Skip to main content

Advertisement

We're creating a new version of this page. See preview

  • Research
  • Open Access

Squared frequency-Kt/V: a new index of hemodialysis adequacy—correlation with solute concentrations by computer simulation

  • 1,
  • 1, 2, 3Email author,
  • 1, 2,
  • 1, 2 and
  • 1, 2
Renal Replacement Therapy20195:8

https://doi.org/10.1186/s41100-019-0198-7

  • Received: 27 September 2018
  • Accepted: 8 January 2019
  • Published:

Abstract

Background

In patients undergoing home dialysis, conventionally, Kt/V has been regarded as an index of the removal efficiency per dialysis session. However, more recently, it has been considered that the hemodialysis product (HDP), rather than the Kt/V, is better associated with the clinical symptoms and outcomes in patients undergoing short daily dialysis or nocturnal dialysis. Nevertheless, the HDP lacks a theoretical background, and it does not take into consideration the dialyzer clearance or patient’s body size. The aims of the present study were to clarify the theoretical validity of HDP focusing on its association with solute concentration by computer simulation and to propose a new index of hemodialysis adequacy.

Methods

We used compartment models and calculated the time course of urea and β2 microglobulin (β2MG) concentrations to determine the peak concentrations and time-averaged concentrations at varying dialysis frequencies (n = 2–7 sessions/week) and durations of dialysis per session (t = 1 to 8 h dialysis sessions).

Results

It was found that the peak concentrations of urea and β2MG were significantly correlated with the HDP. Based on this, we theoretically extracted the factor related to the peak concentration and defined the squared frequency-Kt/V (sf-Kt/V), as a new index for determining hemodialysis adequacy (sf-Kt/V = n2Kt/V; K, clearance; V, solute distribution volume; n, frequency; t, dialysis time); this index was well correlated with the peak concentrations of urea and β2MG, even when the values of K and V were changed.

Conclusions

Since the sf-Kt/V is an index that reflects peak concentrations of urea and β2MG, which takes into account the dialysis frequency, session duration, dialyzer clearance, and the body weight of the patient, it will be a very useful tool for determining appropriate dialysis schedules and dialysis conditions for individual patients.

Keywords

  • Kt/V
  • Hemodialysis product
  • Adequacy of dialysis
  • Home hemodialysis

Background

Home hemodialysis has the advantage that dialysis schedule (frequency and duration of dialysis) can be changed at the patients’ own convenience. Many modalities of dialysis suitable for home hemodialysis have been proposed, including short daily dialysis [1], nocturnal dialysis [25], and daily nocturnal dialysis [6]. Home hemodialysis has been reported to be linked to increased survival [1, 7, 8], better blood pressure control [2], reduced left ventricular mass [4], improved mineral metabolism [4], enhanced quality of life [7, 8], and lower cost [2, 3, 5]. In home hemodialysis, since the dialysis schedule can be flexibly determined, a reliable index useful for determining the appropriate home dialysis modality, dialysis schedule (frequency and duration), and dialysis treatment conditions is required.

The Kt/V is a well-known index of the removal efficiency per dialysis session. To compare different dialysis modalities, the standard Kt/V was proposed as an index that can be uniformly used to measure and explicitly compare dialysis doses [911]. The use of this index was recommended by the National Kidney Foundation Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (KDOQI) guidelines [12] in 2006 and also by the most recent KDOQI in 2015 [13], to evaluate the optimal dialysis dose and schedule for frequent dialysis; however, it was still not widely used, probably because (1) its calculation process is quite complex; (2) the calculation required values of single-pool Kt/V and equilibrated Kt/V to fit the original definition of standard Kt/V, a mass generation per unit volume of body fluid normalized by the concentration; and (3) there is little advantage to use standard Kt/V as an alternative to Kt/V Daugirdas which has already been widely used in daily clinical practices for three times a week schedule.

It was also reported that the hemodialysis product (HDP), rather than the Kt/V, is better correlated with the clinical symptoms and outcomes in patients undergoing short daily dialysis and nocturnal dialysis, the modalities most often used for home hemodialysis [14]. HDP is an index of the adequacy of hemodialysis proposed by Scribner and Oreopoulos [14] in 2002 as their opinion. This index incorporates the dialysis frequency as an important variable:
$$ \mathrm{HDP}={n}^2\;t $$
where n is the dialysis frequency [times/week], and t is the dialysis time per session [h/session].

HDP has been proposed simply based on the very positive results with more frequent dialysis reported by De Palma et al. [15], Buoncristiani et al. [16], Bonomini et al. [17], Pierratos et al. [2, 3], and Lockridge et al. [18]. The HDP has been shown to be well correlated with the patients’ symptoms [14], and fewer symptoms [1928] in dialysis patients has been reported in the treatment at HDP > 70, although these are retrospective observational studies where HDP has not been used as a treatment criterion. Use of the HDP as an index of the adequacy of hemodialysis has major limitations: it is an empirical index that lacks a physiological or theoretical background and ignores the effects of the dialyzer clearance and patient’s body size. Therefore, although many types of dialyzers (low flux to super high flux) are currently available, it is difficult to select a dialyzer and operating condition suitable for short daily dialysis or nocturnal dialysis on the basis of the HDP.

The purpose of the present study was to explore a new index based on solute removal useful for ascertaining the adequacy of hemodialysis that would incorporate dialysis schedule (frequency and duration), the dialyzer clearance, and patient’s body size. To this end, we first sought to identify factors (such as the time-averaged concentrations/peak concentrations) that are strongly correlated with the HDP using a kinetic model. From our results, we developed an index that was also well correlated with these factors and validated the index using a kinetic model.

Methods

Kinetic model for urea

We used the single-pool model (Fig. 1a) and calculated the time course of the concentrations of urea to determine the peak concentrations and time-averaged concentrations under various dialysis schedules (Table 1).
Fig. 1
Fig. 1

Schematic diagram of single-pool (one-compartment) model (a) and three-compartment model (b)

Table 1

Setting conditions in the simulation

Group

A4

A5

A6

A7

A8

B4

B5

B6

B7

B8

C4

C5

C6

C7

C8

D3

D4

 Dialysis frequencies [sessions/week]

2

2

2

2

2

3

3

3

3

3

4

4

4

4

4

5

5

 Dialysis time per session [h/session]

4

5

6

7

8

4

5

6

7

8

4

5

6

7

8

3

4

 HDP

16

20

24

28

32

36

45

54

63

72

64

80

96

112

128

75

100

Group

D5

D6

D7

D8

E2

E3

E4

E5

E6

E7

E8

F1

F2

F3

F4

F5

F6

 Dialysis frequencies [sessions/week]

5

5

5

5

6

6

6

6

6

6

6

7

7

7

7

7

7

 Dialysis time per session [h/session]

5

6

7

8

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

1

2

3

4

5

6

 HDP

125

150

175

200

72

108

144

180

216

252

288

49

98

147

196

245

294

Time course of changes in the solute concentrations for various dialysis schedule was calculated (the dialysis frequency varied from 2 to 7 per week and/or dialysis time per session from 1 to 8 h)

The change of the blood urea level during dialysis was calculated using the following equation:
$$ \frac{Vd{C}_{\mathrm{B}}(t)}{dt}=-{K}_{\mathrm{u}}{C}_{\mathrm{B}}(t)+{G}_{\mathrm{u}} $$

That is, \( {C}_{\mathrm{B}}(t)=\frac{K_{\mathrm{u}}{C}_{\mathrm{B}}(0)-{G}_{\mathrm{u}}}{K_{\mathrm{u}}}{e}^{-\frac{K_{\mathrm{u}}t}{V}}+\frac{G_{\mathrm{u}}}{K_{\mathrm{u}}} \).

And the change of the blood urea level outside the period of dialysis was calculated by the following equation:
$$ \frac{Vd{C}_{\mathrm{B}}(t)}{dt}=-{K}_{\mathrm{u}}{C}_{\mathrm{B}}(t)+{G}_{\mathrm{u}} $$

That is, \( {C}_{\mathrm{B}}(t)=\frac{G_{\mathrm{u}}}{V}t+{C}_{\mathrm{B}}\left({t}_1\right) \)

where CB is the blood urea level, CB(t1) is the blood urea level at the end of dialysis, Ku is the urea clearance, and Gu is the endogenous production rate of urea. Using these equations, assuming Ku = 0, and a steady state (we repeatedly calculated the concentrations until the concentrations at the beginning and end of the week were equal), the time courses of the urea concentrations were calculated by the treatment conditions and the production rate of urea [29] (Table 2).
Table 2

Treatment conditions used to calculate the time courses of urea concentration using a single-pool model

Clearance of urea, Ku

90, 120, 150, 180

[mL/min]

Endogenous production rate of urea, Gu

6.2

[mg/min]

Fluid volume before the start of dialysis, V

36,000

[mL]

Kinetic model for β2-microglobulin

Three-compartment models (Fig. 1b) in which β2-microglobulin (β2MG) was distributed in a slowly moving pool and fast moving pool were used to calculate the time courses of β2MG concentration under various dialysis schedules (Table 1). The values of total clearance, intercompartmental clearance parameters, and compartmental volumes reported by Odell et al [30] for β2MG were used. The equation of mass transfer in each compartment could be expressed by the following equations:
$$ \frac{V_1d{C}_1}{dt}=-\left({K}_{01}+{K}_{12}+{K}_{13}\right){C}_1+{K}_{12}{C}_2+{K}_{13}{C}_3+{G}_{\upbeta} $$
$$ \frac{V_2d{C}_2}{dt}={K}_{12}{C}_1-{K}_{12}{C}_2 $$
$$ \frac{V_3d{C}_3}{dt}={K}_{13}{C}_1-{K}_{13}{C}_3 $$
$$ {K}_{01}={K}_{\mathrm{r}}+{K}_{\mathrm{nr}}+{K}_{\mathrm{d}} $$
$$ {V}_{\mathrm{d}}={V}_1+{V}_2+{V}_3 $$
where Kr, Knr, and Kd are the renal, non-renal, and dialyzer clearance, respectively. The distribution volume, Vd, is the sum of the compartmental volumes, and Gβ is the endogenous production rate of β2MG. The differential equations were solved numerically using a Runge-Kutta routine, using reported values [30] (Table 3). The time courses of the solute concentrations were calculated by the treatment conditions, such as the mass transfer coefficient between pools, solute production, and clearance of dialyzer.
Table 3

Treatment conditions used to calculate the time courses of β2MG concentration using a three-compartment model

Clearance of β2MG, Kβ

40, 60, 80

[mL/min]

Non-renal clearance, Knr

2.82

[mL/min]

Renal clearance, Kr

0

[mL/min]

Intercompartmental clearance, K12

75

[mL/min]

Intercompartmental clearance, K13

28.8

[mL/min]

Endogenous production rate, Gβ

0.159

[mg/min]

Fluid volume before the start of dialysis, V

36,000

[mL]

Volume of compartment 1 per body weight

53

[mL/kg]

Volume of compartment 2 per body weight

39

[mL/kg]

Volume of compartment 3 per body weight

109

[mL/kg]

We compared the correlation between the peak concentrations/time-averaged concentrations of solutes and the HDP, total dialysis time, or squared frequency-Kt/V (sf-Kt/V), by determining the coefficients of determination (R2), likelihood (L), and Akaike Information Criterion (AIC).

Model fitness

Regarding HDP (n2t) and total dialysis time (nt), we compared which one better estimates peak concentration and time-averaged concentration. Wilcoxon’s signed-rank sum test was used to check whether there was a significant difference in the absolute value of the difference between the approximate curves calculated by a least squares method and the calculated values by simulation.

Likelihood ratio test was used to compare the HDP (n2t, degree of freedom is 2) and sf-Kt/V (degree of freedom is 4). We compared the fitness between the HDP or the sf-Kt/V and the peak concentrations of small molecules at varying dialyzer clearances (Fig. 4a, b), and the fitness between the HDP or the sf-Kt/V and the time-averaged concentrations of urea and β2MG at varying dialyzer clearances (Fig. 4c, d).

First, the maximum log likelihood (L) was calculated from the residual sum of squares of the approximate curves and the calculated values by simulation by the following equation.

$$ \log L=-\frac{N}{2}\left(\log \left(2\pi \right)+\log {\sigma}^2+1\right) $$

where σ2 is the maximum likelihood estimator of variance, and N is sample size. The difference of the deviance was calculated by multiplying log L by − 2,

$$ \Delta D=-2\log {L}_{\_\mathrm{HDP}}-\left(-2\log {L}_{\_\mathrm{sf}-\mathrm{Kt}/\mathrm{V}}\right) $$

We performed a chi-square test for ΔD with a difference of 2 degrees of freedom to compare HDP with sf-Kt/V regarding which one would be better for fitting to the peak concentrations of urea and β2MG at varying dialyzer clearances.

AIC was also calculated by the following equation:

$$ \mathrm{AIC}=-2L+2\times \left(\mathrm{number}\ \mathrm{of}\ \mathrm{parameters}\right) $$

When the AIC is smaller, the model is considered to be a better fitting model after taking into account the number of parameters used.

Results

Search for factors correlated with the HDP

We assumed that if we could identify the factors that were more strongly correlated with the HDP than with the total weekly dialysis time, we would be able to estimate why HDP (n2t) is better correlated with the clinical symptoms than the total weekly dialysis time (nt). We focused on the peak concentrations and time-averaged concentrations of solute molecules per week. We used a single-pool model to investigate the kinetics of urea and a three-compartment model to investigate the kinetics of β2MG [30].

The time courses of solute concentrations under various dialysis schedules (varying dialysis frequencies from 2 to 7/ week and varying dialysis times per session from 1 to 8 h/session) were calculated (Table 1). We determined the peak concentrations and time-averaged concentrations for each solute.

The peak concentrations of all molecules were found to be significantly better correlated with the HDP than with the weekly total dialysis time (Fig. 2). While the time-averaged concentrations of urea were more tightly correlated with weekly total dialysis time than with HDP (Fig. 3). Thus, our results suggested that the HDP is strongly correlated with the peak concentrations of urea and β2MG.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2

Peak concentrations vs. HDP and total weekly dialysis time. Relationships between the HDP and peak concentrations of small molecules (a) and β2MG (b) for various dialysis schedules and the relationships between the total weekly dialysis time and peak concentrations of urea (c) and β2MG (d). The peak concentrations were significantly better correlated with the HDP than the total weekly dialysis time (p = 0.0034 for urea, p = 0.0171 for β2MG)

Fig. 3
Fig. 3

Time-averaged concentrations vs. HDP and total weekly dialysis time. Relationships between HDP and the time-averaged concentrations of urea (a) and β2MG (b) for various dialysis schedules and relationships between the total weekly dialysis time and the time-averaged concentrations of urea (c) and β2MG (d). The time-averaged concentrations of small molecules were significantly better correlated with the total weekly dialysis time than the HDP (p = 0.0004 for urea, p = 0.6261 for β2MG)

The “unphysiological nature” of dialysis may also be demonstrated by the difference between the maximum and minimum concentrations. This parameter was, however, not well correlated with HDP (data not shown).

We propose HDP × K/V (n2t × K/V) as a new index called sf-Kt/V (Appendix). This index incorporates both solute removal (K) and fluid volume of the patient (V), whereas the HDP does not. We then investigated whether this index would still be well correlated with the peak concentrations of small molecules when the clearance of the dialyzer was varied. The correlation of the sf-Kt/V with the concentrations showed higher R2 and lower AIC than that of HDP, and the difference in maximum log likelihood (deviance) was statistically large, meaning that the sf-Kt/V showed significantly better correlations with the peak concentrations of small molecules than HDP (Fig. 4). In other words, while the correlations with the HDP became weak when we used a different dialysis clearance, the sf-Kt/V still showed strong correlations with the peak concentrations of urea. Since sf-Kt/V is obtained by multiplying HDP by K/V, that is, the dialyzer clearance and patient’s body weight is also considered in the calculation of the sf-Kt/V; this index is deemed as being a useful new index for comparing the adequacy of dialysis based on solute removal (dialysis dose).
Fig. 4
Fig. 4

Peak concentrations vs. HDP and sf-Kt/V. Relationships between the HDP (a) or the sf-Kt/V (c) and the peak concentrations of urea at for varying dialyzer clearances and relationships between the HDP (b) or the sf-Kt/V (d) and the peak concentrations of β2MG at varying dialyzer clearances. When we entered different dialysis clearances, the sf-Kt/V showed significantly better correlations with the peak concentrations of both urea and β2MG than HDP (p < 0.01 for both cases)

While no precise threshold value of the HDP has been determined based on clinical evidence, HDP > 70 proposed by Scribner and Oreopoulos [14] is well accepted as being indicative of adequate dialysis. In a patient with a dry weight of 60 kg (body fluid volume, 36 L) undergoing dialysis with a dialyzer providing an average urea clearance of 160 mL/min and HDP > 70 will be equivalent to sf-Kt/V > 18.7.

Assuming that HDP > 70 is the threshold value for determining the adequacy of dialysis, we would determine the treatment schedules at varying dialyzer clearances (Fig. 5) and varying patient body weights (Fig. 6) that would yield sf-Kt/V values of over 20. When conducting dialysis four times a week, 6-h dialysis sessions are enough to obtain an HDP value of over 70 (42 × 6 = 96; > 70), regardless of the dialyzer urea clearance. When sf-Kt/V is used, and if patient weight was 60 kg, it can be judged that sufficient solute removal would be obtained when the dialyzer clearance is 180 mL/min or 150 mL/min, but equivalent solute removal cannot be obtained with 6-h sessions when the dialyzer urea clearance is 120 mL/min or 90 mL/min (Fig. 5), which would occur when blood flow rate or dialysate flow rate set to lower value. The appropriate dialysis frequency and dialysis time per session would also be calculated depending on the patient’s body weight (Fig. 6).
Fig. 5
Fig. 5

Dialysis schedules that would yield sf-Kt/V values of over 20 for varying dialyzer clearances at constant V (V = 36,000 mL). Each line shows the schedule that would yield an sf-Kt/V of 20. The area above this line represents the dialysis times/frequencies that yield sf-Kt/V values of over 20. As the dialyzer clearance increases, the dialysis time/frequency needed to obtain an sf-Kt/V value of over 20 decreases

Fig. 6
Fig. 6

Dialysis schedules that would yield sf-Kt/V values of over 20 for varying body weights of the patient at constant K (K = 180 mL/min). Each line shows the schedule that would yield an sf-Kt/V value of 20. The area above this line represents the dialysis times/frequencies that yield sf-Kt/V values of over 20. As the body weight of the patient increases, the dialysis time/frequency needed to obtain an sf-Kt/V value of over 20 increases. Thus, the optimal dialysis schedule depends on the patient’s body weight

Discussion

The results of simulations revealed strong correlations of the HDP with the peak concentrations of urea and β2MG. Considering these results and the fact that the HDP was empirically related to the clinical symptoms of patients, from viewpoint of solute removal, a large value of HDP would mean smaller peak concentrations, which could explain the reduction of the clinical symptoms.

In the field of pharmacokinetics, the toxicity of the substances is known to be time-dependent and concentration-dependent [31]. The experience that greater the HDP led to lighter the symptoms in dialysis patients [14] and the results we obtained that peak concentration of urea and β2MG better correlated with HDP than total dialysis time suggest that the toxicity due to accumulated substances in dialysis patients may concentration-dependent.

Since the results obtained here may be dependent on the parameters listed in Table 3, we have illustrated how the results would change when other values are selected for the relevant parameters. When the parameter changed by about 20%, which was the standard deviation of the measured data in the patients [30] (Table 4), the percent changes of the peak (Table 5) and time-averaged concentrations (Table 6) were determined. Intercompartmental clearances and volumes of the compartments changed the concentration by a few percentage points, and the endogenous production rate of β2MG changed the concentration by 25%. However, the difference among the schedules was only a few percentage points, which would be expected to have had no significant influence on the correlation between the HDP and the peak concentration or time-averaged concentration.
Table 4

Values of the parameters of three-compartment model applied for measured data of β2MG in patients [30]

 

V1 [mL/kg]

Knr [mL/min/kg]

V2 [mL/kg]

K12 [mL/min/kg]

V3 [mL/kg]

K13 [mL/min/kg]

Gβ [mg/hour/kg]

Mean ± SD

53 ± 9

0.047 ± 0.010

39 ± 11

1.25 ± 0.25

109 ± 27

0.48 ± 0.09

0.159 ± 0.041

Ratio of SD [%]

± 17

± 21

± 28

± 20

± 25

± 19

± 26

Data were expressed per kg body weight

Table 5

The percent changes of the peak concentrations determined by the calculation using maximum and minimum value (mean ± SD) of each parameter shown in Table 3

 

Dialysis schedule

Percent changes of peak concentrations [%]

n

t

V 1

K nr

V 2

K 12

V 3

K 13

G β

Maximum value (mean + SD)

2

7

− 1.76

− 11.30

− 2.07

− 0.02

− 3.28

− 0.56

25.79

3

4

− 1.69

− 10.61

− 2.09

− 0.06

− 2.80

− 0.69

25.77

5

7

− 2.45

− 6.76

− 3.18

− 0.04

− 4.58

− 1.02

25.89

7

4

− 3.02

− 5.63

− 2.99

− 0.19

− 1.34

− 1.97

25.78

Minimum value (Mean −  SD)

2

7

1.81

13.93

2.18

0.03

4.12

0.74

− 25.79

3

4

2.04

13.08

2.32

0.09

3.72

0.83

− 25.65

5

7

2.98

7.67

3.66

0.06

6.27

1.45

− 25.77

7

4

3.49

6.35

3.63

0.29

2.47

2.49

− 25.79

Table 6

The percent changes of time-averaged concentrations determined by the calculation using maximum and minimum value (mean ± SD) of each parameter shown in Table 3

 

Dialysis schedule

Percent changes of time-averaged concentration [%]

n

t

V 1

K nr

V 2

K 12

V 3

K 13

G β

Maximum value (mean + SD)

2

7

− 2.10

− 8.94

− 2.27

− 0.07

− 0.40

− 1.88

25.79

3

4

− 1.88

− 8.92

− 1.89

− 0.18

0.65

− 1.75

25.75

5

7

− 2.40

− 4.98

− 2.79

− 0.12

− 0.33

− 2.30

25.82

7

4

− 2.79

− 5.08

− 2.30

− 0.33

1.29

− 2.23

25.74

Minimum value (mean − SD)

2

7

2.25

10.75

2.57

0.11

1.15

2.45

− 25.79

3

4

2.36

10.85

2.40

0.30

− 0.56

1.96

− 25.76

5

7

2.99

5.56

3.33

0.19

1.13

3.05

− 25.77

7

4

3.09

5.66

3.00

0.46

− 1.48

2.52

− 25.82

Ultrafiltration and intercompartmental fluid shift may somehow have an influence, especially the concentrations of intermediate-sized molecules like β2MG. We checked the effects of ultrafiltration (data not shown). The results were similar to those obtained without taking into consideration ultrafiltration, for both urea and β2MG. In regard to intercompartmental fluid shift, we can discuss the results of the effects of the changes in the volumes of the compartments and intercompartmental clearances. The differences in the peak and time-averaged concentrations among the schedules obtained by varying the values of these parameters were only a few percentage points, which would be expected to have exerted no significant influence on the correlations between the HDP and peak concentration or time-averaged concentration.

The average weekly clearance per week, that is, EKR, is expressed using time-averaged concentration (TAC) and generation rate as [32, 33]:
$$ \mathrm{EKR}=\left(G/\mathrm{TAC}\right). $$
If dialysis is performed n times per week with the same clearance, same dialysis time, and same intervals between the dialysis treatments, the concentration changes during the n dialysis sessions per week would be equal and the total removal amount per week can be calculated as:
$$ \mathrm{EKR}{T}_{\mathrm{w}}= nKt, $$
where Tw is the total number of minutes in the week = 168 h. In actual clinical situations, although the intervals between dialysis treatments are not the same and the TAC is estimated from limited sampled data (the exponential decrease in the concentration was not taken into consideration), we may approximate the above as:
$$ \mathrm{EKR}{T}_{\mathrm{w}}\fallingdotseq nKt. $$
This approximation has been shown as a good approximation for thrice-weekly therapy [34]. Therefore, using this approximation:
$$ \mathrm{TAC}=G{T}_{\mathrm{w}}/ nKt=\left(1/ nt\right)\left(G{T}_{\mathrm{w}}/K\right). $$

This approximation can lead to a difference from the actual value. The difference is considered to be attributable to the intervals between dialysis treatments being different (therefore, the concentrations at the beginning of each dialysis session are not the same), and the fact that G, K, and V cannot be regarded as constant [34].

This equation shows that the time-averaged concentration of urea is inversely proportional to the total dialysis time per week (nt). It is obvious from the theoretical point of view that the time-averaged concentration would be well correlated with the total dialysis time. In the simulation of the present study, we obtained TAC = 630 t−1.0 in Fig. 2d, implying that the dataset (dialysis frequency and dialysis time for each session) was selected with little bias and the influence of time and frequency of dialysis on the peak concentration and average concentration can be adequately investigated using this dataset.

Therefore, in this study, a new index sf-Kt/V was devised considering the factors influencing the peak concentrations, sf-Kt/V = n2Kt/V. The sf-Kt/V was established as an indicator showing strong correlations with the peak concentrations. Since sf-Kt/V is an indicator based on solute removal that takes the dialyzer clearance and patient’s body size into consideration, it can be used to propose a dialysis schedule appropriate for each individual patient and to determine the appropriate dialyzer clearance, dialysis time, dialysis frequency, etc.

Scribner and Oreopoulos recommended HDP > 70 based on the 30-year excellent survival outcome in Tassin [1923]. HDP > 70 is equivalent to sf-Kt/V > 20 when the dialyzer used assumed to have an average urea clearance is 160 mL/min and the average dry weight of the patient is 60 kg. Therefore, assuming that HDP > 70 is a threshold value for determining the adequacy of dialysis, it can be considered that an sf-Kt/V value of about 20 for urea may be an approximate threshold of an indicator of the adequacy of dialysis. Currently, there are no data on comparisons of the clinical efficacy using sf-Kt/V as an indicator, and we propose to analyze clinical data in the future to establish a satisfactory threshold of sf-Kt/V. As this threshold value can be determined for each solute, it is necessary to clarify these thresholds not only for urea but also for β2MG.

When we calculate sf-Kt/V, single-pool Kt/V can be used for urea and equilibrated Kt/V for β2MG as Kt/V. For simple calculation to determine the dialysis schedule, dialysis time, and dialyzer clearance, we can use K as the dialyzer clearance corrected by the blood and dialysate flow rate, t as the dialysis time, and V as the estimated body fluid volume. However, if we use this simple calculation, sf-Kt/V would be affected by the differences between the estimated and actual body fluid volume and between the calculated clearance and actual clearance caused by a decrease in the actual blood flow rate or recirculation. Therefore, when conducting cohort studies or randomized controlled trials to determine the threshold value of sf-Kt/V, it is considered better to use single-pool Kt/V for urea and equilibrated Kt/V for β2MG for the calculation of sf-Kt/V.

There were several limitations of the present study. This study was not a clinical study. Whether it is indeed an appropriate index is yet to be confirmed by a cohort study or randomized controlled trial. Furthermore, sf-Kt/V > 20 was also calculated by assuming that HDP > 70 is the threshold value for determining the adequacy of the dialysis schedule; however, HDP > 70 has not yet been confirmed by clinical trials whether this threshold value is appropriate or not. When K = 180 mL/min, V = 36,000 mL, the dialysis duration that would yield sf-Kt/V values of over 20 was calculated as 8 h, meaning Kt/V = 2.4. Current dialysis guidelines for hemodialysis prescription [35] recommend Kt/V = 1.4 or more as the target dose for thrice-weekly dialysis. How to ensure consistency with the current guideline is an important issue while using this index. sf-Kt/V is also not a precise index, like the standard Kt/V or EKR, and does not reflect the residual kidney function. However, it does reflect the peak concentrations of the accumulated solutes in dialysis patients. With further clinical studies, this index has the potential to become a better indicator for determining the adequacy of dialysis in individual patients.

Conclusions

The sf-Kt/V is an index that takes into account the dialysis frequency, session duration and clearance, and the body weight of the patient and correlates with the peak concentrations more tightly than HDP. It offers the promise of being a very useful index for determining appropriate dialysis schedules and dialysis conditions for individual patients.

Abbreviations

AIC: 

Akaike Information Criterion

C B

Blood level [mg/mL]

C peak

Peak concentration per week [mg/mL]

EKR: 

Average weekly clearance per week [mL/min]

G u

Endogenous production rate of urea [mg/min]

G β

Endogenous production rate of β2-microglobulin [mg/min]

HDP: 

Hemodialysis product

K

Dialysis clearance [mL/min]

K d

Dialyzer clearance [mL/min]

K nr

Non-renal clearance [mL/min]

K r

Renal clearance [mL/min]

K u

Clearance of urea [mL/min]

L

Likelihood

n

Dialysis frequency [sessions/week]

N

Sample size

R 2

Coefficients of determination

sf-Kt/V

Squared frequency-Kt/V

t

Dialysis time per session for HDP [h/session]

t

Dialysis time per session [min/session]

T 1, T 2, T 3

Inter-dialysis times [min]

TAC: 

Time-averaged concentration [mg/mL]

T w

Total number of minutes in a week (10,080 min) [min]

V

Body fluid volume [mL]

V 1, V 2, V 3

Volume of compartments 1, 2, and 3 per body weight [mL/kg]

V d

The sum of the compartmental volumes [mL]

β2MG: 

β2-microglobulin

σ2

Maximum likelihood estimator of variance

Declarations

Acknowledgements

Not applicable.

Funding

Institutional research fund.

Availability of data and materials

Not applicable.

Authors’ contributions

KM provided the research design, carried out the simulation and data analysis, and wrote the manuscript. KeKo provided the working hypothesis, participated in the research design, and wrote the manuscript. MH and KoKo participated in the research design and substantially contributed to the study concept. HK provided the working hypothesis, participated in the research design, and substantially contributed to the study concept. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Kitasato University Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Sagamihara, Japan
(2)
Kitasato University School of Allied Health Sciences, Sagamihara, Japan
(3)
Department of Medical Engineering and Technology, Kitasato University School of Allied Health Sciences, 1-15-1 Kitasato, Minami-ku, Sagamihara Kanagawa, 252-0373, Japan

References

  1. Kjellstrand CM, Buoncristiani U, Ting G, Traeger J, Piccoli GB, Sibai-Galland R, et al. Short daily haemodialysis: survival in 415 patients treated for 1006 patient-years. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2008;23:3283–9.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  2. Pierratos A, Ouwendyk M, Francoeur R, Vas S, Raj DS, Ecclestone AM, et al. Nocturnal hemodialysis: three-year experience. J Am Soc Nephrol. 1998;9:859–68.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Pierratos A. Nocturnal home haemodialysis: an update on a 5-year experience. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 1999;14:2835–40.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  4. Culleton BF, Walsh M, Klarenbach SW, Mortis G, Scott-Douglas N, Quinn RR, et al. Effect of frequent nocturnal hemodialysis vs conventional hemodialysis on left ventricular mass and quality of life. JAMA. 2007;298:1291–9.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  5. Agar JW, Knight RJ, Simmonds RE, Boddington JM, Waldron CM, Somerville CA. Nocturnal haemodialysis: an Australian cost comparison with conventional satellite haemodialysis. Nephrology (Carlton). 2005;10:557–70.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  6. Pierratos A. Daily nocturnal home hemodialysis. Kidney Int. 2004;65:1975–86.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  7. Mowatt G, Vale L, MacLeod A. Systematic review of the effectiveness of home versus hospital or satellite unit hemodialysis for people with end-stage renal failure. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2004;20:258–68.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  8. Oberley ET, Schatell DR. Home hemodialysis: survival, quality of life, and rehabilitation. Adv Ren Replace Ther. 1996;3:147–53.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  9. Gotch FA. The current place of urea kinetic modelling with respect to different dialysis modalities. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 1998;13(Suppl 6):S10–4.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  10. Leypoldt JK, Jaber BL, Zimmerman DL. Predicting treatment dose for novel therapies using urea standard Kt/V. Semin Dial. 2004;17:142–5.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  11. Diaz-Buxo JA, Loredo JP. Standard Kt/V: comparison of calculation methods. Artif Organs. 2006;30:178–85.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  12. National Kidney Foundation. KDOQI Clinical Practice Guidelines and Clinical Practice Recommendations for 2006 updates: hemodialysis adequacy, peritoneal dialysis adequacy and vascular access. Am J Kidney Dis. 2006;48(Suppl 1):S1–S322.Google Scholar
  13. National Kidney Foundation. KDOQI Clinical Practice Guideline for Hemodialysis Adequacy: 2015 update. Am J Kidney Dis. 2015;66:884–930.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  14. Scribner BH, Oreopoulos DG. The hemodialysis product (HDP): a better index of dialysis adequacy than Kt/V. Dialysis & Transplantation. 2002;31:13–5.Google Scholar
  15. DePalma JR, Pecker EA, Maxwell MH. A new automatic coil dialyser system for “daily” dialysis. Hemodial Int. 2004;8:19–23.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  16. Buoncristiani U, Quintaliani G, Cozzari M, Giombini L, Ragaiolo M. Daily dialysis: long-term clinical metabolic results. Kidney Int. 1988;33(Suppl 24):S137–40.Google Scholar
  17. Bonomini V, Mioli V, Albertazzi A, Scolari P. Daily-dialysis programme: indications and results. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 1998;13:2774–7.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  18. Lockridge RS, Albert J, Anderson H, Barger T, Coffey L, Craft V, et al. Nightly home hemodialysis: fifteen months of experience in Lynchburg, Virginia. Home Hemodialysis Int. 1999;3:23–8.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  19. Charra B, Calemard E, Cuche M, Laurent G. Control of hypertension and prolonged survival on maintenance hemodialysis. Nephron. 1983;33:96–9.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  20. Charra B, Calemard E, Ruffet M, Chazot C, Terrat JC, Vanel T, et al. Survival as an index of adequacy of dialysis. Kidney Int. 1992;41:1286–91.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  21. Charra B, Chazot C, Jean G, Laurent G. Long, slow dialysis. Miner Electrolyte Metab. 1999;25:391–6.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  22. Charra B, Laurent G. Long hemodialysis: the key to survival? In: Brown EA, Parfrey PS, editors. Complications of long-term dialysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1999. p. 228–56.Google Scholar
  23. Laurent G, Calemard E, Charra B. Long dialysis: a review of fifteen years experience in one centre 1968–1983. Proc Eur Dial Transplant Assoc. 1983;20:122–35.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. The FHN Trial Group. In-center hemodialysis six times per week versus three times per week. N Engl J Med. 2010;363:2287–300.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  25. Woods JD, Port FK, Orzol S, Buoncristiani U, Young E, Wolfe RA, et al. Clinical and biochemical correlates of starting “daily” hemodialysis. Kidney Int. 1999;55:2467–76.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  26. Ok E, Duman S, Asci G, Tumuklu M, Onen Sertoz O, Kayikcioglu M, et al. Comparison of 4-and 8-h dialysis sessions in thrice-weekly in-centre haemodialysis: a prospective, case-controlled study. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2011;26:1287–96.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  27. Lacson E Jr, Xu J, Suri RS, Nesrallah G, Lindsay R, Garg AX, et al. Survival with three-times weekly in-center nocturnal versus conventional hemodialysis. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2012;23:687–95.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  28. Culleton BF, Asola MR. The impact of short daily and nocturnal hemodialysis on quality of life, cardiovascular risk and survival. J Nephrol. 2011;24:405–15.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  29. Sargent JA, Gotch FA. The analysis of concentration dependence of uremic lesions in clinical studies. Kidney Int. 1975;7(Suppl 2):S35–44.Google Scholar
  30. Odell RA, Slowiaczek P, Moran JE. Beta2-microglobulin kinetics in end-stage renal failure. Kidney Int. 1991;39:909–19.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  31. Begg EJ, Barclay ML, Kirkpatrick CJ. The therapeutic monitoring of antimicrobial agents. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1999;47:23–30.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  32. Popovich RP, Moncrief JW. In: Nolph KD, editor. Transport kinetics. Peritoneal dialysis, ed. by, vol. 115. Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publication; 1985.Google Scholar
  33. Mineshima M, Suzuki T, Sudo N, Takemoto M, Agishi T, Ota K, et al. Solute removal dynamics in CAPD. Jpn J. Dialysis Therapy. 1983;16:321–4 (Article in Japanese).View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  34. Mineshima M, Hoshino T, Era K, Nakazato S, Kubo K, Sanaka T, et al. Validity of 1-compartment model for urea on adequate dialysis. Jpn J Artif Organs. 1993;22:320–4 (Article in Japanese).Google Scholar
  35. Watanabe Y, Kawanishi H, Suzuki K, Nakai S, Tsuchida K, Tabei K, et al. Japanese Society for Dialysis Therapy Clinical Guideline for “maintenance hemodialysis: hemodialysis prescriptions”. Ther Apher Dial. 2015;19(Suppl 1):67–92.View ArticleGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© The Author(s) 2019

Advertisement