Skip Navigation


NDT Advance Access originally published online on October 26, 2004
Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 2004 19(12):2965-2970; doi:10.1093/ndt/gfh502
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
19/12/2965    most recent
gfh502v1
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 (5)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Grooteman, M. P. C.
Right arrow Articles by Nubé, M. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Grooteman, M. P. C.
Right arrow Articles by Nubé, M. J.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Nephrol Dial Transplant Vol. 19 No. 12 © ERA-EDTA 2004; all rights reserved

Editorial Review

Impact of the type of dialyser on the clinical outcome in chronic haemodialysis patients: does it really matter?

Muriel P. C. Grooteman and Menso J. Nubé

Department of Nephrology, Free University Medical Centre, de Boelelaan 1117, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Correspondence and offprint requests to: M. J. Nubé, Department of Nephrology, Free University Medical Centre, de Boelelaan 1117, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Email: m.j.nube@mca.nl

Keywords: bioincompatibility; cardiovascular disease; clinical outcome; dialyser; ESRD; flux; haemodialysis

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.



   Introduction
 
Despite the relative efficiency of modern equipment, haemodialysis (HD) remains inferior to normal kidney function for several reasons. First of all, HD treatment results in a weekly clearance of small molecular weight substances of only 10–15 ml/min, as compared with 90–120 ml/min for normal kidneys. Secondly, so-called ‘middle molecules’ (MMs) as well as some larger peptides, which are normally excreted or metabolized by the healthy kidney, are cleared inadequately and will therefore accumulate in chronic HD (CHD) patients. Thirdly, various undesirable interactions, including both short- and long-term side effects—termed bio(in)compatibility—may occur between the living organism and the extracorporeal circuit (ECC) [1].

In the last decades, a variety of new dialysers, differing in design, material, membrane surface area and permeability, have been developed. Very recently, one of the world's largest companies involved in the production and development of dialysers replaced its total set of low-flux (LF) dialysers by a . . . [Full Text of this Article]



   Dialysers
 


   Bio(in)compatibility
 


   Solute mass transport
 


   Markers of endothelial dysfunction and cardiovascular disease
 


   Clinical data
 


   Conclusions
 

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?