Search

In haemodialysis (HD), unwanted substances (uraemic retention solutes or 'uraemic toxins') that accumulate in uraemia are removed from blood by transport across the semipermeable membrane. Like all membrane separation processes, the transport requires driving forces to facilitate the transfer of molecules across the membrane. The magnitude of the transport is quantified by the phenomenon of 'flux', a finite parameter defined as the volume of fluid (or permeate) transferred per unit area of membrane surface per unit time. In HD, as transmembrane pressure is applied to facilitate fluid flow or flux across the membrane to enhance solute removal, flux is defined by the ultrafiltration coefficient (KUF; mL/h/mmHg) reflecting the hydraulic permeability of the membrane. However, in HD, the designation of flux has come to be used in a much broader sense and the term is commonly used interchangeably and erroneously with other measures of membrane separation processes, resulting in considerable confusion. Increased flux is perceived to reflect more 'porous' membranes having 'larger' pores, even though other membrane and therapy attributes determine the magnitude of flux achieved during HD. Adjectival designations of flux (low-, mid-, high-, super-, ultra-) have found indiscriminate usage in the scientific literature to qualify a parameter that influences clinical decision making and prescription of therapy modalities (low-flux or high-flux HD). Over the years the concept and definition of flux has undergone arbitrary and periodic adjustment and redefinition by authors in publications, regulatory bodies (US Food and Drug Administration) and professional association guidelines (European Renal Association, Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative), with little consensus. Industry has stretched the boundaries of flux to derive marketing advantages, justify increased reimbursement or contrive new classes of therapy modalities when in fact flux is just one of several specifications that determine membrane or dialyser performance. Membranes considered as high-flux previously are today at the lower end of the flux spectrum. Further, additional parameters unrelated to the rate of diffusive or convective transport (flux) are used in conjunction with or in place of KUF to allude to flux: clearance (mL/min, e.g. of β2-microglobulin) or sieving coefficients (dimensionless). Considering that clinical trials in nephrology, designed to make therapy recommendations and guide policy with economic repercussions, are based on the parameter flux they merit clarification—by regulatory authorities and scientists alike—to avoid further misappropriation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Informed decision-making is paramount to the improvement of dialysis therapies and patient outcomes. A cornerstone of delivery of optimal dialysis therapy is to delineate which substances (uraemic retention solutes or 'uraemic toxins') contribute to the condition of uraemia in terms of deleterious biochemical effects they may exert. Thereafter, decisions can be made as to which of the accumulated compounds need to be targeted for removal and by which strategies. For haemodialysis (HD), the non-selectivity of membranes is sometimes considered a limitation. Yet, considering that dozens of substances with potential toxicity need to be eliminated, and targeting removal of individual toxins explicitly is not recommended, current dialysis membranes enable elimination of several molecules of a broad size range within a single therapy session. However, because HD solute removal is based on size-exclusion principles, i.e. the size of the substances to be removed relative to the mean size of the 'pores' of the membrane, only a limited degree of selectivity of removal is possible. Removal of unwanted substances during HD needs to be weighed against the unavoidable loss of substances that are recognized to be necessary for bodily functions and physiology. In striving to improve the efficiency of HD by increasing the porosity of membranes, there is a greater potential for the loss of substances that are of benefit. Based on this elementary trade-off and availability of recent guidance on the relative toxicity of substances retained in uraemia, we propose a new evidence-linked uraemic toxin elimination (ELUTE) approach whereby only those clusters of substances for which there is a sufficient body of evidence linking them to deleterious biological effects need to be targeted for removal. Our approach involves correlating the physical properties of retention solutes (deemed to express toxicity) with key determinants of membranes and separation processes. Our analysis revealed that in attempting to remove the relatively small number of 'larger' substances graded as having only moderate toxicity, uncontrolled (and efficient) removal of several useful compounds would take place simultaneously and may compromise the well-being or outcomes of patients. The bulk of the uraemic toxin load comprises uraemic toxins below <30 000 Da and are adequately removed by standard membranes. Further, removal of a few difficult-to-remove-by-dialysis (protein-bound) compounds that express toxicity cannot be achieved by manipulation of pore size alone. The trade-off between the benefits of effective removal of the bulk of the uraemic toxin load and risks (increased loss of useful substances) associated with targeting the removal of a few larger substances in 'high-efficiency' HD treatment strategies needs to be recognized and better understood. The removability during HD of substances, be they toxic, inert or beneficial, needs be revised to establish the pros and cons of current dialytic elimination strategies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In most biological or industrial (including medical) separation processes, a membrane is a semipermeable barrier that allows or achieves selective transport between given compartments. In haemodialysis (HD), the semipermeable membrane is in a tubular geometry in the form of miniscule pipes (hollow fibres) and separation processes between compartments involve a complex array of scientific principles and factors that influence the quality of therapy a patient receives. Several conditions need to be met to accomplish the selective and desired removal of substances from blood in the inner cavity (lumen) of the hollow fibres and across the membrane wall into the larger open space surrounding each fibre. Current HD membranes have evolved and improved beyond measure from the experimental membranes available in the early developmental periods of dialysis. Today, the key functional determinants of dialysis membranes have been identified both in terms of their potential to remove uraemic retention solutes (termed 'uraemic toxins') as well subsidiary criteria they must additionally fulfill to avoid undesirable patient reactions or to ensure safety. The production of hundreds of millions of kilometres of hollow fibre membranes is truly a technological achievement to marvel, particularly in ensuring that the fibre dimensions of wall thickness and inner lumen diameter and controlled porosity—all so vital to core solute removal and detoxification functions of dialysis—are maintained for every centimetre length of the fragile fibres. Production of membranes will increase in parallel with the increase in the number of chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients expected to require HD therapies in the future. The provision of high-quality care entails detailed consideration of all aspects of dialysis membranes, as quality cannot in any way be compromised for the life-sustaining—like the natural membranes within all living organisms—function artificial dialysis membranes serve. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]