Skip Navigation


NDT Advance Access originally published online on December 14, 2004
Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 2005 20(2):285-296; doi:10.1093/ndt/gfh550
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
20/2/285    most recent
gfh550v1
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 (16)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Locatelli, F.
Right arrow Articles by Zucchelli, P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Locatelli, F.
Right arrow Articles by Zucchelli, P.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Nephrol Dial Transplant Vol. 20 No. 2 © ERA–EDTA 2004; all rights reserved


Special Feature

Dialysis dose and frequency

Francesco Locatelli1, Umberto Buoncristiani2, Bernard Canaud3, Hans Köhler4, Thierry Petitclerc5 and Pietro Zucchelli6

1 Department of Nephrology and Dialysis, Ospedale A. Manzoni, Lecco, Italy, 2 University of Perugia, Nephrology and Dialysis Unit, Perugia, Italy, 3 Lapeyronie University Hospital, Department of Nephrology, CHU Montpellier, France, 4 Universitätskliniken des Saarlandes, Schwerpunkt Nephrologie, Homburg/Saar, Germany, 5 AURA, Centre d’entraînement à l’hémodialyse à domicile, Paris, France and 6 M. Malpighi Hospital, Department of Nephrology and Dialysis, Bologna, Italy

Correspondence and offprint requests to: Prof. Dr Francesco Locatelli, Department of Nephrology and Dialysis, Ospedale A. Manzoni, Via Dell’Eremo 11, 23900 Lecco, Italy. Email: nefrologia{at}ospedale.lecco.it

Background. From the beginning of the dialysis era, the issue of optimal dialysis dose and frequency has been a central topic in the delivery of dialysis treatment.

Methods. We undertook a discussion to achieve a consensus on key points relating to dialysis dose and frequency, focusing on the relationships with clinical and patient outcomes.

Results. Traditionally, dialysis adequacy has been quantified referring to the kinetics of urea, taken as a paradigm of all uraemic toxins, and applying the principles of pharmacokinetics using either single- or double-pool variable volume models. An index of dialysis dose is the fractional clearance of urea, which is commonly expressed as Kt/V. It can be calculated from blood urea concentration and haemodialysis (HD) parameters, according to the respective urea kinetic model or by means of simplified formulas. Similar principles are applicable to peritoneal dialysis (PD), where weekly Kt/V and creatinine clearance are used. Recommended minimal targets for dialysis adequacy have been defined by both American and European guidelines (DOQI and European Best Practice Guidelines, respectively). The question of how to improve the severe outcome of dialysis patients has recently come back to the fore, since the results of two recent randomized controlled trials led to the conclusion that, in thrice weekly HD and in PD, increasing the dialysis dose well above the minimum requirements of current American guidelines did not improve patient outcome. Daily HD (defined as a minimum of six HD sessions per week), in the form of either short daytime HD or long slow nocturnal HD, is regarded as a possibility to improve dialysis patient outcome. The results of the studies published so far indicate excellent results with respect to all outcomes analysed: optimal blood pressure control, regression of left ventricular hypertrophy and amelioration of left ventricular performance, improvement of renal anaemia, optimal hyperphosphataemia control, improvement of nutritional status, reduction in oxidative stress indices and improvement in quality of life. The basis for these beneficial effects is thought to be a more physiological clearance of solutes and water, with reduced pre- and post-HD solute concentrations and interdialytic oscillation, compared with traditional HD. Apart from concerns regarding reimbursement and organizational issues, no serious adverse effects have been described with daily HD. However, the evidence accumulated is limited mainly to retrospective cohorts, with small patient numbers and no adequate controls in most instances. Therefore, large prospective studies with adequate controls are required to make daily HD accepted by reimbursing authorities and patients.

Conclusions. Given the available observational and interventional body of evidence, there is no reason to reduce arbitrarily dialysis dose, particularly dialysis treatment time in HD patients treated three times weekly. Daily HD represents a very promising tool for improving dialysis outcomes and quality of life, although its impact on patient survival has not yet been proven definitively.

Keywords: daily dialysis; dialysis adequacy; dialysis dose; Kt/V; long slow nocturnal daily dialysis; short daily dialysis; survival; urea kinetic model


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
C. Couchoud, J. Kooman, P. Finne, T. Leivestad, O. Stojceva-Taneva, J. B. Ponikvar, F. Collart, R. Kramar, A. de Francisco, K. J. Jager, et al.
From registry data collection to international comparisons: examples of haemodialysis duration and frequency
Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., January 1, 2009; 24(1): 217 - 224.
[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.