MedPath

Dialysis Membranes and Hemodynamic Tolerance

Not Applicable
Completed
Conditions
Dialysis Membranes and Hemodynamic Tolerance
Interventions
Device: Revaclear
Device: Helixone high flux
Device: Xevonta
Device: Helixone low flux
Registration Number
NCT01898234
Lead Sponsor
Ospedale Regionale di Locarno
Brief Summary

Background:

High- and low-flux dialysis membranes made of different materials may correlate with various hemodynamic tolerance profiles. This study aims to investigate hemodynamic response and incidence of hypotensive episodes by comparing some of the most commonly used high- and low-flux dialyzers.

Methodology:

The study was designed as an open label, randomized, cross-over investigation, including 25 patients undergoing chronic hemodialysis. Four polysulfone dialyzers of 1.8 m2, A (Revaclear, Gambro), B (Helixone high flux, Fresenius), C (Xevonta, BBraun) and D (Helixone low flux, Fresenius), were compared with each other. The hemodynamic profile was assessed with a non-invasive technique and patients were asked to provide tolerance feedback through a questionnaire.

Detailed Description

Not available

Recruitment & Eligibility

Status
COMPLETED
Sex
All
Target Recruitment
25
Inclusion Criteria
  • age 18 and older
  • ability to understand the information presented and sign the informed consent
  • chronic hemodialysis for at least 8 weeks
  • stable dialysis prescriptions and modality in the 2 weeks prior to protocol implementation
Exclusion Criteria
  • mental illness;
  • inability to understand the information presented and sign the informed consent;
  • acute disease requiring hospitalization at the time of patient enrolment
  • pregnancy and breast feeding

Study & Design

Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Study Design
CROSSOVER
Arm && Interventions
GroupInterventionDescription
RevaclearRevaclear-
Helixone high fluxHelixone high flux-
XevontaXevonta-
Helixone low fluxHelixone low flux-
Primary Outcome Measures
NameTimeMethod
comparative evaluation of mean hemodynamic parameters (i.e. systolic and diastolic blood pressure, peripheral resistance and cardiac output) during dialysis4 weeks
comparative evaluation of subjective tolerance across the various membranes4 weeks

As to the assessment of subjective tolerance, we decided to administer the questionnaire designed by Cruz et al. \[Cruz DN, Mahnensmith RL, Brickel HM, Perazella MA. Midodrine and cool dialysate are effective therapies for symptomatic intradialytic hypotension. Am. J. Kidney Dis. 1999 Mag;33(5):920-926\] then modified by Teruel et al. \[Teruel JL, Martins J, Merino JL, Fernández Lucas M, Rivera M, Marcén R, et al. Temperature of the dialysis bath and hemodialysis tolerance. Nefrología: PublicaciónOficial De La Sociedad Española Nefrologia. 2006;26(4):461-468\] and to integrate it with a 1 to 10 numerical scale to assess patient well-being

comparative evaluation of Kt/V and of beta-2 microglobulin removal4 weeks
Secondary Outcome Measures
NameTimeMethod
comparative analysis of the incidence of symptomatic and non-symptomatic systolic pressure drops (> 20 mmHg)4 weeks

Trial Locations

Locations (1)

Ospedale Regionale di Locarno

🇨🇭

Locarno, Ticino, Switzerland

© Copyright 2025. All Rights Reserved by MedPath