Background/Aims: We derived a novel equation for calculating weekly urea standard Kt/V (stdKt/V) during hemodialysis (HD) based on urea mass removed, comparable to the approach during peritoneal dialysis. Methods: Theoretical consideration of urea mass balance during HD led to the following equation for stdKt/V, namely, stdKt/V = N × (URR + UFV/V), where N is the number of treatments per week, URR is urea reduction ratio per treatment, UFV is ultrafiltration volume per treatment, and V is postdialysis urea distribution volume. URR required corrections for postdialysis rebound and intradialytic urea generation. We compared the accuracy of this approach with previous equations for stdKt/V by numerical simulations using a 2-compartment model of urea kinetics for thrice-weekly and more frequent HD prescriptions. Results: The proposed equation based on urea mass removed predicted values of stdKt/V that are equivalent to those calculated by previous equations for stdKt/V. Conclusion: This work provides a novel approach for calculating stdKt/V during HD and strengthens the theoretical understanding of stdKt/V.

Keywords:
Adequacy of dialysis, Daily dialysis, Kinetics, Mathematical models, Urea Kt/V
1.
National Kidney Foundation: KDOQI clinical practice guideline for hemodialysis adequacy: 2015 update. Am J Kidney Dis 2015; 66: 884–930.
2.
European Best Practice Guideline Working Group: Haemodialysis dose quantification: small solutes. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2002; 17(suppl 7): 17–21.
3.
Gotch FA: The current place of urea kinetic modelling with respect to different dialysis modalities. Nephrol Dial Transplant 1998; 13(suppl 6): 10–14.
4.
Daugirdas JT, Depner TA, Greene T, Levin NW, Chertow GM, Rocco MV, et al: Standard Kt/Vurea: a method of calculation that includes effects of fluid removal and residual kidney clearance. Kidney Int 2010; 77: 637–644.
5.
Leypoldt JK, Jaber BL, Zimmerman DL: Predicting treatment dose for novel therapies using urea standard Kt/V. Semin Dial 2004; 17: 142–145.
6.
Blake PG, Daugirdas JT: Adequacy of peritoneal dialysis and chronic peritoneal dialysis prescription; in Daugirdas JT, Blake PG, Ing TS (eds): Handbook of Dialysis, ed 5. Philadelphia, Wolters Kluwer, 2015, pp 464–482.
7.
Henderson LW: Critical interpretation of adequacy parameters in peritoneal dialysis and hemodialysis. Perit Dial Int 1999; 19(suppl 2): S38–S44.
8.
Lindholm B, Waniewski J, Werynski A: Kt/V: the denominator dilemma. Pol Merk Lek 2003; 15: 311–315.
9.
Vonesh EF: Biomathematical modeling of dialysis – the basics. Abstracts of the 24th Annual Conference on Peritoneal Dialysis and the 15th Annual Symposium on Pediatric Dialysis. San Antonio, Texas, USA, February 9–11, 2004. Perit Dial Int 2004; 24:S3–S56.
10.
Greene T, Daugirdas JT, Depner TA, Gotch F, Kuhlman M; Frequent Hemodialysis Network Study Group: Solute clearances and fluid removal in the frequent hemodialysis network trials. Am J Kidney Dis 2009; 53: 835–844.
11.
Clark WR, Leypoldt JK, Henderson LW, Mueller BA, Scott MK, Vonesh EF: Quantifying the effect of changes in the hemodialysis prescription on effective solute removal with a mathematical model. J Am Soc Nephrol 1999; 10: 601–609.
12.
Waniewski J, Debowska M, Lindholm B; Are dialysis adequacy indices independent of solute generation rate? ASAIO J 2014; 60: 90–94.
13.
Daugirdas JT, Leypoldt JK, Akonur A, Greene T, Depner TA; FHN Trial Group: Improved equation for estimating single-pool Kt/V at higher dialysis frequencies. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2013; 28: 2156–2160.
14.
Tattersall JE, DeTakats D, Chamney P, Greenwood RN, Farrington K: The post-hemodialysis rebound: predicting and quantifying its effect on Kt/V. Kidney Int 1996; 50: 2094–2102.
15.
Daugirdas JT, Greene T, Depner TA, Leypoldt J, Gotch F, Schulman G, et al: Factors that affect postdialysis rebound in serum urea concentration, including the rate of dialysis: results from the HEMO Study. J Am Soc Nephrol 2004; 15: 194–203.
16.
Leypoldt JK, Cheung AK, Deeter RB, Goldfarb-Rumyantzev A, Greene T, Depner TA, et al: Kinetics of urea and beta-microglobulin during and after short hemodialysis treatments. Kidney Int 2004; 66: 1669–1676.
17.
Bland JM, Altman DG: Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986; 1: 307–310.
18.
Lin LI: A concordance correlation coefficient to evaluate reproducibility. Biometrics 1989; 45: 255–268.
19.
Daugirdas JT, Depner TA, Greene T, Levin NW, Chertow GM, Rocco MV, et al: Effects of reduced intradialytic urea generation rate and residual renal clearance on modeled urea distribution volume and Kt/V in conventional, daily, and nocturnal dialysis. Semin Dial 2010; 23: 19–24.
20.
Debowska M, Waniewski J, Lindholm B: An integrative description of dialysis adequacy indices for different treatment modalities and schedules of dialysis. Artif Organs 2007; 31: 61–69.
21.
Waniewski J, Debowska M, Lindholm B: Theoretical and numerical analysis of different adequacy indices for hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis. Blood Purif 2006; 24: 355–366.
22.
Waniewski J, Debowska M, Lindholm B: Can the diverse family of dialysis adequacy indices be understood as one integrated system? Blood Purif 2010; 30: 257–265.
23.
Waniewski J, Lindholm B: Fractional solute removal and KT/V in different modalities of renal replacement therapy. Blood Purif 2004; 22: 367–376.
© 2018 S. Karger AG, Basel
2018
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.