Purpose: To determine the relationship between uric acid (UA) and nutritional and antioxidant status in hemodialysis (HD) patients, given that hyperuricemia could be an indicator of good nutritional status possibly because of the antioxidant properties of UA. Methods: Cross-sectional study with 93 patients on HD. Hyperuricemia was considered as UA ≥6.0 mg/dL in females and ≥7.0 mg/dL in males. Nutritional variables were registered. Blood samples were taken before the dialysis session to determine oxidative damage as plasma malondialdehyde (MDA) content, and antioxidant capacity measuring 2,2-diphenyl-piclrylhidrazil radical (DPPH●) scavenging activity and oxygen radical absorbance capacity (ORAC) value. Results: Patients with hyperuricemia had higher creatinine (11.9 vs. 10.5 mg/dL; p = 0.004), potassium (5.5 vs. 5.0 mg/dL; p = 0.014) levels; phase angle (5.8 vs. 4.9; p = 0.005), protein consumption (normalized protein nitrogen appearance, nPNA, 1.03 vs. 0.83; p = 0.013) than normouricemic patients. DPPH● scavenging activity was higher in hyperuricemic subjects (1.139 vs. 1.049 mM Trolox equivalents; p = 0.007); likewise, hyperuricemic subjects had less oxidant damage measured by MDA (10.6 vs. 12.7 nmol/mL; p = 0.020). Subjects with normouricemia were at higher risk of having a reactance to height (Xc/H) ratio less than 35 (OR 2.79; 95% CI, 1.1–7.017, p = 0.028); nPNA < 1.0 (OR 3.78; 95% CI, 1.4–10.2, p = 0.007), diagnosis of cachexia (OR 2.95; 95% CI, 1156–7.518, p = 0.021), potassium levels <5 (OR 2.97; 95% CI, 1.136–7.772, p = 0.023) and PA < 5.5° (OR 3.38; 95% CI, 1.309–8.749, p = 0.012.) Conclusions: Patients with hyperuricemia had higher antioxidant capacity and better nutritional status. Purines and protein restrictions in HD patients with hyperuricemia need to be reviewed individually for each patient. More studies are needed to stablish a cut point of UA levels in renal population.

Background: Intradialytic oral nutrition (ION) has been shown to improve many clinical outcomes, including lowering mortality, in hemodialysis (HD) patients. Despite the benefits, ION is underused in many countries. Objective: The objective of our study was to determine the perception of health-care professionals (HCP) in our environment of the use of ION in patients undergoing HD. Methods: Survey applied to HCP in Mexico who worked or had worked in an HD unit in their locality. Results: From 272 HCP who answered the survey, 74.3% believed that the use of ION has at least one beneficial effect; of these, the most frequently mentioned were an improvement in quality of life (QoL) (54.7%) followed by an improvement in serum albumin (37.9%) and muscle anabolism (31.6%). However, 49% consider that its use involves some risks. Of the respondents, 22% reported that their HD units allowed patients to consume food or supplements during HD sessions; the main reason given to forbid the introduction of food or supplements was the clinic's policy (41%). Conclusions: The personnel surveyed heterogeneous opinions regarding ION, but most believe that it may improve the QoL or the nutritional status of the patients. Nevertheless, the use of ION is uncommon in our country as it is against the internal regulations of most HD units.