In silico simulation demonstrates improved blood volume target attainment in hemodialysis patients, indicating potential for safer individualized fluid removal.
Background: Ultrafiltration (UF) during hemodialysis is typically prescribed as a fixed treatment goal and delivered using a largely constant ultrafiltration rate throughout the session. We evaluated whether Adaptive Ultrafiltration (Adaptive UF), a physiological closed-loop control strategy guided by continuous relative blood volume (RBV) monitoring, could improve RBV target attainment while individualizing fluid removal within predefined treatment constraints. Methods: We performed a paired patient-specific in silico study using 119,472 historical hemodialysis treatments from 11,246 U.S. patients. Treatment-specific plasma refill rate profiles were derived from recorded RBV and ultrafiltration data. For each historical treatment, a corresponding Adaptive UF treatment was simulated and compared with the corresponding originally delivered treatment. Outcomes included the percentage of time within a predefined favorable RBV target region, UF delivery, and operational performance. Results: Mean time within the RBV target region increased from 36.3% with historically delivered treatments to 56.4% with Adaptive UF, showing an absolute improvement of 20.2 percentage points (95% CI, 19.9–20.5); target attainment improved in 90.0% of patients. Mean area outside the target range decreased from 280.7 to 139.5 RBV %–minutes. Mean achieved UF volume increased by 296.4 mL, although treatment-level UF delivery was bidirectional, increasing in 83.1% and decreasing in 16.9% of treatments. UF rates remained below 13 mL/kg/h in all simulations, and 99.4% of treatments remained within predefined UF volume limits. Conclusions: Adaptive UF improved intradialytic RBV target attainment and individualized UF delivery within predefined treatment constraints. Prospective studies are required to determine whether these physiological improvements translate into clinical benefit.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Fuertinger et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: