Fresenius Medical Care Completes Acquisition of NxStage Medical
Browser Upgrade Recommended: Our website has detected that you are using a version of Internet Explorer that will prevent you from accessing certain features on FMCNA.com. We strongly recommend that you use a different browser to optimize your viewing experience. Supported browsers include Chrome, Edge, Firefox, and Safari.
David Thompson, Vice President and Medical Director, Critical Care, Fresenius Medical Care North America & Dinesh Chatoth, Associate Chief Medical Officer, Fresenius Medical Care North America & Shakil Aslam, Vice President and Senior Medical Director, Devices, Fresenius Medical Care North America
(Clearance values of hollow fiber dialyzer with membrane from polysulfone material for different areas1)
During a hemodialysis treatment, activation of clotting factors and platelets results in thrombosis in the dialyzer. Activation of the complement system, with consequent activation of leukocytes can lead to:
All dialysis membranes activate complement and leukocytes to some extent, but unmodified cellulosic membranes are potent complement and leukocyte activators and are generally considered bioincompatible.
In addition, the generation of bradykinin in the presence of a dialysis membrane with an anionic surface and accumulation of the bradykinin in plasma can cause anaphylactoid reactions in the presence of ACE inhibitors.
Early disposable hollow-fiber dialyzers were shipped filled with a formaldehyde solution to maintain sterility. Later, dialyzers were sterilized with ethylene oxide (ETO) and shipped dry, but the polyurethane potting material used in hollow-fiber dialyzers can act as a reservoir for ETO. Residual ETO can diffuse into the blood during dialysis, bind to plasma proteins, and induce antibody formation, leading to intradialytic anaphylactoid reactions, so ETO has now been largely replaced by alternative sterilization methods, such as steam and irradiation.
The decision to prefer one dialyzer brand over another may include additional factors such as the overall cost of the dialysis disposables <links to https://fmcna.com/products/disposables/>, price discounts, reliability of the supply chain, and satisfaction with customer service.
Optiflux series (Fresenius Medical Care North America) and Revaclear (Baxter) dialyzers are the most commonly prescribed dialyzers in the US with a market share of 74% and 17%, respectively.
There have not been many advances in dialyzer membranes and designs since the introduction of high-flux synthetic membranes a few decades ago. Some of the changes in the dialyzer membranes and designs currently being investigated include:
Most dialyzers in use today are high-flux and have similar clearance performance. Every dialysis facility must have options for patients with known hypersensitivity reactions to certain dialyzers. Dialyzers with different membrane materials and/or sterilization techniques should be available. Today, steam and gamma radiation sterilization are preferred to reduce the risk of allergic reactions associated with the use of ethylene oxide.
Additional articles to consider related to this topic:
1. Hemodialysis (HEMO) Study Group. Effect of dialysis dose and membrane flux in maintenance hemodialysis. N Engl J Med. 2002 Dec 19;347(25):2010-9. PubMed PMID: 12490682.
2. Membrane Permeability Outcome (MPO) Study Group. Effect of membrane permeability on survival of hemodialysis patients. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2009 Mar;20(3):645-54. PMID: 19092122
3. Performance of hemodialysis with novel medium cut-off dialyzers. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2017 Jan 1;32(1):165-172. PubMed PMID: 27587605
4. Results of the HepZero study comparing heparin-grafted membrane and standard care show that heparin-grafted dialyzer is safe and easy to use for heparin-free dialysis. Kidney Int. 2014. PubMed PMID: 25007166.
1. Albert E. Yousif, Farah M. Abdul-Kareem, Ali J. Mudhaffer. A Comparative Study of the Physiological Parameters and Efficiency of the Various Types of Hemodialyzers. American Journal of Bioscience and Bioengineering. Vol. 3, No. 2, 2015, pp. 8-16. doi: 10.11648/j.bio.20150302.11