Clinical impact of personalized sodium prescriptions in hemodialysis

• Autor(a) principal: Sousa,Mariana
• Data de Publicação: 2021
• Outros Autores: Santos,Cristina, Colaço,Susana, Santos,José Paulo, Silva,Jorge
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: eng
• Título da fonte: Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
• Texto Completo: http://scielo.pt/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0872-01692021000400226
• topic: Hypertension; Interdialytic Weight; Isonatremic Hemodialysis; Sodium

ABSTRACT Dialysate sodium prescription is often standardized. In some patients, this can be hypernatremic compared to serum sodium, causing a positive sodium balance at the end of treatment that will contribute to increased extracellular volume and interdialytic weight gain. A prospective study was carried out to monitor and compare the clinical implications between different prescriptions of sodium dialysate (isonatremic versus hyponatremic hemodialysis). For that purpose, we included hemodialysis patients in treatment for at least 9 months. The individual sodium setpoint was determined through the median of pre-dialysis sodium measurements, carried out for 6 treatments. The prescribed dialysate sodium was equal to the setpoint (isonatremic period) for 4 weeks and then 2 meq/L inferior to the setpoint (hyponatremic period) for another 4 weeks. The main outcome was interdialytic weight gain. Secondary outcomes were ultrafiltration rate, blood pressure at the beginning of treatment, intradialytic complications, and qualitative assessment of symptoms. Twenty patients were included. Pre-dialysis serum sodium assessments in both periods tended to be patient specific with a stable value. The interdialytic weight gain was lower in the hyponatremic period (1.83±0.50 kg versus 2.04±0.58 kg) but without statistical significance (p value=0.387). The same trend was found in mean ultrafiltration and blood pressure. Dialysis complications were low in both periods. The percentage of cramps and hypotension requiring intervention was higher in the hyponatremic period with no statistically significant differences. Concerning thirst, there was a symptomatic improvement with sodium customization. This improvement was even more significant in the hyponatremic period. This study allowed us to reinforce the existence of a “sodium setpoint” for each patient and the importance of an individualized dialysis prescription. Our results suggest the safety of using isonatremic hemodialysis with improving patients’ symptoms. Regarding hyponatremic hemodialysis, despite being beneficial, it seemed to be associated with a higher number of complications.