-
Kidney International Jun 2019Peritoneal dialysis (PD) is limited by chronic fibrotic remodeling of the peritoneal wall, a transforming growth factor-β (TGF-β)-mediated process. The fractalkine...
Peritoneal dialysis (PD) is limited by chronic fibrotic remodeling of the peritoneal wall, a transforming growth factor-β (TGF-β)-mediated process. The fractalkine (CX3CL1) receptor CX3CR1 is expressed on macrophages and monocytes, where it is a marker of TGFβ expression. Detection of its ligand CX3CL1 on the peritoneal mesothelium led us to hypothesize a pathophysiologic role of CX3CL1-CX3CR1 interaction in peritoneal fibrosis. We found that CX3CL1 was expressed on peritoneal mesothelial cells from PD patients and in a murine PD model. CX3CR1, mostly expressed on macrophages in the peritoneal wall, promoted fibrosis induced by chronic dialysate exposure in the mouse model. Our data suggest a positive feedback loop whereby direct interaction with CX3CR1-expressing macrophages promotes mesothelial expression of CX3CL1 and TGFβ expression. In turn, TGFβ upregulates CX3CR1 in murine and human monocytic cells. Upstream, macrophage cytokines including interleukin-1β (IL-1β) promote mesothelial CX3CR1 and TGFβ expression, providing a starting point for CX3CL1-CX3CR1 interaction. IL-1β expression was enhanced by exposure to dialysate both in vitro and in the mouse models. Our data suggest that macrophage-mesothelial cell crosstalk through CX3CR1-CX3CL1 interaction enhances mesothelial TGFβ production, promoting peritoneal fibrosis in response to dialysate exposure. This interaction could be a novel therapeutic target in PD-associated chronic peritoneal fibrosis.
Topics: Aged; Animals; CX3C Chemokine Receptor 1; Cell Communication; Cell Line; Cells, Cultured; Chemokine CX3CL1; Coculture Techniques; Dialysis Solutions; Disease Models, Animal; Epithelial Cells; Female; Humans; Interleukin-1beta; Leukocytes, Mononuclear; Macrophages, Peritoneal; Male; Mice; Middle Aged; Peritoneal Dialysis; Peritoneal Fibrosis; Peritoneum; Primary Cell Culture; Renal Insufficiency, Chronic; Transforming Growth Factor beta; Up-Regulation
PubMed: 30948201
DOI: 10.1016/j.kint.2018.12.030 -
Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation :... Jun 2018Allowing dialysis patients to eat during the treatment is controversial. It is, therefore, no surprise that practices and policies with respect to intradialytic food... (Review)
Review
Allowing dialysis patients to eat during the treatment is controversial. It is, therefore, no surprise that practices and policies with respect to intradialytic food consumption vary considerably from unit to unit and from country to country. Those who defend the position of feeding during dialysis reason that intradialytic meals offer a supervised and effective therapy for protein-energy wasting. Those who take the opposite view argue that intradialytic food intake should be avoided for the following three reasons. First, interventional studies show that eating during dialysis causes a clinically significant reduction in systemic blood pressure during the postprandial period and elevates the risk of symptomatic intradialytic hypotension; the latter is associated with increased mortality risk. Second, clinical studies have shown that eating during dialysis interferes with the adequacy of the delivered dialysis, whereas eating 2-3 h before the dialysis session has no impact on the efficiency of the subsequent dialysis treatment. And third, randomized studies show that eating during dialysis focus on the positive outcomes but do not adequately balance this potential benefit against the risk of intradialytic hemodynamic instability and poor quality of delivered dialysis. Even after half a century of providing long-term dialysis, definitive randomized trials that balance risks and benefits of eating during dialysis are missing. These knowledge gaps require randomized trials. Since there is a real possibility of harm with eating during dialysis, we caution that instead of encouraging the widespread use of intradialytic meals, practices and policies should focus on adequate nutrient intake during the interdialytic interval.
Topics: Dialysis Solutions; Humans; Hypotension; Parenteral Nutrition; Renal Dialysis
PubMed: 28633456
DOI: 10.1093/ndt/gfx195 -
Peritoneal Dialysis International :... Jul 2021A pathophysiological classification of membrane dysfunction, which provides mechanistic links to functional characteristics, should be used when prescribing...
GUIDELINE 1
A pathophysiological classification of membrane dysfunction, which provides mechanistic links to functional characteristics, should be used when prescribing individualized dialysis or when planning modality transfer (e.g. to automated peritoneal dialysis (PD) or haemodialysis) in the context of shared and informed decision-making with the person on PD, taking individual circumstances and treatment goals into account. ().
GUIDELINE 2A
It is recommended that the PSTR is determined from a 4-h peritoneal equilibration test (PET), using either 2.5%/2.27% or 4.25%/3.86% dextrose/glucose concentration and creatinine as the index solute. () This should be done early in the course dialysis treatment (between 6 weeks and 12 weeks) () and subsequently when clinically indicated. ().
GUIDELINE 2B
A faster PSTR is associated with lower survival on PD. () This risk is in part due to the lower ultrafiltration (UF) and increased net fluid reabsorption that occurs when the PSTR is above the average value. The resulting lower net UF can be avoided by shortening glucose-based exchanges, using a polyglucose solution (icodextrin), and/or prescribing higher glucose concentrations. () Compared to glucose, use of icodextrin can translate into improved fluid status and fewer episodes of fluid overload. () Use of automated PD and icodextrin may mitigate the mortality risk associated with fast PSTR. ().
GUIDELINE 3
UF This is easy to measure and a valuable screening test. Insufficient UF should be suspected when either (a) the net UF from a 4-h PET is <400 ml (3.86% glucose/4.25% dextrose) or <100 ml (2.27% glucose /2.5% dextrose), () and/or (b) the daily UF is insufficient to maintain adequate fluid status. () Besides membrane dysfunction, low UF capacity can also result from mechanical problems, leaks or increased fluid absorption across the peritoneal membrane not explained by fast PSTR.
GUIDELINE 4A
Diagnosing intrinsic membrane dysfunction (manifesting as low osmotic conductance to glucose) as a cause of UF insufficiency: When insufficient UF is suspected, the 4-h PET should be supplemented by measurement of the sodium dip at 1 h using a 3.86% glucose/4.25% dextrose exchange for diagnostic purposes. A sodium dip ≤5 mmol/L and/or a sodium sieving ratio ≤0.03 at 1 h indicates UF insufficiency. ().
GUIDELINE 4B
in the absence of residual kidney function, this is likely to necessitate the use of hypertonic glucose exchanges and possible transfer to haemodialysis. Acquired membrane injury, especially in the context of prolonged time on treatment, should prompt discussions about the risk of encapsulating peritoneal sclerosis. ().
GUIDELINE 5
measures of peritoneal protein loss, intraperitoneal pressure and more complex tests that estimate osmotic conductance and 'lymphatic' reabsorption are not recommended for routine clinical practice but remain valuable research methods. ().
GUIDELINE 6
When resource constraints prevent the use of routine tests, consideration of membrane function should still be part of the clinical management and may be inferred from the daily UF in response to the prescription. ().
Topics: Adult; Dialysis Solutions; Glucans; Glucose; Humans; Icodextrin; Peritoneal Dialysis; Peritoneum; Sodium; Ultrafiltration
PubMed: 33563110
DOI: 10.1177/0896860820982218 -
Blood Purification 2019Intermittent infusion hemodiafiltration (I-HDF) has been developed to prevent a rapid drop in blood pressure during a dialysis session and to improve peripheral... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Intermittent infusion hemodiafiltration (I-HDF) has been developed to prevent a rapid drop in blood pressure during a dialysis session and to improve peripheral circulation. In Japan, >10,000 dialysis patients underwent treatment with I-HDF in 2017, and the number of dialysis patients is increasing year by year. I-HDF involves the intermittent infusion of ultrapure dialysis fluid or sterile nonpyrogenic substitution fluid, for example, at a volume of 200 mL and a rate of 150 mL/min by backfiltration every 30 min during treatment. The total infusion volume can therefore be estimated at 200 (mL) × 7 (infusions) or 1.4 L/session. I-HDF may be regarded as online HDF with a very small replacement volume.
SUMMARY
Several clinical trials of I-HDF have been conducted in Japan. (1) In a 2007 study, despite there being no differences noted in the volume of water removal between hemodialysis (HD) and I-HDF, a significantly lower rate of reduction in the time-averaged blood volume was seen in I-HDF than in HD, so the plasma refilling rate was greater during I-HDF. (2) In a 2015 study, at 13 weeks after a switch from HD, I-HDF was found to be significantly superior to HD in terms of the incidence of events needing intervention by medical staff. However, significantly lower blood β2-microglobulin (MG) and α1-MG levels were observed in the predilution online HDF (pre-HDF) group than in the I-HDF group, and the amount of albumin leak was lower in the I-HDF group than in the pre-HDF group. (3) In a 2017 study, compared with HD, I-HDF was associated with a reduced number of interventions for intradialytic hypotension and less severe tachycardia, suggesting less sympathetic stimulation during I-HDF. Key messages: I-HDF is a valid treatment option because it is associated with an increased plasma refilling rate and fewer interventions needed by medical staff.
Topics: Blood Pressure; Blood Volume; Dialysis Solutions; Female; Hemodiafiltration; Humans; Hypotension; Male
PubMed: 31752002
DOI: 10.1159/000503891 -
Nefrologia : Publicacion Oficial de La... 2017The measure of intraperitoneal pressure in peritoneal dialysis is easy and provides clear therapeutic benefits. However it is measured only rarely in adult peritoneal... (Review)
Review
The measure of intraperitoneal pressure in peritoneal dialysis is easy and provides clear therapeutic benefits. However it is measured only rarely in adult peritoneal dialysis units. This review aims to disseminate the usefulness of measuring intraperitoneal pressure. This measurement is performed in supine before initiating the drain of a manual exchange with "Y" system, by raising the drain bag and measuring from the mid-axillary line the height of the liquid column that rises from the patient. With typical values of 10-16 cmHO, intraperitoneal pressure should never exceed 18 cmHO. With basal values that depend on body mass index, it increases 1-3 cmHO/L of intraperitoneal volume, and varies with posture and physical activity. Its increase causes discomfort, sleep and breathing disturbances, and has been linked to the occurrence of leaks, hernias, hydrothorax, gastro-esophageal reflux and enteric peritonitis. Less known and valued is its ability to decrease the effectiveness of dialysis significantly counteracting ultrafiltration and decreasing solute clearance to a smaller degree. Because of its easy measurement and potential utility, should be monitored in case of ultrafiltration failure to rule out its eventual contribution in some patients. Although not yet mentioned in the clinical practice guidelines for PD, its clear benefits justify its inclusion among the periodic measurements to consider for prescribing and monitoring peritoneal dialysis.
Topics: Adult; Ascitic Fluid; Body Mass Index; Dialysis Solutions; Humans; Hydrostatic Pressure; Kidney Failure, Chronic; Manometry; Peritoneal Dialysis; Pressure; Reference Values; Supine Position; Ultrafiltration
PubMed: 28739249
DOI: 10.1016/j.nefro.2017.05.014 -
Journal of Nephrology Sep 2023This systematic review summarises the stability of less commonly prescribed antibiotics in different peritoneal dialysis solutions that could be used for... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
This systematic review summarises the stability of less commonly prescribed antibiotics in different peritoneal dialysis solutions that could be used for culture-directed therapy of peritonitis, which would be especially useful in regions with a high prevalence of multidrug antibiotic-resistant strains.
METHODS
A literature search of Medline, Scopus, Embase and Google Scholar for articles published from inception to 25 January, 2023 was conducted. Only antibiotic stability studies conducted in vitro and not recently reviewed by So et al. were included. The main outcomes were chemical, physical, antimicrobial and microbial stability. This protocol was registered in PROSPERO (registration number CRD42023393366).
RESULTS
We screened 1254 abstracts, and 28 articles were included in the study. In addition to those discussed in a recent systematic review (So et al., Clin Kidney J 15(6):1071-1078, 2022), we identified 18 antimicrobial agents. Of these, 9 have intraperitoneal dosing recommendations in the recent International Society for Peritoneal Dialysis (ISPD) peritonitis guidelines, and 7 of the 9 had stability data applicable to clinical practice. They were cefotaxime, ceftriaxone, daptomycin, ofloxacin, and teicoplanin in glucose-based solutions, tobramycin in Extraneal solution only and fosfomycin in Extraneal, Nutrineal, Physioneal 1.36% and 2.27% glucose solutions.
CONCLUSIONS
Physicochemical stability has not been demonstrated for all antibiotics with intraperitoneal dosing recommendations in the ISPD peritonitis guidelines. Further studies are required to determine the stability of antibiotics, especially in icodextrin-based and low-glucose degradation products, pH-neutral solutions.
Topics: Humans; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Dialysis Solutions; Glucose; Icodextrin; Peritoneal Dialysis; Peritonitis
PubMed: 37548827
DOI: 10.1007/s40620-023-01716-7 -
Kidney & Blood Pressure Research 2023Hemodialysis is one of the most resources consuming medical intervention. Due to its concept, the proper amount of dialysis fluid passed through dialyzer is crucial to... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Hemodialysis is one of the most resources consuming medical intervention. Due to its concept, the proper amount of dialysis fluid passed through dialyzer is crucial to obtain the expected outcomes. The most frequent source of dialysis fluid is production from liquid concentrate (delivered in containers or plastic bags) in dialysis machine. Alternatively, concentrates for dialysis may be produced in dialysis center by dilution in mixing devices dry or semidry premixed compounds connected with system of central dialysis fluid delivery system. Dialysate consumption depends on various factors like type of hemodialysis machine, session duration, prescribed flow, etc. Summary: Modern hemodialysis machines are equipped with the modules which automatically reduce flow rate of dialysis fluid to the patient blood flow and minimize dialysate consumption during preparation and after reinfusion. Smart using of available options offered by manufacturers allows to save additional portion of acid concentrate and water. The weight of concentrates to be delivered to the dialysis center is the major factor influencing the cost (financial and environmental) of transportation from the manufacturer to the final consumer. The crisis on the energy carriers market and extremely high fuel prices made the transportation cost one of the significant costs of the treatment, which must be bear by supplier and finally influence on the price of goods.
KEY MESSAGES
The careful choice of the concentrate delivery system can improve cost-effectiveness of dialysis. Such solutions implemented in dialysis unit helps make significant savings and decrease the impact on natural environment by carbon footprint reduction.
Topics: Humans; Renal Dialysis; Dialysis Solutions
PubMed: 37166319
DOI: 10.1159/000530439 -
Clinical Journal of the American... Sep 2018
Topics: Calcinosis; Dialysis Solutions; Humans; Kidney Failure, Chronic; Magnesium
PubMed: 30131426
DOI: 10.2215/CJN.08380718 -
Toxins Sep 2022Vascular calcification contributes to cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. A recently developed serum calcification propensity assay is based on the... (Review)
Review
Vascular calcification contributes to cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. A recently developed serum calcification propensity assay is based on the half-transformation time (T50) from primary calciprotein particles (CPPs) to secondary CPPs, reflecting the serum's endogenous capacity to prevent calcium phosphate precipitation. We sought to identify and review the results of all published studies since the development of the T50-test by Pasch et al. in 2012 (whether performed in vitro, in animals or in the clinic) of serum calcification propensity. To this end, we searched PubMed, Elsevier EMBASE, the Cochrane Library and Google Scholar databases from 2012 onwards. At the end of the selection process, 57 studies were analyzed with regard to the study design, sample size, characteristics of the study population, the intervention and the main results concerning T50. In patients with primary aldosteronism, T50 is associated with the extent of vascular calcification in the abdominal aorta. In chronic kidney disease (CKD), T50 is associated with the severity and progression of coronary artery calcification. T50 is also associated with cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality in CKD patients, patients on dialysis and kidney transplant recipients and with cardiovascular mortality in patients on dialysis, kidney transplant recipients, patients with ischemic heart failure and reduced ejection fraction, and in the general population. Switching from acetate-acidified dialysate to citrate-acidified dialysate led to a longer T50, as did a higher dialysate magnesium concentration. Oral administration of magnesium (in CKD patients), phosphate binders, etelcalcetide and spironolactone (in hemodialysis patients) was associated with a lower serum calcification propensity. Serum calcification propensity is an overall marker of calcification associated with hard outcomes but is currently used in research projects only. This assay might be a valuable tool for screening serum calcification propensity in at-risk populations (such as CKD patients and hemodialyzed patients) and, in particular, for monitoring changes over time in T50.
Topics: Biomarkers; Calcium Phosphates; Citrates; Dialysis Solutions; Humans; Magnesium; Renal Insufficiency, Chronic; Spironolactone; Vascular Calcification
PubMed: 36136575
DOI: 10.3390/toxins14090637 -
Blood Purification 2019Calcium (Ca) is an essential element that plays a critical role in many biological processes. In dialysis patients, the regulation of Ca balance is highly complex, given... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Calcium (Ca) is an essential element that plays a critical role in many biological processes. In dialysis patients, the regulation of Ca balance is highly complex, given the absence of kidney function, endocrine disturbances and the use of drugs such as phosphate binders, vitamin D analogues, and calcimimetics. Also, the use of different dialysate Ca (DCa) baths has profound effect on Ca balance, which depends both on the difference between the Ca concentration in the bath and the serum of the patients, as on the ultrafiltration volume.
SUMMARY
The choice of DCa may have important short- and long-term consequences. While lower DCa (especially < 2.5 mEq/L) concentrations have been associated with an increased risk of sudden cardiac death in observational studies, DCa in the higher ranges (3.0 mEq/L and above) may contribute to vascular pathology. Intra-dialytic hemodynamics may also be affected by the choice of DCa. In general, lower DCa concentrations are associated with an increase, and higher DCa concentrations with a decrease in parathyroid hormone (PTH) levels. Preliminary data has suggested that a DCa of 2.75 mEq/L may help in obtaining a net zero intradialytic Ca balance in individual patients, but clinical experience is still limited. Key Message: The optimal Ca balance depends on multiple parameters including blood Ca levels, PTH and the use of phosphate binders and vitamin D analogues, as well as on the risk of hemodynamic stability and cardiac arrhythmias. Therefore, DCa prescription should be individualised. A DCa of 2.75 mEq/L may be useful adjunct for dialysis providers.
Topics: Calcium; Death, Sudden, Cardiac; Dialysis Solutions; Hemodynamics; Humans; Parathyroid Hormone
PubMed: 30517930
DOI: 10.1159/000494584