Monday, April 30, 2018 / Categories: DOPPS, DOPPS HD, Plain Language Summary, Visual Abstract Hemodiafiltration vs. hemodialysis: Comparing mortality risk In standard low flux hemodialysis (HD), toxins composed of large molecules are not cleared from the blood as effectively as toxins composed of small molecules. Hemodiafiltration (HDF) uses a greater volume of fluid to clear more molecules of larger size compared to both low flux and high flux HD. Although there is a widespread notion that HDF provides better patient survival than HD, results of previous studies have been mixed. To help determine whether HDF does in fact lead to better outcomes, researchers examined data from the Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (DOPPS) for 8,567 patients collected between 2009 and 2015. The sample included patients from seven European countries, with approximately 20 facilities from each country. Of the eligible patients, 2,012 (23 percent) were on HDF. After multiple analyses to account for confounding variables, investigators found no evidence that HDF provides better patient survival than HD. Lead author Dr. Francesco Locatelli added, “While from the theoretical point of view HDF is the most efficient dialysis technique, at present the evidence to support its use is weak even at high convective volumes.” Compared to previous studies, including a prior analysis of DOPPS data, the current study has a much larger sample size, a larger proportion of patients using HDF, and more recent data. Because of these differences, results of this analysis may provide a more accurate representation of “real-world” settings than results of previous studies. Further trials specifically designed to test the effect of different volumes of fluid are needed to adequately inform clinical practices. CITATION:Locatelli F, Karaboyas A, Pisoni RL, Robinson BM, Fort J, Vanholder R, Rayner HC, Kleophas W, Jacobson SH, Combe C, Port FK, Tentori F. Mortality risk in patients on hemodiafiltration versus hemodialysis: A ‘real-world’ comparison from the DOPPS. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 33(4):683-689, 2018.PubMed:www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29040687 Previous Article What motivates someone to seek treatment for lower urinary tract symptoms? Next Article Starting sevelamer may reduce mortality risk among hemodialysis patients treated with calcium-based phosphate binders Print
Arbor Research Collaborative for Health Announces Partnership with Altarum to Support and Evaluate the National Hypertension Control Initiative Tuesday, April 26, 2022
Arbor Research Collaborative for Health Announces Hire of Chauncey Lynch, BS, as Vice President of Finance & Chief Financial Officer Monday, March 28, 2022
PDOPPS: International Icodextrin Use and Association with Peritoneal Membrane Function, Fluid Removal, Patient and Technique Survival Friday, March 18, 2022
Arbor Research Collaborative for Health Announces Hire of Shanthy Edward, M.A., Psy.D. as Vice President of Strategic Growth & Chief Growth Officer Monday, March 7, 2022
Arbor Research Collaborative for Health Appoints Chris Spera, PhD as New President & CEO Friday, November 19, 2021
Launch of the US DOPPS Practice Monitor - Peritoneal Dialysis (DPM-PD), tracking the latest practice trends for patients receiving PD Wednesday, August 25, 2021
Secular Trends in the Cost of Immunosuppressants after Solid Organ Transplantation in the United States Wednesday, March 6, 2019
Uptake of Generic vs Brand Name Immunosuppressants Among US Organ Transplant Recipients Wednesday, July 18, 2018