BackgroundA concentrate for bicarbonate haemodialysis acidified with citrate instead of acetate has been marketed in recent years. The small amount of citrate used (one-fifth of the concentration adopted in regional anticoagulation) protects against intradialyser clotting while minimally affecting the calcium concentration. The aim of this study was to compare the impact of citrate- and acetate-based dialysates on systemic haemodynamics, coagulation, acid-base status, calcium balance and dialysis efficiency.MethodsIn 25 patients who underwent a total of 375 dialysis sessions, an acetate dialysate (A) was compared with a citrate dialysate with (C+) or without (C) calcium supplementation (0.25 mmol/L) in a randomised single-blind cross-over study. Systemic haemodynamics were evaluated using pulse-wave analysis. Coagulation, acid-base status, calcium balance and dialysis efficiency were assessed using standard biochemical markers.ResultsPatients receiving the citrate dialysate had significantly lower systolic blood pressure (BP) (-4.3 mmHg, p < 0.01) and peripheral resistances (PR) (-51 dyne.sec.cm-5, p < 0.001) while stroke volume was not increased. In hypertensive patients there was a substantial reduction in BP (-7.8 mmHg, p < 0.01). With the C+ dialysate the BP gap was less pronounced but the reduction in PR was even greater (-226 dyne.sec.cm-5, p < 0.001). Analyses of the fluctuations in PR and of subjective tolerance suggested improved haemodynamic stability with the citrate dialysate. Furthermore, an increase in pre-dialysis bicarbonate and a decrease in pre-dialysis BUN, post-dialysis phosphate and ionised calcium were noted. Systemic coagulation activation was not influenced by citrate.ConclusionThe positive impact on dialysis efficiency, acid-base status and haemodynamics, as well as the subjective tolerance, together indicate that citrate dialysate can significantly contribute to improving haemodialysis in selected patients.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT00718289

RCA may be a safe and useful form of anticoagulation which is more expensive than heparinization but helps to minimize bleeding risk. The risk of metabolic complications is higher at the beginning of a new RCA program. For centers lacking experienced staff we suggest reserving this technique for patients with rapid clotting of the extracorporeal circuit if treated without anticoagulation.

Background Malnutrition in patients hospitalized in internal medicine wards is highly prevalent and represents a prognostic factor of worse outcomes. Previous evidence suggested the prognostic role of the nutritional status in patients affected by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We aim to investigate the nutritional risk in patients with COVID-19 hospitalized in an internal medicine ward and their clinical outcomes using the Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 (NRS-2002) and parameters derived from bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA). Methods Retrospective analysis of patients with COVID-19 aimed at exploring: 1) the prevalence of nutritional risk with NRS-2002 and BIA; 2) the relationship between NRS-2002, BIA parameters and selected outcomes: length of hospital stay (LOS); death and need of intensive care unit (ICU); prolonged LOS; and loss of appetite. Results Data of 90 patients were analyzed. Patients at nutritional risk were 92% with NRS-2002, with BIA-derived parameters: 88% by phase angle; 86% by body cell mass; 84% by fat-free mass and 84% by fat mass (p-value ≤0.001). In ROC analysis, NRS had the maximum sensitivity in predicting the risk of death and need of ICU and a prolonged hospitalization showing moderate-low specificity; phase angle showed a good predictive power in terms of AUC. NRS-2002 was significantly associated with LOS (β 12.62, SE 5.79). In a multivariate analysis, blood glucose level and the early warning score are independent predictors of death and need of ICU (OR 2.79, p ≤0.001; 1.59, p-0.029, respectively). Conclusion Present findings confirm the clinical utility of NRS-2002 to assess nutritional risk in patients with COVID-19 at hospital admission and in predicting LOS, and that bioimpedance does not seem to add further predictive value. An early detection of nutritional risk has to be systematically included in the management of COVID-19 patients hospitalized in internal medicine wards.

Pain severity and symptom distress in dialysis patients are important, but underestimated and undertreated. They interfere with sleep quality and daily living. Routine assessment of pain burden, pain management similar to that used in palliative care, and adequate analgesic use to treat specific dialysis-associated pain syndromes should be considered in guidelines.

Mild metabolic alkalosis resulting from standard bicarbonate haemodialysis (32 mmol/l) may induce symptomatic hypotension. While normalizing chronic metabolic acidosis is desirable, reducing bicarbonate concentrations should be considered in cases of significant alkalaemia or otherwise untreatable haemodynamic instability.