Abstract

BackgroundLittle information is available regarding which type of dialyzer membrane results in good prognosis in patients on chronic hemodialysis. Therefore, we conducted a cohort study from a nationwide registry of hemodialysis patients in Japan to establish the association between different dialyzer membranes and mortality rates.MethodsWe followed 142,412 patients on maintenance hemodialysis (female, 39.1%; mean age, 64.8 ± 12.3 years; median dialysis duration, 7 [4–12] years) for a year from 2008 to 2009. We included patients treated with seven types of high-flux dialyzer membranes at baseline, including cellulose triacetate (CTA), ethylene vinyl alcohol (EVAL), polyacrylonitrile (PAN), polyester polymer alloy (PEPA), polyethersulfone (PES), polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA), and polysulfone (PS). Cox regression was used to estimate the association between baseline dialyzers and all-cause mortality as hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals for 1-year mortality adjusting for potential confounders, and propensity score matching analysis was performed.ResultsThe distribution of patients treated with each membrane was as follows: PS (56.0%), CTA (17.3%), PES (12.0%), PEPA (7.5%), PMMA (4.9%), PAN (1.2%), and EVAL (1.1%). When data were adjusted using basic factors, with PS as a reference group, the mortality rate was significantly higher in all groups except for the PES group. When data were further adjusted for dialysis-related factors, HRs were significantly higher for the CTA, EVAL, and PEPA groups. When the data were further adjusted for nutrition-and inflammation-related factors, HRs were significantly lower for the PMMA and PES groups compared with the PS group. After propensity score matching, HRs were significantly lower for the PMMA group than for the PS group.ConclusionThe results suggest that the use of different membrane types may affect mortality in hemodialysis patients. However, further long-term prospective studies are needed to clarify these findings, including whether the use of the PMMA membrane can improve prognosis.

Highlights

  • Dialyzer technology is undergoing development and moving towards high permeability and biocompatibility; there is an urgent need for robust evidence regarding the performance of various types of dialyzers

  • The distribution of patients treated with each membrane was as follows: PS (56.0%), cellulose triacetate (CTA) (17.3%), PES (12.0%), polyester polymer alloy (PEPA) (7.5%), PMMA (4.9%), PAN (1.2%), and ethylene vinyl alcohol (EVAL) (1.1%)

  • When data were further adjusted for dialysis-related factors, hazard ratios (HRs) were significantly higher for the CTA, EVAL, and PEPA

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Dialyzer technology is undergoing development and moving towards high permeability and biocompatibility; there is an urgent need for robust evidence regarding the performance of various types of dialyzers. High-flux dialyzers are recommended for good outcomes in hemodialysis patients [1,2]. Types IV and V, which are classified as HPM dialyzers and composed of synthetic membranes, are used for >90% of Japanese hemodialysis patients [1]. Many Japanese patients are currently treated with HPM dialyzers, including high-flux membrane dialyzers. We conducted a cohort study from a nationwide registry of hemodialysis patients in Japan to clarify the association between different HPM dialyzers and mortality rates. Little information is available regarding which type of dialyzer membrane results in good prognosis in patients on chronic hemodialysis. We conducted a cohort study from a nationwide registry of hemodialysis patients in Japan to establish the association between different dialyzer membranes and mortality rates

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call