albumin (Alb) leakage was also measured. To test biocompatibility, hs CRP, interleukin (IL)-6, tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-a, pentraxin (PTX)-3, intercellular adhesion molecule (ICAM)-1, and cluster of differentiation 62 platelet (CD62P; a platelet cell surface marker) levels were measured.

Results

Post-HDF was more efficient at removing small-molecular-weight solutes than pre-HDF. The reduction rate of b2-MG was 81.2±2.6% for both modes. The reduction rates of a1-MG were 33.1±5.8% for pre-HDF and 37.4±3.9% for post-HDF, showing a significant difference (p<0.05). Alb leakages (g/session) were 2.8 for pre-HDF and 3.4 for post-HDF (p<0.05). No differences between the two modes were observed in the rates of changes in CRP, IL-6, TNF-a, ICAM-1, and PTX-3 levels. Increases in the expression rates of CD62P were 164.7±24.1% for pre-HDF and 210.7±44.2% for post-HDF (p<0.05).

Conclusion

The percent change in the CD62P expression rate was smaller for pre-HDF than for post-HDF; platelets may have been less activated during pre-HDF than during post-HDF under this study’s conditions. Post-HDF was more efficient at removing solutes.

Funding

  • Private Foundation Support