A Brief History of Daily Hemodialysis

Daily hemodialysis has been in uninterrupted practice since its introduction in California in 1967. Early trials were stopped for technical, logistical, and economical problems, but a rapidly increasing number of centers now perform it on close to 200 patients, either as long nightly or short daytime hemodialysis. Increasing the frequency of dialysis appears much more important in improving patient well-being than increasing the Kt/V dose, and patients quickly experience much more vigor, energy, and improved quality of life when starting daily hemodialysis. Blood pressure improves, and medications can often be discontinued. Similarly, the need for erythropoietin decreases, and nutrition and dry body mass increase. While the cost of dialysis increases, the total cost for a patient decreases as medications and hospitalizations decrease. Technical innovation will solve the logistical problems by letting a machine do the labor necessary to begin and end a dialysis session. Access problems have decreased for native fistula, and the other access types have not been studied enough.     

Experience With Nocturnal Hemodialysis

In order to provide a highly efficient, long-duration form of hemodialysis, we developed nocturnal hemodialysis. Patients were dialyzed nightly at home for 8 – 10 hours, 6 – 7 nights/week. We kept the dialysate flow at 100 mL/min and the blood flow at 250 – 300 mL/min. Patients were monitored remotely from the hospital through a computer connection. An internal jugular line was used as an access. We have trained 12 patients over 30 months and have accumulated 160 patient-months worth of data. The patients tolerated the dialysis very well and slept through the night. There was a significant improvement in their sense of well-being. Nightly Kt/V was 0.99. Weekly removal of phosphate was two times as high and β ₂ -microglobulin four times as high as conventional hemodialysis. All patients have discontinued their phosphate binders and have increased their dietary phosphate and protein intake. Hypertension was controlled with fewer medications, and erythropoietin dosages decreased. Complications were infrequent and included catheter occlusion and infections. Reusing the dialyzers decreased the cost of the treatment to levels similar to continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis. Nocturnal hemodialysis represents a viable dialysis modality that combines high quality, low cost, and excellent tolerance.     

The renaissance of home hemodialysis: where we are, why we got here, what is happening in the United States and elsewhere

Home hemodialysis has been around since 1964, but its use has declined over the years in most countries, this despite its advantages, particularly improved patient survival and quality of life and significant cost savings. Experience has shown that home hemodialysis can be performed successfully by many more patients than at present. Recently, with the demonstration of even better results with more frequent hemodialysis that is obviously best performed at home and with the development of new, more patient-friendly machines, the use of home hemodialysis is beginning to increase again.     

Delayed Dialyzer Reprocessing for Home Hemodialysis

Although dialyzer reuse for home hemodialysis (done by patients at home) has been in practice since the 1960s, it is now almost completely abandoned. The need for dialyzer reuse resurfaced with the renewed interest in daily/nightly forms of home hemodialysis and the associated increase in operating costs. We describe a method of dialyzer reuse based on reprocessing of dialyzers at the center, after they had been stored in a refrigerator at home for 1 week by the patient. Transportation of the dialyzers by either the patient or a transportation service was acceptable to the patients. Despite the lower number of reuses, possibly related to the delayed processing, dialyzer reuse in this setting provided significant financial benefits. Experience with this process for 3 years has not disclosed any negative effects after the initial logistical issues related to dialyzer transportation were resolved. In summary, weekly dialyzer reprocessing at the center provides a solution to the need for dialyzer reuse for the home hemodialysis patient.     

Home hemodialysis: Beliefs,attitudes, and practice patterns

There is increasing interest of the worldwide kidney community in home hemodialysis (HHD). This is due to emerging evidence of its superiority over conventional hemodialysis (HD), largely attributed to improved outcomes on intensive schedule HD, best deployed in patient's own homes. Despite published work in this area, universal uptake remains limited and reasons are poorly understood. All those who provide HD care were invited to participate in a survey on HHD, initiated to understand the beliefs, attitudes, and practice patterns of providers offering this therapy. The survey was developed and posted on the Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation‐Educational (NDT‐E) website. Two hundred and seventy‐two responses were deemed suitable for complete analysis. It is apparent from the survey that there is great variability in the prevalence of HHD. Physicians have a great deal of interest in this modality, with majority viewing home as being the ideal location for the offer of intensive HD schedules (55%). A significant number (21%) feel intensive HD may be offered even outside the home setting. Those who offer this therapy do not see a financial disadvantage in it. Many units identify lack of appropriately trained personnel (35%) and funding for home adaptation (50.4%) as key barriers to widespread adoption of this therapy. Despite the interest and belief in this therapy among practitioners, HHD therapy is still not within reach of a majority of patients. Modifiable organizational, physician, and patient factors exist, which could potentially redefine the landscape of HHD provision. Well‐designed systematic research of national and local barriers is needed to design interventions to help centers facilitate change.     

The History of Home Hemodialysis: A View From Seattle

Home hemodialysis was first used for the treatment of end-stage renal disease in the early 1960s, primarily as a means of reducing the cost of treatment. It was soon found to be an effective form of treatment that provided patient independence, greater opportunity for rehabilitation, and better survival. In 1973, when the Medicare End-Stage Renal Disease Program began, some 40% of all U.S. dialysis patients were on home hemodialysis, but since then the percentage of patients on this treatment has steadily decreased. There are several reasons for this, one in particular being the lack of availability of suitable equipment. There is now renewed interest in home hemodialysis sparked by the knowledge that new equipment specifically designed for this is being developed, that this is the modality with the best survival rate, greatest opportunity for adequate dialysis and best quality of life, and an interest in the use of daily (or nightly) home hemodialysis. Consequently, more than 30 years later, it appears that home hemodialysis may again become the preferred treatment for many more patients.     

Effects of frequent hemodialysis on blood pressure: Results from the randomized frequent hemodialysis network trials

Hypertension is a common complication of chronic kidney disease and persists among most patients with end‐stage renal disease despite the provision of conventional thrice weekly hemodialysis (HD). We analyzed the effects of frequent HD on blood pressure in the randomized controlled Frequent Hemodialysis Network trials. The daily trial randomized 245 patients to 12 months of 6× (“frequent”) vs. 3× (“conventional”) weekly in‐center hemodialysis; the nocturnal trial randomized 87 patients to 12 months of 6× weekly nocturnal HD vs. 3× weekly predominantly home‐based hemodialysis. In the daily trial, compared with 3× weekly HD, 2 months of frequent HD lowered predialysis systolic blood pressure by ?7.7 mmHg [95% confidence interval (CI): ?11.9 to ?3.5] and diastolic blood pressure by ?3.9 mmHg [95% CI: ?6.5 to ?1.3]. In the nocturnal trial, compared with 3× weekly HD, 2 months of frequent HD lowered systolic blood pressure by ?7.3 mmHg [95% CI: ?14.2 to ?0.3] and diastolic blood pressure by ?4.2 mmHg [95% CI: ?8.3 to ?0.1]. In both trials, blood pressure treatment effects were sustained until month 12. Frequent HD resulted in significantly fewer antihypertensive medications (daily: ?0.36 medications [95% CI: ?0.65 to ?0.08]; nocturnal: ?0.44 mediations [95% CI: ?0.89 to ?0.03]). In the daily trial, the relative risk per dialysis session for intradialytic hypotension was lower with 6×/week HD but given the higher number of sessions per week, there was a higher relative risk for intradialytic hypotensive requiring saline administration. In summary, frequent HD reduces blood pressure and the number of prescribed antihypertensive medications.     

Comparison of Staff‐Assisted Home Hemodialysis with In‐Center Hemodialysis and In‐Hospital Hemodialysis

Home hemodialysis (HHD) is superior to in‐center hemodialysis (ICHD) in terms of survival, quality of life, and cost‐effectiveness. However, assistance from family members in performing HHD is not always available to patients, and professional assistance for HHD can be cost prohibitive. For certain patients, ICHD can be impractical due to difficulties in transportation, which may necessitate ambulance transportation or hospitalization for in‐hospital hemodialysis (IHHD). We describe 4 patients that have had problems receiving ICHD for various reasons. Two of these patients had problems with transportation, while the other two could not remain on dialysis for the prescribed duration of time and, therefore, received inadequate dialysis. These patients had difficulty while receiving ICHD in meeting the adequacy criteria set by Dialysis Outcomes Quality Initiative. One of these patients had a neuropsychiatric disorder and displayed disruptive behavior. When these 4 patients were switched to staff‐assisted home hemodialysis (SAHD), the dialysis core indicators improved compared with ICHD, and the patients needed significantly fewer hospitalization days. In this paper, we demonstrate that, in patients that cannot be easily transferred, and in patients with neuropsychiatric disorders, SAHD can be a less expensive and more efficacious modality of dialysis.     

Patient preferences for in-center intense hemodialysis

There is a lack of data on patient preferences for intense hemodialysis (IHD). In this study, we conducted a cross-sectional survey to identify patient preferences and patient-centered barriers for IHD. A questionnaire on preferences and anticipated barriers, anticipated benefits, and quality of life for three in-center IHD schedules (daytime 2 hr six times/week [DHD], nocturnal 8 hr three times/week [ND3], and nocturnal 8 hr six times/week [ND6]) was administered to 100 chronic hemodialysis patients. A majority of patients (68%) were willing to undergo DHD for symptomatic benefits or increase in survival. An increase in energy level (94%) and improvement in sleep (57%) were the most common potential benefits that would justify DHD, but only 19% would undergo DHD for an increase in survival of < or =3 years. Only 20% and 7% would consider ND3 and ND6, respectively. The most common reported barriers were inadequate time for self (50%) and family (53%), followed by transportation difficulties (53%). Most patients would undergo DHD for symptomatic or survival benefits, but not ND3 or ND6. Disruption of personal time, however, is an important consideration. Success of DHD program would depend on arrangements for transportation to dialysis unit.     

Left ventricular assist device patient maintained on home hemodialysis: A novel class of patients to the home dialysis population

Severe heart failure is increasingly being managed by cardiac transplantation, and in some cases mechanical support devices serve as destination therapies. Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) were approved for destination therapy for end stage heart failure patients before the more advanced total artificial heart modality became available. One common complication of mechanical assist device placement is acute kidney injury. Historically, patients with mechanical support devices have had to have inpatient hemodialysis until combined heart kidney transplant. Though, some units have started accepting LVAD patients in outpatient dialysis clinics. The cost of in center hemodialysis remains high and home dialysis modalities are becoming increasingly popular. We report the first patient with an LVAD to undergo training and successful home hemodialysis while awaiting combined heart kidney transplantation.     

The International Quotidian Dialysis Registry: annual report 2006

Interest in short daily and nocturnal hemodialysis (HD) regimens continues to grow worldwide. Despite growing optimism that these therapies will afford better patient outcomes over conventional HD, the current literature has not been viewed as sufficiently compelling to affect widespread implementation in most jurisdictions. Before these therapies can gain wider acceptance, larger and more rigorous studies will likely be needed. In June 2004, the Quotidian Dialysis Registry, based at the Lawson Health Research Institute at the University of Western Ontario, Canada, began recruiting patients across North America. By using an Internet-based data entry platform, patients from various centers worldwide will eventually be recruited, and studied prospectively. This paper constitutes the second annual update on patient and center recruitment, patient and treatment characteristics, and future directions for the registry.     

A simple method to create buttonhole cannulation tracks in a busy hemodialysis unit

The preference for fistulae as the hemodialysis access of choice has led to a significant number of accesses that are less than ideal for cannulation. Buttonhole cannulation is ideal for such accesses, but the technique for creation provides major challenges. In 12 patients, buttonhole tunnel tracks were created by leaving the polyurethane catheter of a Clampcath^® hemodialysis needle indwelling for 10 days after the initial cannulation. After each dialysis the catheter was flushed, and dressed with an antibacterial ointment and gauze. Dialysis was carried out via the catheter during that time. After day 10, the catheter was removed, the tunnel track covered with an antibacterial dressing and the tunnel track was cannulated with a dull buttonhole needle at the next dialysis. Successful buttonhole accesses were created in 11 patients after 10 days, the 12th patient required a single sharp needle cannulation before using dull needles. During the first 2 weeks of dull needle cannulation both pain experienced on cannulation and the difficulty cannulating the access were significantly less than in the classical buttonhole technique (P<0.01). Complications during the follow-up period (6 months–1.5 years) included difficulty cannulating with a dull needle (22) and antibacterial agent induced contact dermatitis (4). There was no episode of sepsis or tunnel track infection. Initial cannulation of the fistula using a Clampcath^® hemodialysis needle, leaving the polyurethane catheter indwelling for 10 days, is a simple, safe, and effective technique for the creation of buttonhole tunnel tracks.     

Oral intake during hemodialysis: Is there an association with intradialytic hypotension?

Oral intake (OI) of food and fluid has been associated with hypotension during hemodialysis (HD). Trials evaluating this relationship are small. The objective of this study was to quantify OI and to examine its association with hypotension during HD. This is a cross-sectional retrospective chart review study of 3 consecutive HD runs (dialysate iCa=1.25 mmol/L) in 126 stable HD patients (n=378). For each run, the calculation for OI=total ultrafiltration-(net weight loss+IV fluids given). Hypotension was defined as a systolic blood pressure of <100 mmHg at any point during the run. The mean age of the patients was 60.9 years, 38.2% were female, 30.2% had diabetes mellitus, and the majority were Caucasian. The mean (SD) OI was 0.27 (0.352) L/run, range -1.061 to 1.901 L/run, with a normal distribution. In bivariate analysis, there was no correlation of OI with systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, or mean blood pressure (BP), and the mean OI did not differ among runs with hypotension (n=78) compared with uncomplicated runs (p=0.93). Oral intake was not predictive of hypotension in a multiple logistic regression model controlling for vintage, age, sex, BP medications, coronary disease, dialysis day and shift, diabetes mellitus, s-Ca, Na and ultrafiltration profiles, and dialysis temperature, even when the analysis was restricted to runs where the patients reached the prescribed dry weight within 0.1 kg. The results of this study suggest that the mean OI during dialysis is just over 0.25 kg, with some patients consuming several kilograms. The clinical significance of OI is uncertain. We did not find an association between OI and hypotension. It is likely that this association was confounded by failure to achieve the prescribed dry weight in a proportion of patients with a high OI, as well as interventions implemented in response to hypotension in previous runs. For example, patients with previous episodes of low BP are advised to limit OI, are prescribed profiles, and so on. There may be other deleterious effects of high OI including hypertension and cardiac disease. The generalizability of the results of this largely Caucasian study population is a recognized limitation. Further prospective and blinded studies are needed to examine the association between OI and hypotension, the long-term clinical consequences of OI, and to define thresholds for recommended OI during dialysis.     

The International Quotidian Dialysis Registry: annual report 2005

The International Quotidian Dialysis Registry was designed to collect data describing treatments, characteristics, and outcomes of patients treated with quotidian hemodialysis (HD) worldwide. In July 2004, North American centers were first invited to enroll patients. By March 1, 2005, a total of 70 nocturnal and 8 short-daily HD patients from three Canadian and two US centers were enrolled. As recruitment continues, projected enrollment for 2005 may exceed 200 patients from North America alone. Preliminary analyses indicate that the current registry cohort is younger (mean age, 49.5 +/- 1.6 years) and carries a lower burden of comorbidity than the overall North American HD population. The low event rate expected in this cohort underlines the need for a large sample size if an appropriately powered survival study is to be undertaken. Increasing recruitment in the United States by including HD centers owned or managed by large dialysis organizations, and beginning overseas collaborations to include Australia, New Zealand, Europe, and South America will be the primary areas of focus for 2005.     

The ideal home hemodialysis machine

Daily home hemodialysis (HD) patients have a much superior survival rate than patients on regular, 3 times a week in-center HD or on peritoneal dialysis. Present-day HD machines are unsuitable for use at home by patients. We present our concept of the ideal home HD machine that allows daily short and long HD, does all the work preparing for and cleaning up after dialysis, has an intravenous infusion system controlled by the patient, needs no systemic anticoagulation, and teaches and interacts with the patient during dialysis. To fulfill these functionalities, the dialyzer and blood tubing must be integrated with the machine and replaced less often than monthly, the machine must be capable of at least 200 L/week of hemodiafiltration, prepare all fluids necessary between and during dialyses, and all the components and fluids must be much beyond ultrapure.     

On‐line hemodiafiltration at home

Survival with online hemodiafiltration (OL‐HDF) is higher than with hemodialysis; frequent hemodialysis has also improved survival and quality of life. Home hemodialysis facilitates frequent therapy. We report our experience with 2 patients with stage 5 CKD who started home hemodialysis with OL‐HDF in November 2016. After a training period at the hospital, they started home hemodialysis with OL‐HDF after learning how to manage dialysis monitors and how to administer water treatment. We used the “5008‐home” (FMC^©) monitor, and the Acqua C^© (Fresenius Medical Care) for water treatment. Water conductivity was always checked before and during dialysis sessions and was always 2.5 to 3 mS/cm. Water cultures always fulfilled the criteria for ultrapurity. As far as we know, this is the first report on patients receiving OL‐HDF at home. The technique proved to be safe and valid for renal replacement therapy and transfers the benefits of hospital convective therapy to the home setting. Future data will enable us to determine whether survival has also improved.