Background. While cardiovascular events remain the primary form of mortality in haemodialysis (HD) patients, few centres are aware of the impact of the hydration status (HS). The aim of this study was to investigate how the magnitude of the prevailing overhydration influences long-term survival.Methods. We measured the hydration status in 269 prevalent HD patients (28% diabetics, dialysis vintage = 41.2 ± 70 months) in three European centres with a body composition monitor (BCM) that enables quantitative assessment of hydration status and body composition. The survival of these patients was ascertained after a follow-up period of 3.5 years. The cut off threshold for the definition of hyperhydration was set to 15% relative to the extracellular water (ECW), which represents an excess of ECW of ∼2.5 l. Cox-proportional hazard models were used to compare survival according to the baseline hydration status for a set of demographic data, comorbid conditions and other predictors.Results. The median hydration state (HS) before the HD treatment (ΔHSpre) for all patients was 8.6 ± 8.9%. The unadjusted gross annual mortality of all patients was 8.5%. The hyperhydrated subgroup (n = 58) presented ΔHSpre = 19.9 ± 5.3% and a gross mortality of 14.7%. The Cox adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) revealed that age (HRage = 1.05, 1/year; P < 0.001), systolic blood pressure (BPsys) (HRBPsys = 0.986 1/mmHg; P = 0.014), diabetes (HRDia = 2.766; P < 0.001), peripheral vascular disease (PVD) (HRPVD = 1.68; P = 0.045) and relative hydration status (ΔHSpre) (HRΔHSpre = 2.102 P = 0.003) were the only significant predictors of mortality in our patient population.Conclusion. The results of our study indicate that the hydration state is an important and independent predictor of mortality in chronic HD patients secondary only to the presence of diabetes. We believe that it is essential to measure the hydration status objectively and quantitatively in order to obtain a more clearly defined assessment of the prognosis of haemodialysis patients.

The method of intersecting slopes (SHV with SNV) via BIS is a new method for the prediction DW. This approach will offer considerable improvement for the routine management of DW in the dialysis setting.

Technical systems for an accurate and practicable fluid management of dialysis patients are urgently needed, since current clinical methods are partially subjective, imprecise, and time consuming. Such new systems should not only allow the determination of the target normohydration weight, but also must be able to detect clinically relevant changes in fluid volume ( approximately 1 l). This study focuses on the systematic analysis of the detection limit of several candidate methods for fluid management. In a cohort of 16 new dialysis patients, several candidate methods were applied in parallel during each treatment of the initial weight reduction phase: the measurement of vena cava diameter (VCD), vena cava collapsibility index (CI), the blood volume drop during an ultrafiltration (UF) bolus (Deltarelative blood volume (RBV)-), the rebound after the UF bolus (DeltaRBV+), and the extracellular fluid volume determined with whole body bioimpedance spectroscopy (BIS). A clinical reference method was used to manage the fluid status of patients. All methods showed significant correlations with predialysis weight. The detection limits W(lim) of candidate methods for changes in fluid status were assessed as W(lim)=0.87 kg+/-0.64 kg (BIS), 1.74 kg+/-1.56 kg (VCD), 2.3 kg+/-1.0 kg (DeltaRBV-), 7.4 kg+/-8.5 kg (CI), 40 kg+/-108 kg (DeltaRBV+). Only BIS shows a satisfactorily low detection limit W(lim), whereas W(lim) was rated as critical for the VCD and DeltaRBV- methods, and as unacceptable for the CI and DeltaRBV+ methods. Bioimpedance spectroscopy appears to be the most promising method for a practical fluid management system in dialysis.

Whole-body impedance spectroscopy (BCM) has been validated by comparing isotope dilution methods for precisely measuring body volume compartments. Clinical assessment as well as comparison to other methods shows that BCM predicts a reliable individual dialysis target weight in kilograms, which corresponds to a physiological (normal) extracellular volume. BCM is helpful in the management of volume status and arterial hypertension in hemodialysis patients as well as in patients with chronic kidney disease. Quantified by BCM, overhydration is a powerful predictor of death in hemodialysis patients.

BackgroundThe infusion of microbubbles as a side effect of haemodialysis was repeatedly demonstrated in recent publications, but the knowledge on the source of microbubbles and on microbubble formation is scarce.MethodsMicrobubbles in the range of 10–500 µm were measured by a non-invasive bubble counter based on a pulsed ultrasonic Doppler system in a non-interventional study of a single centre. Totally, 29 measurements were performed in standard treatments covering a broad range of patient and treatment conditions (types of blood access, treatment modes, blood flow rates and arterial pressures).ResultsSeveral possible sources of microbubbles could be identified such as an arterial luer lock connector at negative pressure and remnant bubbles from insufficient priming, but some sources of microbubbles remain unknown. Microbubbles were found in all treatments, haemodialysis (HD) and online haemodiafiltration. The lowest average microbubble rates (17 ± 16 microbubbles per minute) were observed in patients treated by online haemodiafiltration at medium blood flow rates and moderate arterial pressures and the highest average microbubble rates (117 ± 63 microbubbles per minute) at high blood flow rates (550 mL/min) and low arterial pressures (−210 mmHg). Generally, the microbubble rate correlated to both blood flow rate (correlation coefficient r = 0.45) and negative arterial pressure (r = 0.67).ConclusionsMicrobubbles are a general side effect of HD; origin and pathophysiologic consequences of this phenomenon are not well understood, and deserve further study.