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 (36)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Girndt, M.
Right arrow Articles by Kohler, H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Girndt, M.
Right arrow Articles by Kohler, H.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation, Vol 14, Issue 3 676-682, Copyright © 1999 by Oxford University Press


ORIGINAL ARTICLES

Influence of dialysis with polyamide vs haemophan haemodialysis on monokines and complement activation during a 4-month long-term study

M Girndt, O Heisel and H Kohler
Medical Department IV, University of Homburg/Saar, D-66421 Homburg/Saar, Germany; Corresponding author

Background. Contact between blood and dialysis membranes activates mononuclear cells and the complement system. The extent of activation is dependent on the dialyser material used and is considered an index of biocompatibility. Polyamide dialysers consist of a synthetic membrane that claims high standards of biocompatibility. Haemophan dialysers represent membranes made of modified cellulose that are now broadly used for treatment in Europe and are already considered to be more biocompatible than the cuprophane membranes that were used as reference in most previous studies. Methods. In a cross-over treatment study short-term as well as long-term effects of a polyamide dialyser with respect to monokine induction and complement activation were compared to a haemophan dialyser. Results. Neither haemophan nor polyamide dialysers induced relevant changes in plasma monokine levels. However, in vitro challenge of mononuclear cells with lipopolysaccharide (LPS) unmasked a significantly stronger preactivation for the secretion of proinflammatory monokines during haemophan than polyamide dialysis. Unlike other monokines the production of the regulatory monokine IL-10 was mainly influenced by individual factors and correlated with the patient's immune status rather than the dialyser type used. Enhanced preactivation of monocytes in haemophan compared to polyamide dialysis was paralleled by an increased complement activation. Cellular preactivation and formation of terminal complement complex remained constant over the 4-month treatment period. Conclusions. Haemophan and polyamide dialysers do not induce changes in plasma cytokine levels both during short-term and long-term use. However, they significantly differ in complement activation as well as preactivation of monocytes. Preactivated monocytes are prone to secrete high amounts of proinflammatory cytokines when exposed to a second stimulus like endotoxin. Secretion of the regulatory cytokine IL-10 is not influenced by the dialyser type. Keywords: biocompatibility; complement activation; haemodialysis; interleukin-10; monokines
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
P.-A. Triverio, P.-O. Bridevaux, P. Roux-Lombard, L. Niksic, T. Rochat, P.-Y. Martin, P. Saudan, and J.-P. Janssens
Interferon-gamma release assays versus tuberculin skin testing for detection of latent tuberculosis in chronic haemodialysis patients
Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., June 1, 2009; 24(6): 1952 - 1956.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Nephrol Dial TransplantHome page
A. Mourad, S. Carney, A. Gillies, B. Jones, R. Nanra, and P. Trevillian
Acute effect of haemodialysis on arterial stiffness: membrane bioincompatibility?
Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., November 1, 2004; 19(11): 2797 - 2802.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Nephrol Dial TransplantHome page
R. Klingel, M. Schaefer, A. Schwarting, F. Himmelsbach, U. Altes, I. Uhlenbusch-Korwer, and G. Hafner
Comparative analysis of procoagulatory activity of haemodialysis, haemofiltration and haemodiafiltration with a polysulfone membrane (APS) and with different modes of enoxaparin anticoagulation
Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., January 1, 2004; 19(1): 164 - 170.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Am. Soc. Nephrol.Home page
W. H. Horl
Hemodialysis Membranes: Interleukins, Biocompatibility, and Middle Molecules
J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., January 1, 2002; 13(90001): S62 - 71.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Nephrol Dial TransplantHome page
U. Sester, M. Sester, G. Heine, H. Kaul, M. Girndt, and H. Kohler
Strong depletion of CD14+CD16+ monocytes during haemodialysis treatment
Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., July 1, 2001; 16(7): 1402 - 1408.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Nephrol Dial TransplantHome page
M. Girndt, U. Sester, M. Sester, H. Kaul, and H. Kohler
Impaired cellular immune function in patients with end-stage renal failure
Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., December 1, 1999; 14(12): 2807 - 2810.
[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.