Why the study?
Does online hemodiafiltration improve left ventricular mass, ejection fraction, or pulse-wave velocity compared to low-flux hemodialysis in patients with ESRD?
Does online hemodiafiltration improve left ventricular mass, ejection fraction, or pulse-wave velocity compared to low-flux hemodialysis in patients with ESRD?
Online hemodiafiltration does not significantly alter the rate of change in left ventricular mass, ejection fraction, or pulse-wave velocity over time compared with low-flux hemodialysis in patients with ESRD.
Online hemodiafiltration confers no cardiac structural or functional benefit over low-flux hemodialysis in ESRD; challenges expectations of superiority on these endpoints.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Increased left ventricular mass (LVM), low ventricular ejection fraction (EF), and high pulse-wave velocity (PWV) relate to overall and cardiovascular mortality in patients with ESRD. The aim of this study was to determine the effect of online hemodiafiltration (HDF) versus low-flux hemodialysis (HD) on LVM, EF, and PWV. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: Echocardiography was used to assess LVM and EF in 342 patients in the CONvective TRAnsport STudy followed for up to 4 years. PWV was measured in 189 patients for up to 3 years. Effect of HDF versus HD on LVM, EF, and PWV was evaluated using linear mixed models. RESULTS: Patients had a mean age of 63 years, and 61% were male. At baseline, median LVM was 227 g (interquartile range [IQR], 183-279 g), and median EF was 65% (IQR, 55%-72%). Median PWV was 9.8 m/s (IQR, 7.5-12.0 m/s). There was no significant difference between the HDF and HD treatment groups in rate of change in LVM (HDF: change, -0.9 g/yr [95% confidence interval (95% CI), -8.9 to 7.7 g]; HD: change, 12.5 g/yr [95% CI, -3.0 to 27.5 g]; P for difference=0.13), EF (HDF: change, -0.3%/yr [95% CI, -2.3% to 1.8%]; HD: change, -3.4%/yr [95% CI, -5.9% to -0.9%]; P=0.17), or PWV (HDF: change, -0.0 m/s per year [95% CI, -0.4 to 0.4 m/s); HD: change, 0.0 m/s per year [95% CI, -0.3 to 0.2 m/s]; P=0.89). No differences in rate of change between treatment groups were observed for subgroups of age, sex, residual kidney function, dialysis vintage, history of cardiovascular disease, diabetes, or convection volume. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with online HDF did not affect changes in LVM, EF, or PWV over time compared with HD.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mostovaya et al. (2014) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: