Home haemodialysis and uraemic toxin removal: does a happy marriage exist?

Abstract

Home-based methods of haemodialysis are becoming of increasing interest. In this article, we review theoretical and evidence-based aspects of dialysis adequacy in the home setting compared with those of standard in-centre dialysis. Owing to the flexibility it enables, home haemodialysis may allow reduced blood flow rates and the successful use of less-efficient access systems. With home haemodialysis, Kt/V(urea) targets should be pursued as recommended in current guidelines, taking into account that this parameter does not reflect a number of essential elements that affect adequacy, such as dialyser pore size or alternative timeframes-factors that might be applicable to modern home haemodialysis. The use of high-flux, large-pore haemodialysers is associated with improved removal of large uremic toxins and should be considered as standard in home haemodialysis where possible, although dialysis water purity is crucial. Large molecule removal is further enhanced by applying convective strategies (such as haemo[dia]filtration), but these strategies greatly increase technical complexity. Alternate-day haemodialysis is more desirable than the usual thrice-weekly approach to avoid complications at the end of the long weekend interval, and it is easier to implement such a regime at home than in-centre. Frequent, prolonged, and combined frequent and prolonged dialysis regimes are all associated with improved removal and improved outcomes. All three alternative timeframes are easier to apply at home than in-centre. Home haemodialysis offers increased flexibility in adopting dialysis regimes that make it possible to improve solute removal and, therefore, outcomes.