Effects of high-volume online mixed-hemodiafiltration on anemia management in dialysis patients.
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2019
2019
Historique:
received:
12
11
2018
accepted:
08
02
2019
entrez:
23
2
2019
pubmed:
23
2
2019
medline:
22
11
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Anemia is a major comorbidity of patients with end-stage renal disease and poses an enormous economic burden to health-care systems. High dose erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) have been associated with unfavorable clinical outcomes. We explored whether mixed-dilution hemodiafiltration (Mixed-HDF), based on its innovative substitution modality, may improve anemia outcomes compared to the traditional post-dilution hemodiafiltration (Post-HDF). We included 174 adult prevalent dialysis patients (87 on Mixed-HDF, 87 on Post-HDF) treated in 24 NephroCare dialysis centers between January 2010 and August 2016 into this retrospective cohort study. All patients were dialyzed three times per week and had fistula/graft as vascular access. Patients were matched at baseline and followed over a one-year period. The courses of hemoglobin levels (Hb) and monthly ESA consumption were compared between the two groups with linear mixed models. Mean baseline Hb was 11.9±1.3 and 11.8±1.1g/dl in patients on Mixed- and Post-HDF, respectively. While Hb remained stable in patients on Mixed-HDF, it decreased slightly in patients on Post-HDF (at month 12: 11.8±1.2 vs 11.1±1.2g/dl). This tendency was confirmed by our linear mixed model (p = 0.0514 for treatment x time interaction). Baseline median ESA consumption was 6000 [Q1:0;Q3:16000] IU/4 weeks in both groups. Throughout the observation period ESA doses tended to be lower in the Mixed-HDF group (4000 [Q1:0;Q3:16000] vs 8000 [Q1:0;Q3:20000] IU/4 weeks at month 12; p = 0.0791 for treatment x time interaction). Sensitivity analyses, adjusting for differences not covered by matching at baseline, strengthened our results (Hb: p = 0.0124; ESA: p = 0.0687). Results of our explorative study suggest that patients on Mixed-HDF may have clinical benefits in terms of anemia management. This may also have a beneficial economic impact. Future studies are needed to confirm our hypothesis-generating results and to provide additional evidence on the potential beneficial effects of Mixed-HDF.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Anemia is a major comorbidity of patients with end-stage renal disease and poses an enormous economic burden to health-care systems. High dose erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) have been associated with unfavorable clinical outcomes. We explored whether mixed-dilution hemodiafiltration (Mixed-HDF), based on its innovative substitution modality, may improve anemia outcomes compared to the traditional post-dilution hemodiafiltration (Post-HDF).
METHODS
We included 174 adult prevalent dialysis patients (87 on Mixed-HDF, 87 on Post-HDF) treated in 24 NephroCare dialysis centers between January 2010 and August 2016 into this retrospective cohort study. All patients were dialyzed three times per week and had fistula/graft as vascular access. Patients were matched at baseline and followed over a one-year period. The courses of hemoglobin levels (Hb) and monthly ESA consumption were compared between the two groups with linear mixed models.
RESULTS
Mean baseline Hb was 11.9±1.3 and 11.8±1.1g/dl in patients on Mixed- and Post-HDF, respectively. While Hb remained stable in patients on Mixed-HDF, it decreased slightly in patients on Post-HDF (at month 12: 11.8±1.2 vs 11.1±1.2g/dl). This tendency was confirmed by our linear mixed model (p = 0.0514 for treatment x time interaction). Baseline median ESA consumption was 6000 [Q1:0;Q3:16000] IU/4 weeks in both groups. Throughout the observation period ESA doses tended to be lower in the Mixed-HDF group (4000 [Q1:0;Q3:16000] vs 8000 [Q1:0;Q3:20000] IU/4 weeks at month 12; p = 0.0791 for treatment x time interaction). Sensitivity analyses, adjusting for differences not covered by matching at baseline, strengthened our results (Hb: p = 0.0124; ESA: p = 0.0687).
CONCLUSIONS
Results of our explorative study suggest that patients on Mixed-HDF may have clinical benefits in terms of anemia management. This may also have a beneficial economic impact. Future studies are needed to confirm our hypothesis-generating results and to provide additional evidence on the potential beneficial effects of Mixed-HDF.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30794672
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0212795
pii: PONE-D-18-30101
pmc: PMC6386285
doi:
Substances chimiques
Hematinics
0
Hemoglobins
0
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0212795Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
I have read the journal's policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: LAP has a consultancy agreement with NephroCare, Italy; PR and AnFe are employees of NephroCare, Italy. The other authors are employees of Fresenius Medical Care and may hold stock in the company. The realization of therapies investigated in this study has been performed with products mostly manufactured by Fresenius Medical Care. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.
Références
J Nephrol. 2001 Nov-Dec;14 Suppl 4:S94-100
pubmed: 11798154
Hemodial Int. 2012 Jul;16(3):342-50
pubmed: 22360439
Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2008 Jul;23(7):2337-43
pubmed: 18305316
Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2001 May;16(5):1053-8
pubmed: 11328916
Kidney Res Clin Pract. 2017 Sep;36(3):209-223
pubmed: 28904872
Kidney Int. 2010 Jul;78(2):215-23
pubmed: 20428102
Kidney Int. 2000 Nov;58(5):2155-65
pubmed: 11044237
Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2015 Apr;30(4):682-9
pubmed: 25385719
PLoS One. 2014 Apr 17;9(4):e94434
pubmed: 24743493
Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2017 Jun 1;32(6):1047-1052
pubmed: 27448671
Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2018 Jun 1;33(6):1025-1039
pubmed: 29186592
Hippokratia. 2014 Oct-Dec;18(4):315-8
pubmed: 26052197
Am J Kidney Dis. 2002 Sep;40(3):582-9
pubmed: 12200811
N Engl J Med. 2006 Nov 16;355(20):2085-98
pubmed: 17108343
Kidney Int. 2016 Jul;90(1):192-202
pubmed: 27178833
Am J Nephrol. 2011;33(1):70-5
pubmed: 21178336
Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2009 Feb;24(2):562-70
pubmed: 18809977
Blood Purif. 2011;32(3):210-9
pubmed: 21811070
Contrib Nephrol. 2011;175:129-140
pubmed: 22188695
Semin Dial. 2014 Mar;27(2):119-27
pubmed: 24738146
J Am Soc Nephrol. 2012 Oct;23(10):1631-4
pubmed: 22935483
Kidney Int. 2014 Aug;86(2):423-32
pubmed: 24552852
J Am Soc Nephrol. 2013 Feb;24(3):487-97
pubmed: 23411788
Nephrol Dial Transplant. 1999 May;14(5):1202-7
pubmed: 10344362
Blood Purif. 2006;24(2):163-73
pubmed: 16352871
Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2012 Sep;27(9):3594-600
pubmed: 22622452
Contrib Nephrol. 2017;189:184-188
pubmed: 27951566
Nephron Extra. 2012 Jan;2(1):55-65
pubmed: 22619668
Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2013 Mar;28(3):542-50
pubmed: 23345621
Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2015 Apr;30(4):523-5
pubmed: 25801634
Hematol Oncol Clin North Am. 2014 Aug;28(4):671-81, vi
pubmed: 25064707
N Engl J Med. 2009 Nov 19;361(21):2019-32
pubmed: 19880844
J Am Soc Nephrol. 2005 Jul;16(7):2180-9
pubmed: 15901766
Kidney Int. 2006 Feb;69(3):573-9
pubmed: 16407883
Blood Purif. 2002;20(4):349-56
pubmed: 12169844
Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2011 Aug;26(8):2617-24
pubmed: 21245130
PLoS One. 2018 Jun 18;13(6):e0198320
pubmed: 29912924
Semin Dial. 2009 Jan-Feb;22(1):1-4
pubmed: 19175532
Adv Chronic Kidney Dis. 2009 Mar;16(2):76-82
pubmed: 19233066
Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2016 Jun;31(6):978-84
pubmed: 26492924