结合扩散、对流和吸收:聚甲基丙烯酸甲酯膜与聚砜膜在线稀释血液透析滤除对甲酰硫酸盐的中试研究

P. Molina, J. Peiró, M. Martínez-Gómez, Belén Vizcaíno, C. Esteller, Mercedes González-Moya, María García-Valdelvira, Mariola D. Molina, F. Maduell
{"title":"结合扩散、对流和吸收:聚甲基丙烯酸甲酯膜与聚砜膜在线稀释血液透析滤除对甲酰硫酸盐的中试研究","authors":"P. Molina, J. Peiró, M. Martínez-Gómez, Belén Vizcaíno, C. Esteller, Mercedes González-Moya, María García-Valdelvira, Mariola D. Molina, F. Maduell","doi":"10.3390/kidneydial1020015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Dialytic clearance of p-cresyl sulfate (pCS) and other protein-bound toxins is limited by diffusive and convective therapies, and only a few studies have examined how to improve their removal by adsorptive membranes. This study tested the hypothesis that high-flux polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) dialysis membranes with adsorptive capacity increase pCS removal compared to polysulfone membranes, in a postdilution on-line hemodiafiltration (OL-HDF) session. Thirty-five stable hemodialysis patients randomly completed a single study of 4 h OL-HDF with PMMA (BG2.1U, Toray®, Tokyo, Japan) and polysulfone (TS2.1, Toray®) membranes. The primary endpoint was serum pCS reduction ratios (RRs) obtained with each dialyzer. Secondary outcomes included RRs of other solutes such as β2-microglobulin, the convective volume obtained after each dialysis session, and the dialysis dose estimated by ionic dialysance (Kt) and urea kinetics (Kt/V). The RRs for pCS were higher with the PMMA membrane than those obtained with polysulfone membrane (88.9% vs. 58.9%; p < 0.001), whereas the β2-microglobulin RRs (67.5% vs. 81.0%; p < 0.001), Kt (60.2 ± 8.7 vs. 65.5 ± 9.4 L; p = 0.01), Kt/V (1.9 ± 0.4 vs. 2.0 ± 0.5; p = 0.03), and the convection volume (18.8 ± 2.8 vs. 30.3 ± 7.8 L/session; p < 0.001) were significantly higher with polysulfone membrane. In conclusion, pCS removal by OL-HDF was superior with high-flux PMMA membranes, appearing to be a good dialysis strategy for improving dialytic clearance of pCS, enabling an acceptable clearance of β2-microglobulin and small solutes.","PeriodicalId":74038,"journal":{"name":"Kidney and dialysis","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Combining Diffusion, Convection and Absorption: A Pilot Study of Polymethylmethacrylate versus Polysulfone Membranes in the Removal of P-Cresyl Sulfate by Postdilution On-Line Hemodiafiltration\",\"authors\":\"P. Molina, J. Peiró, M. Martínez-Gómez, Belén Vizcaíno, C. Esteller, Mercedes González-Moya, María García-Valdelvira, Mariola D. Molina, F. Maduell\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/kidneydial1020015\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Dialytic clearance of p-cresyl sulfate (pCS) and other protein-bound toxins is limited by diffusive and convective therapies, and only a few studies have examined how to improve their removal by adsorptive membranes. This study tested the hypothesis that high-flux polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) dialysis membranes with adsorptive capacity increase pCS removal compared to polysulfone membranes, in a postdilution on-line hemodiafiltration (OL-HDF) session. Thirty-five stable hemodialysis patients randomly completed a single study of 4 h OL-HDF with PMMA (BG2.1U, Toray®, Tokyo, Japan) and polysulfone (TS2.1, Toray®) membranes. The primary endpoint was serum pCS reduction ratios (RRs) obtained with each dialyzer. Secondary outcomes included RRs of other solutes such as β2-microglobulin, the convective volume obtained after each dialysis session, and the dialysis dose estimated by ionic dialysance (Kt) and urea kinetics (Kt/V). The RRs for pCS were higher with the PMMA membrane than those obtained with polysulfone membrane (88.9% vs. 58.9%; p < 0.001), whereas the β2-microglobulin RRs (67.5% vs. 81.0%; p < 0.001), Kt (60.2 ± 8.7 vs. 65.5 ± 9.4 L; p = 0.01), Kt/V (1.9 ± 0.4 vs. 2.0 ± 0.5; p = 0.03), and the convection volume (18.8 ± 2.8 vs. 30.3 ± 7.8 L/session; p < 0.001) were significantly higher with polysulfone membrane. In conclusion, pCS removal by OL-HDF was superior with high-flux PMMA membranes, appearing to be a good dialysis strategy for improving dialytic clearance of pCS, enabling an acceptable clearance of β2-microglobulin and small solutes.\",\"PeriodicalId\":74038,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Kidney and dialysis\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-11-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Kidney and dialysis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/kidneydial1020015\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kidney and dialysis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/kidneydial1020015","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

对甲酚硫酸酯(pCS)和其他蛋白质结合毒素的透析清除受到扩散和对流疗法的限制,只有少数研究研究探讨了如何通过吸附膜提高其清除率。本研究在稀释后在线血液透析过滤(OL-HDF)过程中检验了具有吸附能力的高通量聚甲基丙烯酸甲酯(PMMA)透析膜与聚砜膜相比增加pCS去除的假设。35名稳定的血液透析患者随机完成了一项使用PMMA(BG2.1U,Toray®,日本东京)和聚砜(TS2.1,Toray™)膜的4小时OL-HDF的单一研究。主要终点是用每个透析器获得的血清pCS减少率(RR)。次要结果包括其他溶质的RR,如β2-微球蛋白,每次透析后获得的对流体积,以及通过离子透析(Kt)和尿素动力学(Kt/V)估计的透析剂量。PMMA膜对pCS的RR高于聚砜膜(88.9%对58.9%;p<0.001),而β2-微球蛋白RR(67.5%对81.0%;p<001)、Kt(60.2±8.7对65.5±9.4L;p=0.01)、Kt/V(1.9±0.4对2.0±0.5;p=0.03)、,聚砜膜的对流量(18.8±2.8 vs.30.3±7.8 L/次;p<0.001)显著高于聚砜膜。总之,OL-HDF对pCS的去除优于高通量PMMA膜,这似乎是一种很好的透析策略,可以提高pCS的透析清除率,使β2-微球蛋白和小溶质的清除率达到可接受的水平。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Combining Diffusion, Convection and Absorption: A Pilot Study of Polymethylmethacrylate versus Polysulfone Membranes in the Removal of P-Cresyl Sulfate by Postdilution On-Line Hemodiafiltration
Dialytic clearance of p-cresyl sulfate (pCS) and other protein-bound toxins is limited by diffusive and convective therapies, and only a few studies have examined how to improve their removal by adsorptive membranes. This study tested the hypothesis that high-flux polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) dialysis membranes with adsorptive capacity increase pCS removal compared to polysulfone membranes, in a postdilution on-line hemodiafiltration (OL-HDF) session. Thirty-five stable hemodialysis patients randomly completed a single study of 4 h OL-HDF with PMMA (BG2.1U, Toray®, Tokyo, Japan) and polysulfone (TS2.1, Toray®) membranes. The primary endpoint was serum pCS reduction ratios (RRs) obtained with each dialyzer. Secondary outcomes included RRs of other solutes such as β2-microglobulin, the convective volume obtained after each dialysis session, and the dialysis dose estimated by ionic dialysance (Kt) and urea kinetics (Kt/V). The RRs for pCS were higher with the PMMA membrane than those obtained with polysulfone membrane (88.9% vs. 58.9%; p < 0.001), whereas the β2-microglobulin RRs (67.5% vs. 81.0%; p < 0.001), Kt (60.2 ± 8.7 vs. 65.5 ± 9.4 L; p = 0.01), Kt/V (1.9 ± 0.4 vs. 2.0 ± 0.5; p = 0.03), and the convection volume (18.8 ± 2.8 vs. 30.3 ± 7.8 L/session; p < 0.001) were significantly higher with polysulfone membrane. In conclusion, pCS removal by OL-HDF was superior with high-flux PMMA membranes, appearing to be a good dialysis strategy for improving dialytic clearance of pCS, enabling an acceptable clearance of β2-microglobulin and small solutes.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信