Routine assessment of kidney urea clearance, dialysis dose and protein catabolic rate in the once-weekly haemodialysis regimen.

The dialysis dose (Kt/V) and normalized protein catabolic rate (PCRn) are the most useful indices derived from the urea kinetic model (UKM) in haemodialysis (HD) patients. The kidney urea clearance (Kru) is another important UKM parameter which plays a key role in the prescription of incremental HD. Ideally, the three kinetic parameters should be assessed using the complex software Solute Solver based on the double pool UKM. In the clinical setting, however, the three indices are estimated with simplified formulae. The recently introduced software SPEEDY assembles the aforementioned equations in a plain spreadsheet, to produce quite accurate results of Kru, Kt/V and PCRn. Unfortunately, specific equations to compute Kt/V and PCRn for patients on a once-weekly HD regimen (1HD/wk) were not available at the time SPEEDY was built-up. We devised a new version of SPEEDY (SPEEDY-1) and an even simpler variant (SPEEDY-1S), using two recently published equations for the 1HD/wk schedule . Moreover, we also added a published equation to estimate the equivalent renal clearance (EKR) normalized to urea distribution volume (V) of 35 L (EKR35) from Kru and Kt/V . Aim of the present study was to compare the results obtained using the new methods (SPEEDY-1 and SPEEDY-1S) with those provided by the reference method Solute Solver. One hundred historical patients being treated with the once-weekly HD regimen were enrolled. A total of 500 HD sessions associated to the availability of monthly UKM studies were analysed in order to obtain Kru, single pool Kt/V (spKt/V), equilibrated Kt/V (eKt/V), V, PCRn and EKR35 values by using Solute Solver, SPEEDY-1 and SPEEDY-1S. When comparing the paired values of the above UKM parameters, as computed by SPEEDY-1 and Solute Solver, respectively, all differences but one were statistically significant at the one-sample t-test; however, the agreement limits at Bland-Altman analysis showed that all differences were negligible. When comparing the paired values of the above UKM parameters, as computed by SPEEDY-1S and Solute Solver, respectively, all differences were statistically significant; however, the agreement limits showed that the differences were negligible as far as Kru, spKt/V and eKt/V are concerned, though much larger regarding V, PCRn and EKR35. We implemented SPEEDY with a new version specific for the once-weekly HD regimen, SPEEDY-1. It provides accurate results and is presently the best alternative to Solute Solver. Using SPEEDY-1S led to a larger difference in PCRn and EKR35, which could be acceptable for clinical practice if SPEEDY-1 is not available.

Casino FG ，Deira J ，Suárez MA ，Aguilar J ，Basile C ... -  《-》

The lacking equation that estimates the protein catabolic rate in patients on once-weekly haemodialysis.

Casino FG ，Mostacci SD ，Sabato A ，Montemurro M ，Procida C ，Saracino A ，Santarsia G ，Basile C ... -  《-》

Improving the "second generation Daugirdas equation" to estimate Kt/V on the once-weekly haemodialysis schedule.

Casino FG ，Deira J ，Suárez MA ，Aguilar J ，Santarsia G ，Basile C ... -  《-》

The variable target model: a paradigm shift in the incremental haemodialysis prescription.

The recent interest in incremental haemodialysis (HD) is hindered by the current prescription based on a fixed target model (FTM) for the total (dialytic + renal) equivalent continuous clearance (ECC). The latter is expressed either as standard Kt/V (stdKt/V), i.e. the pre-dialysis averaged concentration of urea-based ECC, or EKRc, i.e. the time averaged concentration-based ECC, corrected for volume (V) = 40 L. Accordingly, there are two different targets: stdKt/V = 2.3 volumes per week (v/wk) and EKRc = 13 mL/min/40 L. However, fixing the total ECC necessarily implies perfect equivalence of its components-the residual renal urea clearance (Kru) and dialysis clearance (Kd). This assumption is wrong because Kru has much greater clinical weight than Kd. Here we propose that the ECC target varies as an inverse function of Kru, from a maximum value in anuria to a minimum value at Kru levels not yet requiring dialysis. The aim of the present study was to compare the current FTM with the proposed variable target model (VTM). The double pool urea kinetic model was used to model dialysis sessions for 360 virtual patients and establish equations predicting the ECC as a function of Kd, Kru and the number of sessions per week. An end-dialysis urea distribution V of 35 L (corresponding to a body surface area of 1.73 m 2 ) was used, so that the current EKRc target of 13 mL/min/40 L could be recalculated at an EKRc 35 value of 12 mL/min/35 L equal to 12 mL/min/1.73 m 2 . The latter also coincides with the maximum value of the EKRc 35 variable target in anuria. The minimum target value of EKRc 35 was assumed to coincide with Kru corrected for V = 35 L (i.e. Krc 35 = 6 mL/min/1.73 m 2 ). The corresponding target for stdKt/V was assumed to vary from 2.3 v/wk at Krc 35 = 0 to 1.7 v/wk at Krc 35 = 6 mL/min/1.73 m 2 . On this basis, the variable target values can be obtained from the following linear equations: target EKRc 35 = 12 - Krc 35 ; target stdKt/V = 2.3 - 0.1 × Krc 35 . Two versions of stdKt/V were considered: the classic version (stdKt/V Gotch ) with Kru at 70%, and the current version (stdKt/V Daug ) with Kru at 100%. The VTM with stdKt/V Gotch produces results very close to those using the FTM with stdKt/V Daug . Once-weekly HD is virtually not allowed by the FTM. In contrast, the VTM allows dialysis to start at Krc 35 ∼5 mL/min/1.73 m 2 on a once-weekly HD schedule, at least in relatively healthy patients; this schedule can be maintained until Krc 35 falls below 4 mL/min/1.73 m 2 , at which point the schedule should be changed to a twice-weekly HD schedule, that, in turn, could be maintained until Krc 35 falls below 2 mL/min/1.73 m 2 . A paradigm shift from the FTM to the VTM in the prescription of incremental HD is proposed, whereby the VTM would allow less frequent treatments at lower Kru, with important clinical and economic implications. This approach is likely to be safe but needs to be confirmed by randomized controlled trials.

Casino FG ，Basile C 《-》

Errors in Computing the Normalized Protein Catabolic Rate due to Use of Single-pool Urea Kinetic Modeling or to Omission of the Residual Kidney Urea Clearance.

The protein catabolic rate normalized to body size (PCRn) often is computed in dialysis units to obtain information about protein ingestion. However, errors can manifest when inappropriate modeling methods are used. We used a variable volume 2-pool urea kinetic model to examine the percent errors in PCRn due to use of a 1-pool urea kinetic model or after omission of residual urea clearance (Kru). When a single-pool model was used, 2 sources of errors were identified. The first, dependent on the ratio of dialyzer urea clearance to urea distribution volume (K/V), resulted in a 7% inflation of the PCRn when K/V was in the range of 6 mL/min per L. A second, larger error appeared when Kt/V values were below 1.0 and was related to underestimation of urea distribution volume (due to overestimation of effective clearance) by the single-pool model. A previously reported prediction equation for PCRn was valid, but data suggest that it should be modified using 2-pool eKt/V and V coefficients instead of single-pool values. A third source of error, this one unrelated to use of a single-pool model, namely omission of Kru, was shown to result in an underestimation of PCRn, such that each ml/minute Kru per 35 L of V caused a 5.6% underestimate in PCRn. Marked overestimation of PCRn can result due to inappropriate use of a single-pool urea kinetic model, particularly when Kt/V <1.0 (as in short daily dialysis), or after omission of residual native kidney clearance.

Daugirdas JT 《-》