Real-Time Dialysis Dose: Ionic Dialysis Versus Classical Urea Kinetic Modeling Indices.

Abstract

Introduction Worldwide, over 850 million people need renal replacement therapy, and over 80% of them are on hemodialysis. The term "dialysis adequacy" is most often associated with the achievement of minimally acceptable indices - single pool Kt/V (spKt/V) and urea reduction ratio (URR%) and largely does not take into account other clinical indicators in patients. In addition, it should be taken into account that in the conditions of clinical practice, their measurement is carried out according to standards controlled by the regulatory structures and is carried out with a frequency between one and three months, and not during each dialysis procedure. Accordingly, based on the obtained value, we assume that it refers to the urea clearance of the entire dialysis prescription. A new methodology for measuring dialysis adequacy through ionic dialysis allows dose estimation in real time without the need for additional blood testsby recording the difference in sodium ion conductivity at the dialyzer inlet and outlet. The latter corresponds to the dialysis dose delivered and can be measured at each dialysis session, enabling timely therapeutic intervention at minimal cost to the community. The aim of this original article is to present ion dialysis to the community as a reliable and inexpensive alternative to classical urea kinetic modeling (UKM), evaluating the comparability of the two methods and the possible sources of error in the result. Material and methods This was a retrospective study of 32 patients undergoing hemodialysis at the Clinic of Nephrology and Dialysis at the University Hospital St. Marina (Varna, Bulgaria) for the period between January and December 2020.For each of the patients, four measurements (every three months) of the delivered dialysis dose were performed by ion dialysis and classical urea kinetic modeling in order to assess the comparability and reliability of the two methods. Results The analysis of the results proved a high correlation between the validated indicators of dialysis adequacy (spKt/V; URR) and those registered with online monitoring (online clearance monitor) by ionic dialysis - online Kt/V (onKt/V)while at the same time reporting a significant difference in the two methods - primarily based on the anthropometric formulas used to estimate the volume. The established regression models confirmed the high predictive value of ionic dialysis in relation to the actually delivered dose. Discussion Despite the high bond strength, our recorded values ​​for onKt/V are 8% lower compared to results using UKM. Therefore, onKt/V as an assessment metric has the ability to underestimate the dialysis dose received. Various factors as a possible source of error and its cause have been reported by some authors. Several studies have reported differences of 2-5% in instantaneous conductance measurements, which they associate mainly with differences in the diffusion coefficients of urea and sodium, as well as different effects of dialysis membrane charge or inadequate ultrafiltration correction. Conclusions Our study confirms that online clearance monitoring (OCM) is a practical non-invasive tool for daily use that complements the classic performance of OCM by helping to deliver an adequate dialysis dose with increased patient benefit and minimal cost of financial resources.