1,659
Views
17
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Clinical Study

Differences in Bio-incompatibility among Four Biocompatible Dialyzer Membranes Using in Maintenance Hemodialysis Patients

, , , , &
Pages 682-691 | Received 16 Feb 2011, Accepted 11 May 2011, Published online: 25 Jul 2011
 

Abstract

Background: Following the introduction of modified cellulosic and then synthetic membrane dialyzers, it was realized that the dialyzer bio-incompatibility depends on the membrane composition. We designed a prospective, randomized, cohort study of 6 months to determine several parameters of biocompatibility in maintenance hemodialysis (MHD) patients treated with four different membrane dialyzers. Methods: There were 60 MHD patients enrolled in the study. In baseline, synthetic low-flux dialyzer, polysulfone (PS) membrane was used in all patients for at least 3 months. Then the patients were randomly divided into three groups according to different dialyzer membranes. Synthetic high-flux dialyzer group, ployethersulfone membrane, cellulose triacetate (CTA) high-flux membrane, and synthetic low-flux dialyzer, polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) membrane were used in 6 months. A new dialyzer was used for each study treatment, and there was no dialyzer reuse. The biocompatibility markers and solutes removal markers were detected repeatedly at different time points. Results: The blood levels of highly sensitive C reactive protein, interleukin (IL)-1β, and interleukin (IL)-13 showed no difference among different groups at al time points. However, the blood complement levels and white blood cell counts were significantly different among three groups. When the dialyzers changed from PS to PMMA membrane, C3a levels and white blood cell counts changed significantly (p < 0.05). Moreover, the changes of C5a levels were significantly different between group CTA and group PMMA in month 3 (p < 0.05). Conclusion: There were much more differences on bio-incompatibility among different dialyzer membranes.

Declaration of interest: The authors thank Zhang Yu and Zhang Qi-Dong for their technical help. This study got financial support from Beijing Municipal Science and Technology Commission Funds (No. D09050704310903), Collaborative Project Funds on Fundamental and Clinical Research of Capital Medical University (No. 10JL26), the Research Fund for the Doctoral Program of Higher Education (PFDP) of Ministry of Education of the People’s Republic of China (20101107120003).

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.