Related Experiment Videos
Comparative crossover controlled study using polysulphone and vitamin E coated dialyzers.
Mohamed S Al-Jondeby1, Iolani T Cabaguing, Amelita A Pajarillo
1Department Nephrology, Armed Forces Hospital, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
Saudi Medical Journal
|April 22, 2003
Summary
The vitamin E coated dialyzer showed minor differences compared to the polysulphone dialyzer, with slightly better outcomes in reducing intradialytic symptoms but a higher incidence of dialyzer clotting.
Area of Science:
- Nephrology
- Biomaterials Science
Background:
- Limited clinical data exists for vitamin E coated dialyzers (CL-EE12, Terumo).
- Hemodialysis utilizes dialyzers to remove waste products from blood.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the efficacy and intradialytic symptoms of a vitamin E coated dialyzer against a standard polysulphone dialyzer.
- To evaluate clinical performance in patients undergoing hemodialysis.
Main Methods:
- A controlled crossover trial was conducted with 75 patients (34 in Group A, 41 in Group B).
- Patients alternated between vitamin E coated and polysulphone (Fresenius 60) dialyzers for 4-week periods.
- Key parameters including hemoglobin, urea reduction ratio (URR), Kt/V, blood pressure, and interdialytic weight gain were monitored weekly. Intradialytic symptoms were also recorded.
Main Results:
- The vitamin E dialyzer showed a statistically significant increase in dialyzer clotting (1.6% vs 0.1%, P<0.03).
- Patients experienced fewer hypotensive episodes (P<.007) and less itching (P<.02) with the vitamin E dialyzer.
- Urea reduction ratio (URR) and urea clearance ratio (Kt/V) were slightly higher with the vitamin E dialyzer in weeks 2 and 3.
Conclusions:
- The vitamin E coated dialyzer demonstrated a trend towards reduced intradialytic symptoms.
- A higher rate of dialyzer clotting necessitates further investigation for the vitamin E coated dialyzer.
- Clinical differences between the two dialyzer types were generally minor.