Skip to content

Comparison of Post- and Pre-dilutional Hemodiafiltration in Hemodialysis Patients

Effects of Post- and Pre-dilutional Hemodiafiltration on Patients With End-stage Renal Disease

Status
Completed
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Observational
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT03288285
Enrollment
49
Registered
2017-09-20
Start date
2017-09-01
Completion date
2019-04-07
Last updated
2019-04-23

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

Conditions

Hemodiafiltration

Keywords

hemodiafiltration, pre-dilution, post-dilution, uremic toxins

Brief summary

Hemodiafiltration (HDF) is a choice of treatment modalities for patients with end-stage renal disease. Hemodiafiltration, combining diffusion and convection, may increase removal of large and middle molecule uremic toxins comparing to conventional hemodialysis. The techniques of hemodiafiltration include pre-dilution and post-dilution according to the infusion site of substitution fluid. Post-dilution HDF is most widely used because of higher removal rate of uremic toxins. However, hemoconcentration and clotting of membrane limit its further clearance of toxins. Pre-dilution may preserve membrane permeability and maintain hemodynamic status. Although lower clearance of small molecule uremic toxins, one study in Japan showed survival benefits of pre-dilution HDF, comparing to post-dilution HDF. The aim of this study was to compare pre-dilution and post-dilution HDF in terms of their clinical and biological parameters and clearance of uremic toxins by using cross-over study design.

Detailed description

1. Study design: randomly assigned, cross-over study. 2. Patient number: 60. 3. Inclusion criteria: stable patients end-stage renal disease who were older than 20 years and received thrice-weekly standard hemodialysis for more than 3 months were recruited. 4. Exclusion criteria: active systemic disease, liver cirrhosis, active malignancy, receiving immunosuppressive treatment, dialysis with temporal non-tunneled catheter, inadequate dialysis dose (single-pooled Kt/V\<1.2). 5. Methods: Prior to randomization, a Charlson Comorbidity Index score and baseline characteristics are recorded for each patient. Each patient who received HDF prior to study will received one-month high-flux hemodialysis with target single-pooled Kt/V\>1.2 for washout. The baseline characteristics of each patient including dialyzer, dialysis time, blood flow, dialysate flow, replacement volume, pre- and post-dialysis blood pressure and body weight were recorded. The follow-up laboratory data will also be collected: predialysis C-reactive protein, blood urea nitrogen, creatinine, bicarbonate, sodium, potassium, uric acid, albumin, calcium, phosphate, intact parathyroid hormone, β2-microglobulin, prolactin, fibroblast growth factor 23, α1-microglobulin, indoxyl sulfate, p-cresol sulfate, advance oxidation protein products, advance glycation product, percentage of proinflammatory monocytes; interleukin-6, tumor necrosis factor-α, hematocrit, transferrin saturation and ferritin. Urea kinetics including kt/V, Urea reduction ratio and normalized protein catabolic rate are calculated. We also used Physical Symptoms Distress Scale for life quality measurement. After randomization, two group received standard prescription of pre- and post-dilution HDF. The prescribed convective volume per treatment of post-dilution mode is based on blood flow, filtration fraction and hematocrit to achieved current recommendation of 23 liter/1.73m2. The convective volume of pre-dilution mode will be at least twice higher than the desired dose in post-dilution mode for each patient. After 3-month stable hemodiafiltration, parameters mentioned above will also be checked. Two group will be switched for another 3-month course and then switch again. The total following time is 12 months. 6. Outcome: The primary objective is to compare the removal of a wide spectrum of solutes such as middle and protein-bound molecules. Secondary outcomes are intradialytic tolerance, including intradialytic hypotension, cramps and arrhythmia, and life quality measurements.

Interventions

None listed

Sponsors

Tungs' Taichung Metroharbour Hospital
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Observational model
CASE_CROSSOVER
Time perspective
CROSS_SECTIONAL

Eligibility

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

Inclusion criteria

* stable patients end-stage renal disease who were older than 20 years and received thrice-weekly standard hemodialysis for more than 3 months were recruited.

Exclusion criteria

* active systemic disease, liver cirrhosis, malignancy, receiving immunosuppressive treatment, dialysis with temporal non-tunneled catheter, inadequate dialysis dose (kt/V\<1.2).

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Removal of a wide spectrum of solutes1 yearsThe primary objective is to compare the removal of a wide spectrum of solutes such as middle and protein-bound molecules

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Intradialytic tolerance1 yearsintradialytic tolerance including symptomatic hypotension, cramps, headache, nutrition, and inflammatory status.

Countries

Taiwan

Outcome results

None listed

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