Lessons from recent trials on hemodialysis

Abstract

Today, hemodialysis (HD) represents a rescue therapy for an increasing number of patients worldwide. Thanks to continuous improvements, it is now better tolerated; thus, allowing patients relief from uremic symptoms and increasing survival. However, many questions regarding the best way of ameliorating the outcomes of chronic kidney disease patients requiring dialysis are still open. Recently, 2 randomized controlled clinical trials tried to give some answers to the current debates around dialysis. The first one--the IDEAL trial--evaluated the effects of beginning early or late dialysis on patient mortality and morbidity, and it did not find any significant difference between the 2 groups, suggesting that starting dialysis on the basis of an estimate of GFR alone is not suitable. The second one--the FHN daily trial--compared in-center conventional (3 times per week) with in-center frequent (6 times per week) HD. It found that daily dialysis is associated with improvements in left ventricular mass, physical health composite scores and some secondary outcomes (hypertension and hyperphosphatemia) - although it also discovered there had been more frequent interventions related to vascular access. Despite the fact that both studies presented some unavoidable limitations, they gave important information which is useful in everyday clinical practice. According to evidence-based medicine, such well-designed and well-conducted randomized controlled trials are the best way to improve our knowledge.