AzTrials
AzTrials

End-stage Renal DiseaseNCT01877499

Can High Convection Volumes be Achieved in Each Patient During Online Post-dilution Hemodiafiltration?

An observational study of End-stage Renal Disease and Renal Replacement Therapy, run by Amsterdam UMC, location VUmc at 7 sites in Netherlands.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

Two recent randomized controlled trials (RCT) on online hemodiafiltration (HDF) did not show a treatment effect on patient survival when compared with low- or high-flux hemodialysis. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 years and older
What is being tested?
Optimization of HDF key parameters
How many people
86 participants
Where
7 sitesNetherlands
Study dates
28 Mar 2013to 30 Jun 2015
Phase
Observational
Are there results?
None posted in the registry

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 18 years and older
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Adult, Older adult

Study population: Patients treated with hemodialysis or hemodiafiltration recruited at dialysis units in 6-7 hospitals in the Netherlands

Who may be able to join

  • Patients treated with HD or HDF since >6 weeks, 3 times a week;
  • Patients able to understand the study procedures;
  • Patients willing to provide written informed consent.

Who cannot join

  • Current age < 18 years;
  • Severe incompliance to dialysis procedure and accompanying prescriptions (frequency and duration of dialysis treatment and fluid restriction);
  • Life expectancy < 3 months due to non-renal disease.

Trial locations and contacts

7 sites in 1 country.

7 sites in 1 country

Netherlands7 sites
  • Academic Medical Center - Dianet

    Amsterdam

  • Diapriva Dialyse Center

    Amsterdam

  • VUmc

    Amsterdam

  • Catharina Hospital

    Eindhoven

  • Martini Hospital

    Groningen

  • Maasstad Hospital

    Rotterdam

  • UMC Utrecht

    Utrecht

Other trials in Netherlands

About this study

Official title: Can High Convection Volumes be Achieved in Each Patient During Online Post-dilution Hemodiafiltration? Feasibility Study in Preparation of the Convective Transport Study (CONTRAST II)

Two recent randomized controlled trials (RCT) on online hemodiafiltration (HDF) did not show a treatment effect on patient survival when compared with low- or high-flux hemodialysis. Interestingly, post-hoc (on treatment) analyses from both trials unequivocally showed reduced mortality in the patient group achieving the highest convection volumes. Moreover, a third trial recently found a significant 30% decrease in mortality when HDF was applied with a mean convection volume of 23.7 L per session, which was somewhat higher than the average volumes reached in the aforementioned trials. Altogether, these findings support the concept of a dose-response effect, in which a minimally delivered convection volume is required in order to show a survival benefit.

Hence, the question arises whether high convection volumes are achievable in the majority of patients. The aim of this study is thus to test the following hypothesis: high-volume (>22 liters per treatment) post-dilution on-line hemodiafiltration (HDF) is achievable in the majority (>75%) of patients treated with chronic intermittent hemodialysis. This will be done through the use of a dedicated standardized protocol, in which the three most important determinants of convection volume will be successively optimized: treatment time, blood flow rate and filtration fraction.

Read the detailed description

Hemodialysis (HD) is the most common used renal replacement therapy worldwide. The main objective is the removal of excess fluid and toxic solutes from the patient. Despite the relative efficiency of modern dialyzers, HD remains inferior to normal kidney function, in part because of the inadequate clearance of so-called 'middle molecules'. In other words, 'uremic toxins' accumulate in chronic HD patients.

The role of middle molecular weight uremic toxins in the pathogenesis of many co-morbid conditions associated with end-stage renal disease is increasingly recognized. Hence, the hypothesis that their enhanced removal could convey a better survival has been proposed. Actually, HDF is the most effective modality in terms of solute removal, because solute transport is achieved by both diffusion (especially for small molecules) and convection (the most important clearance route for middle molecules). Although some convective transport can be achieved with high-flux HD, only in HDF can the amount of filtered volume reach values of 20 liters per session or more.

In line with this thinking, two RCTs comparing HDF to standard hemodialysis with either low- or high-flux membranes were performed. However, treatment assignment did not alter the primary outcome of all-cause mortality in neither of them. Interestingly, post-hoc analyses from both trials unequivocally showed reduced mortality in the patient group achieving the highest convection volumes. Whether these data result from so-called dose-targeting bias (the healthiest patients reaching the highest volumes) cannot be formally excluded, but it is noteworthy that these results remained after correction for known determinants of mortality. Moreover, careful examination of patients' baseline characteristics of the CONTRAST HDF cohort did not reveal a healthier profile among the high convection volume group.

Recently, a third trial found a significant 30% decrease in mortality when HDF was applied with a mean convection volume of 23.7 L per session, which was somewhat higher than the average volumes reached in the aforementioned trials (respectively 20.7 and 19.5 L per session). Altogether, these findings support the concept of a dose-response effect, in which a minimally delivered convection volume is required in order to show a survival benefit.

Hence, the question arises whether high convection volumes are achievable in the majority of patients. In a previous sub-analysis of CONTRAST, it was found that the most important determinants of achieved convection volume were treatment time and blood flow rate. Moreover, it was noted that convection volumes and filtration fraction (defined as the ratio of extracted plasma water flow rate to blood flow rate) differed markedly per participating center, suggesting different practice patterns. Thus, it is plausible that the optimization of these apparently seemingly modifiable factors, on an individual basis through a dedicated standardized protocol, could translate into a higher achieved convection volume.

The aim of this study is to test the following hypothesis: high-volume (>22 liters per treatment) post-dilution on-line hemodiafiltration (HDF) is achievable in the majority (>75%) of patients treated with chronic intermittent hemodialysis.

This study is a prospective observational study, in which all enrolled patients will be treated by post-dilution on-line HDF with the application of a standardized protocol aiming at maximizing the convection volume.

At the beginning of the study, each patient's usual dialysis parameters will serve as starting parameters. In addition, incident HDF patients will start with a filtration fraction of 25 % (or equivalent) on a post-dilution mode.

Then, convection volume will be increased stepwise by successively optimizing the three most important determining factors. First, treatment time will be increased to 4 h, if possible. Second, blood flow will be increased by 50 mL/min per treatment until a value 400 mL/min is reached, provided that pre-specified safety limits are respected. Third, filtration fraction will be increased by 2% per treatment up to a maximum of 33% or the maximally achieved value within safety limits. To take into account different settings between the various dialysis machines used by the participating centers, an easy-to-use conversion table will be provided to the nursing staff, allowing to find the parameter (substitution flow, substitution volume or substitution ratio) corresponding to the desired filtration fraction.

At the end of the step-up protocol, the achieved convection volume will be assessed and compared to the starting value. Additionally, a follow-up period of 8 weeks, in which the maximum values of the targeted parameters will be kept the same, will be observed in order to assess whether the high convective volumes can be maintained for a longer period.

Being tested
Optimization of HDF key parameters
Keywords
Hemodiafiltration, Convection volume, Filtration fraction, Blood flow, Treatment time
Medical subject headings
Kidney Failure, Chronic

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • Optimization of HDF key parametersOther

    First, patients actually receiving standard dialysis will be switched to post-dilution HDF.

    Then, a stepwise increase in 3 key parameters of the HDF prescription will be applied in a standardized way, in order to obtain the highest achievable convection volume.

    Precisely, the following 3 parameters will successively be increased towards a maximal target:

    1. Treatment time (up to 4 hours per session);
    2. Blood flow rate (up to 400 mL/min;
    3. Filtration fraction, defined as the ratio between extracted plasma water flow rate and blood flow rate (up to 33%).

    Maximal values for these parameters will be those achieved within pre-specified safety limits.

Study groups in NCT01877499
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
optimization of HDF key parametersThe cohort is composed of patients with end-stage renal disease receiving dialysis for at least 6 weeks, either as standard hemodialysis (low- or high-flux) or hemodiafiltration (HDF).
Receives: Other: Optimization of HDF key parameters

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Percentage of patients with a convection volume of at least 22 liters per treatment

    Measured: At the end of the step-up protocol (within 6 weeks from the start of the study)

Secondary outcomes (4)
  1. Achieved convection volume

    Measured: At the end of the step-up protocol and after a 8-weeks maintenance phase

  2. Change in convection volume

    Measured: At the end of the step-up protocol and after a 8-weeks maintenance phase, vs. baseline

  3. Change in other HDF parameters

    Increase in treatment time, blood flow rate and filtration fraction

    Measured: At the end of the step-up protocol and after a 8-weeks maintenance phase, vs. baseline

  4. Change in dialysis system pressures

    Change in dynamic venous, arterial, filter entrance and transmembrane pressures during treatment when the maximal convection volume is reached vs. baseline pressure values

    Measured: At the end of the step-up protocol and after a 8-weeks maintenance phase, vs. baseline

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted13 Jun 2013 (estimated)
  2. Study start28 Mar 2013
  3. Primary completion6 Mar 2015
  4. Study completion30 Jun 2015

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Observational
Observational model
Cohort
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrolment
86 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT01877499
Sponsor's protocol ID
METc 2013/33
Other IDs
not available yet, not yet available
Status last verified
Mar 2017
First submitted
6 Jun 2013
Last updated
3 Mar 2017
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
No

Publications

  • Grooteman MP, van den Dorpel MA, Bots ML, Penne EL, van der Weerd NC, Mazairac AH, den Hoedt CH, van der Tweel I, Levesque R, Nube MJ, ter Wee PM, Blankestijn PJ; CONTRAST Investigators. Effect of online hemodiafiltration on all-cause mortality and cardiovascular outcomes. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2012 Jun;23(6):1087-96. doi: 10.1681/ASN.2011121140. Epub 2012 Apr 26.

    PubMed 22539829
  • Ok E, Asci G, Toz H, Ok ES, Kircelli F, Yilmaz M, Hur E, Demirci MS, Demirci C, Duman S, Basci A, Adam SM, Isik IO, Zengin M, Suleymanlar G, Yilmaz ME, Ozkahya M; Turkish Online Haemodiafiltration Study. Mortality and cardiovascular events in online haemodiafiltration (OL-HDF) compared with high-flux dialysis: results from the Turkish OL-HDF Study. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2013 Jan;28(1):192-202. doi: 10.1093/ndt/gfs407. Epub 2012 Dec 9.

    PubMed 23229932
  • Maduell F, Moreso F, Pons M, Ramos R, Mora-Macia J, Carreras J, Soler J, Torres F, Campistol JM, Martinez-Castelao A; ESHOL Study Group. High-efficiency postdilution online hemodiafiltration reduces all-cause mortality in hemodialysis patients. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2013 Feb;24(3):487-97. doi: 10.1681/ASN.2012080875. Epub 2013 Feb 14.

    PubMed 23411788
  • Penne EL, van der Weerd NC, Bots ML, van den Dorpel MA, Grooteman MP, Levesque R, Nube MJ, Ter Wee PM, Blankestijn PJ; CONTRAST investigators. Patient- and treatment-related determinants of convective volume in post-dilution haemodiafiltration in clinical practice. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2009 Nov;24(11):3493-9. doi: 10.1093/ndt/gfp265. Epub 2009 Jun 10.

    PubMed 19515802

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

An observational study of End-stage Renal Disease and Renal Replacement Therapy, run by Amsterdam UMC, location VUmc at 7 sites in Netherlands.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 3 inclusion and 3 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 3 Mar 2017. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 7 sites in Netherlands. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Percentage of patients with a convection volume of at least 22 liters per treatment (time frame: At the end of the step-up protocol (within 6 weeks from the start of the study)). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?

On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT01877499, which also lists 4 linked publications.

Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 3 Mar 2017.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in