Skip to content

Randomized Bioimpedance vs Clinical Methods in Guiding Ultrafiltration in Hemodialysis Patients

Bioimpedance Versus Clinical Methods in Guiding Ultrafiltration in Hemodialysis Patients: a Randomized Trial

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT01828658
Acronym
BIAHD
Enrollment
131
Registered
2013-04-10
Start date
2008-07-31
Completion date
2011-12-31
Last updated
2013-10-16

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Haemodialyzed Patients, Volume Status

Keywords

hemodialysis, fluid management, bioimpedance, mortality, arterial stiffness

Brief summary

The investigators developed a prospective, randomized, controlled trial to compare strict volume control using bioimpedance (using the BCM - Body Composition Monitor device) versus traditional clinical volume control in hemodialysis patients and the impact on mortality, hydration status, blood pressure values and arterial stiffness.

Detailed description

The investigators developed a randomized controlled study to compare exclusively bioimpedance guided ultrafiltration in hemodialysis patients versus traditional methods for volume assessment. The duration of the study was 3,5 years. During the first 2,5 years of the study all enrolled patients were randomized using a block randomization algorithm in two arms. In the interventional arm the post-dialysis dry weight was prescribed exclusively using the BCM device (Body Composition Monitor - Fresenius Medical Care, Germany). In the control arm dry weight assessment was done by traditional clinical methods. In both arms,during the intervention period (2,5 years) BCM measurements were performed every 3 months before dialysis, but only in the interventional arm the values were disclosed to the medical personnel and used to guide the dry weight and ultrafiltration volumes. In the control arm (clinical), both patients and caregivers were fully blinded from the BCM results. The BCM device measures for each patient an ideal dry weight interval ( +/- 1.1 kg). In the interventional arm, the prescribed dry weights of the patients were strictly maintained in the ideal weight interval (+/- 1.1 kg) proposed by the BCM device. Primary outcome was all cause-mortality compared in the strict bioimpedance arm versus the clinical (control) arm and was assessed at 2,5 years. Secondary end-points, assessed during the randomization period (2,5 years), were to compare blood pressure (determined pre dialysis), arterial stiffness and relative fluid overload (RFO = overhydration/ total body water), as measured by the BCM device. During the last year of the study, all patients were left free of any intervention, and only arterial stiffness was assessed a third time at 3,5 years.

Interventions

OTHERStrict bioimpedance guided dry weight prescription

Post dialysis patient dry weight was exclusively prescribed using the ideal weight measured by the BCM device (+/- 1.1 Kg).

Sponsors

Grigore T. Popa University of Medicine and Pharmacy
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
DOUBLE (Subject, Caregiver)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* older than 18-year * on chronic hemodialysis for more than 3 months

Exclusion criteria

\- life expectancy of less than 1 year Presence of a condition that may interfere with the determination of dry weight using the Body Composition Monitor (R): * severe ascites (decompensated liver failure) * limb amputations * cardiac stent, pacemaker or defibrillator * hip prosthetic * pregnancy * mental deficiency (impossibility to give consent)

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
All cause mortality2,5 years follow-upWe assessed all-cause mortality in the two arms of the study at the end of intervention period.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Arterial stiffness3,5 yearsArterial stiffness was evaluated by applanation tonometry, measuring pulse wave velocity, and was done with a SphygmoCor® device (AtCor Medical, Westmead, Sydney, Australia). Measurements were performed in both arms at baseline, end of intervention (2,5 years) and at the end of the study (3,5 years).
Blood pressure values2,5 yearsIn both arms, blood pressure was measured predialysis every 3 months and noted as a mean of the previous 3 predialysis BP values.
Overhydration2,5 yearsOverhydration was evaluated in both arms of the study using the Body Composition Monitor (BCM device), every 3 months. Overhydration was quantified as Relative fluid overload (RFO = overhydration/ total body water - as measured by the BCM.

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026