Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (6)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Mactier, R.
Right arrow Articles by Allam, B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Mactier, R.
Right arrow Articles by Allam, B.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation, Vol 12, Issue 6 1182-1186, Copyright © 1997 by Oxford University Press


ORIGINAL ARTICLES

Comparison of high-efficiency and standard haemodialysis providing equal urea clearances by partial and total dialysate quantification

R Mactier, A Madi and B Allam
Renal Unit and Biochemistry Department, Stobhill Hospital, Balornock Road, Glasgow, UK; Corresponding author

Background. Short-duration high-efficiency haemodialysis has been utilized increasingly in recent years to deliver adequate blood urea clearances per dialysis session. However, high-efficiency and standard-duration haemodialysis schedules, which achieve equal patient urea clearances, may not represent equivalent dialytic therapy due to solute differences in intercompartmental dysequilibrium during dialysis and differences in dialysis mechanics. Methods. To circumvent the effects of intercompartmental dysequilibrium and postdialysis rebound solute clearances were measured by direct dialysis quantification (total and partial dialysate collections) rather than blood clearances. High-efficiency haemodialysis (dialyser blood flow rate=400 ml/min; dialysis time=170.67 min) was compared with standard haemodialysis (dialyser blood flow rate=200 ml/min; dialysis time=240 min) performed in random order in six anuric patients using Fresenius F8 dialysers and the same haemodialysis machine. Such haemodialysis schedules were prescribed to provide equivalent urea clearances. Results. Patient plasma water urea clearances measured by direct quantification were equivalent, whereas high efficiency haemodialysis achieved significantly lower phosphate clearances (P=0.01), less net bicarbonate absorption (P=0.01), and {beta}2microglobulin removal (P<0.001) than standard haemodialysis. Estimated total dialysate effluent volumes with partial dialysate collection and total dialysate collection correlated closely (r=0.95) and there were no differences between patient urea, creatinine and phosphate clearances measured by partial and total dialysate quantification. Conclusions. The data indicate that even if high-efficiency and standard haemodialysis provide equal whole-body urea clearances, delivered dialysis therapy is not equivalent. The partial dialysate collection method is as accurate as the cumbersome total dialysate collection approach and may be applied to assess delivered dose by minor modification of current haemodialysis machines. Keywords: direct dialysis quantification; high-efficiency haemodialysis; solute removal; urea kinetics; partial dialysate collection; total dialysate collection
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Nephrol Dial TransplantHome page
A. Ficheux, N. Gayrard, I. Szwarc, S. Soullier, J. Bismuth-Mondolfo, P. Brunet, M.-F. Servel, and A. Argiles
Use of spent dialysate analysis to estimate blood levels of uraemic solutes without blood sampling: urea
Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., October 23, 2009; (2009) gfp539v1.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.