Related Experiment Video
Updated: Apr 30, 2026

Measurement of Tissue Oxygenation Using Near-Infrared Spectroscopy in Patients Undergoing Hemodialysis
Published on: October 2, 2020
Comparison of myocardial perfusion during hemodialysis and hemodiafiltration
Roger De Andrade1, Tessa Kotze, Maia Lesosky
1Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, University of Cape Town and Groote Schuur Hospital, Cape Town, South Africa.
Insights
Hemodiafiltration (HDF) showed no advantage over hemodialysis (HD) in improving myocardial perfusion defects. Both treatments demonstrated a trend towards worsening perfusion during dialysis sessions.
Area of Science:
- Nephrology
- Cardiology
- Medical Imaging
Background:
- Patients undergoing renal replacement therapy often experience cardiovascular complications.
- Myocardial perfusion abnormalities are common in patients on hemodialysis.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare myocardial perfusion in patients undergoing conventional hemodialysis (HD) versus hemodiafiltration (HDF).
Main Methods:
- Myocardial perfusion scintigraphy using (99m)Tc-methoxyisobutylisonitrile was performed pre- and post-dialysis in 25 patients.
- Patients were initially on HD, then switched to HDF for 3 months before repeat scintigraphy.
- Clinical and laboratory data were collected throughout the study.
Main Results:
- No statistically significant difference in myocardial perfusion defects was observed between HD and HDF.
- Both HD and HDF showed a trend towards worsening perfusion defects during dialysis.
- No significant differences in blood pressure changes were noted between the two methods.
Conclusions:
- Hemodiafiltration does not offer a statistical advantage over hemodialysis regarding myocardial perfusion defects.
- The study suggests potential microcirculatory issues contributing to perfusion defects.
- Further investigation into the pathogenesis of these defects is warranted.
Background:
We compared myocardial perfusion in patients first on conventional hemodialysis (HD) and then on hemodiafiltration (HDF).
Methods:
Myocardial perfusion scintigraphy was performed in 25 patients pre- and post-HD. Patients were then converted to HDF for 3 months prior to repeating the scintigraphy. (99m)Tc-methoxyisobutylisonitrile was administered intravenously pre-dialysis and then within the last hour of dialysis. Up to 90 min after injection, tomographic images were obtained. Clinical and laboratory data were collected pre- and post-dialysis.
Results:
Five patients did not complete the study. Patients entering the study were on average 41.7 years old and on HD for 4 years (median). The mean standard Kt/V for the two procedures was not statistically different (1.55 for HD and 1.48 for HDF). The mean substitution volume for HDF was 18.48 liters. There were no significant differences in changes in blood pressures between HD and HDF (p = 0.22). There were no significant differences in myocardial perfusion defects in patients on HD compared with those on HDF. During dialysis in both studies, the data showed a general trend to worsening of perfusion defects.
Conclusions:
There was no advantage of HDF over HD with no statistical difference in perfusion defects between HD and HDF. There was a trend to worsening of perfusion defects during dialysis in the majority on HD and HDF. Midweek dialysis perfusion scores appeared to be consistently lower than early-week dialysis, but this was not statistically significant. The pathogenesis of the defects may lie at a microcirculatory level.
Related Concept Videos
Hemodialysis I: Introduction
Hemodialysis II: Procedure and Complications
Hemodialysis III: Nursing Management
Extracorporeal Removal of Drugs: Peritoneal Dialysis and Hemodialysis
Extracorporeal Removal of Drugs: Hemoperfusion and Hemofiltration
Dialysis

