Background: A novel class of membranes, medium cut-off (MCO) membranes, has recently been designed to achieve interesting removal capacities for middle and large middle molecules in hemodialysis (HD) treatments. The few studies published to date have reported contradictory results regarding middle-sized molecules when comparing MCO dialyzers versus dialyzers used in online hemodiafiltration (OL-HDF). Methods: A prospective, single-center study was carried out in 22 patients. Each patient underwent 9 dialysis sessions with routine dialysis parameters, one with an MCO dialyzer in HD and the other 8 with different dialyzers in OL-HDF. The removal ratio (RR) of urea, creatinine, β₂-microglobulin, myoglobin, prolactin, α₁-microglobulin, α₁-acid glycoprotein, and albumin was intraindividually compared. Albumin loss in dialysate was measured. We propose a global removal score ([urea_RR + β₂-microglobulin_RR + myoglobin_RR + prolactin_RR + α₁-microglobulin_RR + α₁-acid glycoprotein_RR]/6 – albumin_RR) as a new tool for measuring dialyzer effectiveness. Results: No significant differences in the RRs of small and middle molecular range molecules were observed between the MCO vs. OL-HDF dialyzers (range 60–80%). Lower RRs were found for α₁-microglobulin and α₁-acid glycoprotein without significant differences. The albumin RR was < 11% and dialysate albumin loss was < 3.5 g in all situations without significant differences. The global removal score was 54.9 ± 4.8% with the MCO dialyzer without significant differences. Conclusions: Removal of a wide range of molecular weights, calculated with the proposed global removal score, was almost equal with the MCO dialyzer in HD treatment compared with 8 high-flux dialyzers in high-volume OL-HDF without relevant changes in albumin loss. The global removal score could be a new tool to evaluate the effectiveness of dialyzers and/or different treatment modalities.

Online hemodiafiltration (OL-HDF) is currently the most effective technique. Several randomized studies and meta-analyses have observed a reduction in mortality as well as a direct association with convective volume. Currently, it has not been well established whether a larger dialyzer surface area could provide better results in terms of convective and depurative effectiveness. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of larger dialyzer surface areas on convective volume and filtration capacity. A total of 37 patients were studied, including 31 men and 6 women, who were in the OL-HDF program using a 5008 Cordiax monitor with auto-substitution. Each patient was analyzed in 3 sessions in which only the dialyzer surface area varied (1.0, 1.4 or 1.8 m(2)). The concentrations of urea (60 Da), creatinine (113 Da), β2-microglobulin (11800 Da), myoglobin (17200 Da) and α1-microglobulin (33000 Da) were determined in serum at the beginning and end of each session in order to calculate the percent reduction of these solutes. The convective volume reached was 29.8 ± 3.0 with 1.0 m(2), 32.7 ± 3.1 (an increase of 6%) with 1.4 m(2), and 34.7 ± 3.3 L (an increase of 16%) with 1.8 m(2) (p<.001). The increased surface of the dialyzer showed an increase in the dialysis dose as well as urea and creatinine filtration. The percentage of β2m reduction increased from 80.0 ± 5.6 with 1.0 m(2) to 83.2 ± 4.2 with 1.4 m(2) and to 84.3 ± 4.0% with 1.8 m(2). As for myoglobin and a1-microglobulin, significant differences were observed between smaller surface area (1.0 m(2)) 65.6 ± 11 and 20.1 ± 9.3 and the other two surface areas, which were 70.0 ± 8.1 and 24.1 ± 7.1 (1.4 m(2)) and 72.3 ± 8.7 and 28.6 ± 12 (1.8 m(2)). The 40% and 80% increases in surface area led to increased convective volumes of 6 and 16% respectively, while showing minimal differences in both the convective volume as well as the filtration capacity when the CUF was higher than 45 ml/h/mmHg. It is recommended to optimize the performance of dialyzers with the minimal surface area possible when adjusting the treatment prescription.

Introduction: The medium cut-off Elisio HX dialyzer by Nipro became commercially available in Europe in 2021, but there are still no reports of in vivo data. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of it compared with previously evaluated hemodialysis (HD), expanded HD (HDx), and postdilution hemodiafiltration (HDF) treatments. Methods: A prospective study was carried out on 18 patients who underwent 5 dialysis sessions: FX80 Cordiax in HD, Elisio H19 in HD, Elisio HX19 in HDx, Theranova 400 in HDx, and FX80 Cordiax in HDF. The reduction ratios of urea, creatinine, ß2-microglobulin, myoglobin, kappa FLC, prolactin, α1-microglobulin, α1-acid glycoprotein, lambda FLC, and albumin were compared. Dialysate albumin loss was measured. Results: The comparison between the different dialysis modalities revealed no difference for small molecules, but HDx and HDF were significantly more efficient than HD for medium and large molecule removal. The efficacy of Elisio HX19 dialyzer in HDx was similar to the Theranova 400, superior to both dialyzers in HD, and slightly lower than HDF. Albumin losses in dialysate with HD dialyzers were less than 1 g, but between 1.5 and 2.5 g in HDx and HDF. The global removal score (GRS) values with HDx treatments were statistically significantly higher than those with HD. The highest GRS was obtained with the helixone dialyzer in HDF. Conclusions: The new MCO dialyzer, Elisio HX, performs with excellent behavior and tolerance. It represents an upgrade compared to their predecessor and is very close to the removal capacity of HDF treatment.

Background: In a previous study on a nocturnal, every-other-day online haemodiafiltration scheme, different removal patterns were observed for urea, creatinine, β2-​microglobulin, myoglobin and prolactin. The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of dialysis duration and infusion flow (Qi) on the removal of different molecular weight (MW) solutes, and to quantify the effect of the different treatments on the kinetics of the solutes by using a classical two-compartment model. Methods: This prospective, in-center study was carried out in 10 patients on a nocturnal, every-other-day online post-dilution haemodiafiltration program. Each patient received four dialysis sessions with different conditions, two 4-h sessions (with infusion flows of 50 or 100 ml/min) and two 8-h sessions (with infusion flows of 50 or 100 ml/min). To analyze the solute kinetics, blood samples were obtained hourly during the dialysis treatments and in the first 3 h post-dialysis. Results: Removal patterns differed in the molecules studied, which were quantified by means of the two-compartment mathematical model. The main results show the impact of dialysis duration on the removal of low molecular weight molecules (urea and creatinine), while the impact of Qi is clearly shown for high molecular weight molecules (myoglobin and prolactin). For middle molecular weight solutes, such as β2-microglobulin, both factors (duration and Qi) enhance the removal efficiency of the dialyzer. Conclusions: Our study evaluates experimentally and mathematically how treatment time and infusion flow affect the filtration of solutes of different MW during post-dilution haemodiafiltration. The results provided by the present study should help physicians to select and individualise the most appropriate schedules to deliver an optimum diffusive and convective dialysis dose for each patient.

Background: The biocompatibility of dialysis membranes is a determining factor in avoiding chronic microinflammation in patients under haemodialysis. Lower biocompatibility has been related to increased inflammatory status, which is known to be associated with cardiovascular events. Classically, cellulose membranes have been considered bioincompatible. A new-generation of asymmetric cellulose triacetate (CTA) membranes allows the performance of high convective transport techniques, but there have been no studies of their biocompatibility. The aim of the present study was to analyze and compare the biocompatibility characteristics of 4 membranes, including CTA, in online hemodiafiltration (OL-HDF) patients. Methods: We included 15 patients in ­OL-HDF. After a 2-week washout period with helixone membrane, each patient was treated with the 4 membranes (polyamide, polynephron, helixone and CTA) for 4 weeks in a randomized order. The other dialysis parameters were kept stable throughout the study. We studied changes in markers of the activation of the complement system, monocytes, platelets, and adhesion molecules with the 4 membranes, as well as inflammatory parameters. Results: Biocompatibility was similar among the membranes. There were no sustained differences in complement activation, measured by C3a and C5a levels, or in platelet activation, determined by levels of P-selectin and platelet-derived microparticles (CD41a+). No differences were observed in activated monocyte levels (CD14+/CD16+) or in plasma levels of interleukin (IL)-1, IL-6, IL-10 or high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, although tumour necrosis factor-α levels decreased when the patients were dialyzed with CTA. No significant differences were found in markers of endothelial damage, assessed by levels of plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 and adhesion molecules (intercellular adhesion molecule-1 and vascular cell adhesion molecule-1). Conclusion: The 4 membranes evaluated in this study in stable patients on OL-HDF, including the new-generation CTA, show similar biocompatibility with the methods applied.