No abstract

As intravenous administration of deferoxamine is difficult in home dialysis patients we set out to determine the efficacy of intramuscular (i.m.) and intraperitoneal (i.p.) deferoxamine for removal of aluminum. Patients with serum aluminum levels greater than 90 micrograms/liter were studied in a paired fashion with each patient serving as their own control. Serum and peritoneal fluid aluminum were determined using flameless atomic absorption. In hemodialysis patients 2 g of intravenous deferoxamine increased serum aluminum from 124.7 +/- 32.4 to 415 +/- 192.4 micrograms/liter. One g of deferoxamine given intravenously or intramuscularly resulted in 76.8 +/- 35.3% and 70.4 +/- 23.2%, respectively, of the 2 g i.v. response. The rate at which serum aluminum increased following i.v. deferoxamine infusion was biphasic, with an initial rapid phase lasting 139 minutes followed by a much slower phase. The volume of distribution of aluminum following deferoxamine administration was 12.6 +/- 1.61 and the half life (t1/2) for aluminum removal during hemodialysis was 9.0 +/- 2.0 hours. The increase in serum aluminum following deferoxamine was not due to chelation of erythrocyte aluminum as erythrocyte aluminum remained constant over 24 hours. In patients on continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis, 2 g intravenous deferoxamine resulted in the removal of 560 +/- 267 micrograms of aluminum over 24 hours while 2 g deferoxamine given intraperitoneally gave 91 +/- 13% of the intravenous response. Aluminum clearance over 48 hours was twice that for 24 hours for both i.v. and i.p. deferoxamine.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Aluminum (Al) removal following deferoxamine (DFO) therapy in hemodialysis patients was evaluated in a paired-fashion comparing cuprophane (Travenol 12.11) and polysulfone (Fresenius F-80) dialyzers. QB and QD were held constant at 250 and 500 ml/min, respectively. The polysulfone dialyzer increased total plasma Al clearance from 20.0 +/- 2.8 to 80.5 +/- 7.6 ml/min (P less than 0.01), and reduced the t 1/2 of plasma Al during hemodialysis from 538 +/- 113 to 112 +/- 12 min (P less than 0.01). The polysulfone F-80 dialyzer increased Al removal during the first hour of hemodialysis from 518 +/- 191 to 1812 +/- 720 micrograms/hr (P less than 0.01). During a four hour hemodialysis the F-80 dialyzer returned plasma Al levels to pre-DFO values (103 +/- 36 vs. 93 +/- 23, P less than 0.05), suggesting complete removal of the DFO chelated Al complex. In one patient Al removal was evaluated using cuprophane, F-40, F-60 and F-80 dialyzers and the t 1/2 for Al removed decreased from 484.6 to 276.1 and 108 to 99 minutes, respectively. These data show the Fresenius F-80 polysulfone dialyzer effects the rapid removal of DFO-Al complexes. We propose use of the Fresenius F-80 dialyzer in conjunction with reduced DFO doses and i.m. administration of DFO the day prior to dialysis to limit DFO exposure as a method to decrease DFO-related side-effects in hemodialysis patients.