The present systematic review and meta-analysis aims to compare the effect of bicarbonate hemodialysis and HDF on quality of life (QoL), fatigue, and time to recovery in end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients. Searches were run on January 2024 and updated on 3 March 2024 in the following databases: Ovid MEDLINE (1985 to present); Ovid EMBASE (1985 to present); Cochrane Library (Wiley); PubMed (1985 to present). Ten articles were fully assessed for eligibility and included in the investigation. Compared to HD, online HDF had a pooled MD of the mental component score (MCS) of the SF-36of 0.98 (95% CI -0.92, 2.87; P = 0.31). and of the physical component score (PCS) of 0.08 (95% CI -1.32, 1.48; P = 0.91). No significant heterogeneity was observed (Chi2 = 4.85; I2 = 38%; P = 0.18 and Chi2 = 3.85; I2 = 22%; P = 0.28, respectively). Studies that compared the QoL assessed through the Kidney Disease Questionnaire or KDQOL-SF and show that HDF does not improve QoL when compared with HD, in most studies. In five out of seven studies, HDF was not significantly more effective than HD in improving fatigue. The length of the recovery time resulted in similar in patients receiving HDF and HD in all studies included in the present review. HDF is not more effective than HD in improving QoL and fatigue and in reducing the length of time of recovery after dialysis.
Read full abstract