ABSTRACT Ensuring the microbiological safety of dialysis water is a critical requirement in hemodialysis practice. Contamination with bacterial endotoxins poses a serious risk to patient health, particularly in regions with limited access to advanced purification systems. Developing affordable and effective local alternatives can significantly improve dialysis water quality and patient safety. This study aimed to develop and evaluate a locally fabricated synthetic membrane for the removal of bacterial endotoxins from dialysis water, providing a safe and cost‐effective purification solution suitable for resource‐limited healthcare environments. The fabricated membrane was tested in vitro using Limulus amebocyte lysate (LAL) assay for quantitative endotoxin detection, contact angle measurement to assess surface wettability, and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) for morphological characterization. The performance of the membrane alone and in combination with ultrasound treatment, ultraviolet treatment, magnetic treatment, and ozone was compared to determine the most efficient treatment configuration. The results showed that combining membrane filtration with ozonation achieved the highest relative endotoxin reduction (~87%) , outperforming the membrane‐only system. The membrane exhibited a contact angle of 67°, indicating moderate hydrophilicity favorable for stable filtration performance. SEM analysis revealed a uniform, defect‐free porous surface with pore sizes ranging from 0.5 to 2 μm, confirming effective endotoxin retention and structural integrity. This study demonstrates the feasibility and effectiveness of integrating locally produced synthetic membranes with ozonation as a practical, efficient, and sustainable approach to improving dialysis water quality. The proposed system offers a promising low‐cost alternative for enhancing patient safety and can be adapted in healthcare centers with limited technical resources.
Humudat et al. (Sun,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: