COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
META-ANALYSIS
RESEARCH SUPPORT, NON-U.S. GOV'T
REVIEW
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Effect of hemodiafiltration or hemofiltration compared with hemodialysis on mortality and cardiovascular disease in chronic kidney failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials.

BACKGROUND: Whether convective modalities of dialysis, including hemofiltration (HF) and hemodiafiltration (HDF), improve cardiovascular outcomes and mortality is unclear.

STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

SETTING & POPULATION: Patients receiving HDF, HF, or standard hemodialysis (HD).

SELECTION CRITERIA FOR STUDIES: Randomized controlled trials.

INTERVENTION: Convective modalities of dialysis (HDF and HF) versus standard HD.

OUTCOMES: The primary outcome was clinical cardiovascular outcomes. Secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality, episodes of symptomatic hypotension, dialysis adequacy, and β2-microglobulin level. Relative risks (RRs) or weighted mean differences with 95% CIs for individual trials were pooled using random-effects models.

RESULTS: The search yielded 16 trials including 3,220 patients. Therapies assessed were convective modalities (HDF or HF) compared with standard HD. Compared with HD, convective modalities did not significantly reduce the risk of cardiovascular events (RR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.66-1.10) or all-cause mortality (RR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.65-1.05). Convective modalities reduced symptomatic hypotension (RR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.30-0.81) and improved serum β2-microglobulin levels (-5.95 mg/L; 95% CI, -10.27 to -1.64), but had no impact on small-molecule clearance (weighted mean difference in Kt/V, 0.04; 95% CI, -0.04 to 0.12). There was a nonsignificant trend to a greater likelihood of receiving a kidney transplant for participants allocated to filtration therapies (RR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.99-1.42).

LIMITATIONS: The trials were predominantly of suboptimal quality and underpowered, with imbalance in some prognostic variables at baseline. Intention-to-treat analysis was not used in some trials. Our analysis was limited to published outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS: The potential benefits of convective modalities over standard HD for cardiovascular outcomes and mortality remain unproved. Further high-quality randomized trials are needed to define the impact of these modalities on clinically important outcomes.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app