c

cAcute hemodialysis prescriptionc

cc

cAuthors

cPhillip Ramos, MD, MSCI

cMark R Marshall, MD

cThomas A Golper, MD Section Editors

cJeffrey S Berns, MD

cPaul M Palevsky, MD

cRichard H Sterns, MD Deputy Editor

ccTheodore W Post, MD

Last literature review version 17.1: January 2009 | This topic last updated: June 10,
2008 (More

INTRODUCTION Ͷ Acute renal failure (ARF) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality,
particularly in the hospital setting. Despite improvements in renal replacement therapy
(RRT) techniques during the last several decades, the mortality rate associated with ARF in
critically ill patients remains above 50 percent. (See "Renal and patient outcomes after acute

tubular necrosis

RRT is ideally initiated in the acute setting prior to the dangerous accumulation of
extravascular volume and/or uremic toxins that can result in further multi-organ damage
and failure. Once the decision to initiate RRT has been made, the specific modality of dialytic
support must be chosen. This consists of peritoneal dialysis, intermittent hemodialysis and
its variations (eg, hemofiltration), and continuous renal replacement therapy. Once the

selection is made, the acute dialysis prescription can be determined

c
An acute hemodialysis treatment is defined as a hemodialysis session specifically performed
for ARF (also known as acute kidney injury [AKI]) or in the setting of a hospitalized end stage
renal disease (ESRD) patient. The choice of specific dialysis modality, particularly the choice
between continuous or intermittent dialysis, is discussed separately. (See "Continuous renal

 replacement therapy in acute kidney injury (acute renal failure

The various components of the acute hemodialysis prescription will be described here. The
use of peritoneal dialysis in ARF is discussed separately (See "Use of peritoneal dialysis for

 the treatment of acute kidney injury (acute renal failure

INDICATIONS Ͷ The urgent indications for RRT in patients with ARF generally include
volume overload refractory to diuretics, hyperkalemia, metabolic acidosis, uremia, and toxic
overdose of a dialyzable drug. In an attempt to minimize morbidity, dialysis should be
started prior to the onset of overt complications of renal failure, whenever possible. This is
discussed in detail separately. (See "Renal replacement therapy (dialysis) in acute kidney

injury (acute renal failure): Indications, timing, and dialysis dose", section on Indications

MODALITY Ͷ Once the decision to initiate RRT has been made, the specific modality of
dialytic support must be chosen. The possibilities include peritoneal dialysis, intermittent
hemodialysis and its variations (eg, hemofiltration), and continuous renal replacement
therapy. Once this selection is made, the acute dialysis prescription can be determined. The
determining factors of which modality is chosen include the catabolic state, hemodynamic
stability, and whether the primary goal is solute removal (eg, uremia, hyperkalemia), fluid
removal, or both. This is reviewed elsewhere. (See "Renal replacement therapy (dialysis) in

acute kidney injury (acute renal failure): Indications, timing, and dialysis dose

VASCULAR ACCESS Ͷ When acute hemodialysis is chosen as the dialytic support modality,
vascular access must be established prior to initiating treatment. Placement of the venous

dialysis catheter must be considered carefully, especially in the critically ill patient

The location depends upon factors such as body habitus, whether the patient is ambulatory
or bed-ridden, presence of vascular disease or atypical anatomy, and the avoidance of
specific complications in an at-risk patient (eg, risk of pneumothorax while placing a
subclavian venous dialysis catheter in a patient with severe chronic obstructive pulmonary

disease or history of deep vein thrombosis or other venous disease

c
 For hospitalized ESRD patients, daily reassessment of the existing angioaccess (eg,
arteriovenous graft or fistula) is appropriate. Many events during the hospitalization can
jeopardize the existing access (eg, hypotension). (See "Acute hemodialysis vascular access"

for a more detailed discussion of this issue

HEMODIALYZER MEMBRANES Ͷ In the setting of ARF, the choice of artificial membranes

utilized may have a bearing on clinical outcome. Previously, it was postulated that non-
complement activating membranes may incur less inflammatory risk with resultant decrease
in infectious complications and possibly an increased probability of improved restoration of
renal function. However, there are inconsistent findings concerning the effect of membrane
biocompatibility on outcomes among patients with acute renal failure, with several meta-
analyses reporting disparate results. (See "Renal replacement therapy (dialysis) in acute
renal failure: Recovery of renal function and effect of hemodialysis membrane", section on

Complement activation, for a discussion relating to these issues

Membranes can also be of low or high flux. High flux membranes contain large pores that
allow for enhanced permeability of larger molecules [1] . Although this property can
enhance removal of putative toxins and improve outcome, it could also allow the back
transport (from dialysate to blood) of potentially harmful water-borne molecules. This
property is a factor that confounds some of the conclusions from previously performed
studies. Certainly, having the purest dialysate water possible should be a goal when using
these more porous membranes to utilize their positive attributes and to minimize their

potential risks

Overall, there are theoretical advantages to high flux biocompatible membranes that have
not been consistently corroborated by often underpowered or flawed clinical studies.
However, the effect of membrane biocompatibility on outcomes (when present) is
consistently beneficial. In addition, since such membranes can now be obtained cheaply,

cost has been eliminated as a deciding factor

We therefore suggest the following approach: If the water system used is high quality, high
flux biocompatible dialysis membranes should be used in the ARF setting. If the water
system is not of high quality, low flux biocompatible dialysis membranes should be used.
Another option is the use of in-line membrane filtration devices on dialysis machines to
c
generate ultrapure dialysate

See "Renal replacement therapy (dialysis) in acute renal failure: Recovery of renal function 
and effect of hemodialysis membrane", sections on Complement activation and High versus
 low flux membranes and see "Maintaining water quality for hemodialysis", for a discussion

concerning water quality

DIALYSATE COMPOSITION Ͷ The dialysate solution composition consists of potassium,

sodium, bicarbonate buffer, calcium, magnesium, chloride, and glucose. Unlike chronic
hemodialysis, the dialysate composition in acute hemodialysis is routinely altered each
treatment to correct the metabolic abnormalities that can rapidly develop during ARF. This is
particularly true in the treatment of potassium and/or acid/base derangements. Thus, the

dialysate potassium, sodium, bicarbonate, and calcium are routinely changed in this setting

Issues surrounding magnesium, chloride, and glucose include the following: The usual
dialysate magnesium concentration is 0.5 to 1.0 mEq/L, and is not usually different from that
in the chronic setting. The amount of dialysate chloride is dependent upon the dialysate
sodium and bicarbonate concentrations. The standard dialysate glucose concentration is 200
mg/dL, but may be decreased to more efficiently lower the serum potassium during
c
hemodialysis

Potassium dialysate composition Ͷ There is no standard dialysate potassium concentration

in the acute hemodialysis prescription because of wide variability in serum potassium prior
to initiating the hemodialysis session. It is crucial to know the predialysis serum potassium
level at the start of the hemodialysis session to tailor the dialysate potassium so that

normokalemia will be attained with avoidance of hypokalemia

The goal of an acute hemodialysis treatment is not necessarily to lower the total body
potassium burden for general nutritional purposes. Instead, the goals are often more short

term, such as normalizing the serum potassium level for the next 24 hours

The typical potassium concentration in the dialysate for acute hemodialysis ranges from 2.0
to 4.0 meq/L. However, the dialysate potassium concentration should be varied based upon
the pre-dialysis value [2] . As described below, the dialysate glucose concentration can be

another determinant of the rate of potassium removal

The prescribed dialysate bath potassium is determined by both the absolute serum
potassium and the rate of rise in the inter-dialytic period. A rapid rate of rise in serum
potassium may best be treated by daily hemodialysis rather than lowering the dialysate

potassium bath concentration

c
 Some patients with acute and/or severe hyperkalemia have muscle weakness and cardiac
conduction abnormalities, and should be treated with more rapidly acting medical therapies
prior to the initiation of dialysis. The first electrocardiographic changes with hyperkalemia
are tall peaked T waves and shortened QT interval (show ECG 1). This is followed by
progressive lengthening of the PR interval and QRS duration, and then loss of the P wave
with further prolongation of the QRS interval ("sine wave" pattern). Conduction delay can
manifest as bundle branch or AV nodal block, and ventricular fibrillation or asystole can

result. (See "Clinical manifestations and treatment of hyperkalemia

If more advanced electrocardiographic features of hyperkalemia are present, medical

management should be initiated immediately with continuous ECG monitoring. Medical
therapy is administered while emergency hemodialysis is being arranged, (See "Clinical

manifestations and treatment of hyperkalemia", section on Treatment

Although there is no general consensus concerning the optimal strategy, the following is our
general approach to the dialysate potassium concentration [2] : Predialysis potassium <4.0
meq/L Ͷ If the predialysis serum potassium level is less than 4.0 meq/L, we recommend
that the dialysate potassium bath should be adjusted to 4.0 meq/L [2] . This is done to
prevent the development of hypokalemia and its complications. Predialysis potassium
between 4.0 and 5.5 meq/L Ͷ If the predialysis serum potassium level is between 4.0 and
5.5 mEq/L, the typical potassium concentration in the dialysate for acute hemodialysis
usually ranges from 2.0 to 4.0 mEq/L. We suggest using a dialysate potassium of 3.5 meq/L if
the predialysis serum potassium is between 4.0 to 4.5 mEq/L, and 3.0 meq/L if the
predialysis serum potassium is between 4.5 to 5.5 meq/L. However, if a rapid increase in
extracellular potassium is anticipated prior to the next hemodialysis session (eg, due to
marked rhabdomyolysis), then a dialysate potassium of 2.0 meq/L should be used to ensure
normokalemia in the lower range of normal. Predialysis potassium >5.5 meq/L and <8.0
meq/L Ͷ If patients have a predialysis serum potassium level greater than 5.5 meq/L and
less than 8.0 meq/L, then a 2.0 meq/L dialysate potassium bath should be used. However,
the dialysate concentration should be increased to 2.5 or 3.0 meq/L in patients at risk for
cardiac arrhythmia or those receiving digitalis [2] . (See "Complications with potassium
removal" below). Severe hyperkalemia, potassium >8.0 meq/L Ͷ In cases of severe
hyperkalemia (eg, >8.0 meq/L), a dialysate potassium concentration of 1.0 mEq/L can be
used to rapidly decrease the serum potassium to a more tolerable level. However, this
c
should be done with a high degree of caution to avoid hypokalemia

Although rarely recommended, a zero potassium bath has also been used to rapidly
decrease the serum potassium in a short period of time [3,4] . After four hours of
hemodialysis in one study, for example, a dialysate free of potassium was more effective
than a 1.0 or 2.0 mEq/L potassium dialysate bath in removing serum potassium, removing 85
 percent more potassium than a 2.0 meq/L bath and 46 percent more than a 1.0 meq/L bath

c[3

However, to minimize the risk of hypokalemia and dialysis-induced arrhythmias, we do NOT

recommend use of a zero potassium dialysate bath for the treatment of severe
hyperkalemia. If a rapid fall in serum potassium is desired because of severe hyperkalemia,
we suggest using a 1.0 meq/L potassium bath and checking a serum potassium every 30 to
60 minutes. Once the serum potassium is between 6 and 7 meq/L, the dialysate potassium
concentration can be changed to 2.0 meq/L for the remainder of the hemodialysis session,

depending upon many other prescriptive components discussed below

In patients with underlying cardiac disorders or those taking digoxin, the dialysate
concentration can be changed to 3.0 meq/L once the serum potassium is approximately 5.5
meq/L to avoid possibly life-threatening arrhythmias, with the postdialysis serum potassium
goal of 4.0 meq/L. Although not studied in the acute setting, this overall approach decreases
the risk of hypokalemia and dialysis-induced arrhythmias, particularly in patients with
predisposing risk factors delineated below. (See "Complications with potassium removal"

below

The amount of potassium removal is proportional to the gradient between the serum and
dialysate concentrations. The administration of insulin, intravenous glucose, beta-agonists,
or bicarbonate either concurrently or prior to hemodialysis results in intracellular
translocation of potassium, lower serum levels, and therefore lower rates of potassium

removal during dialysis

Dialysate glucose concentration Ͷ The dialysate glucose concentration is another factor that
can modulate potassium removal, since the glucose load enhances insulin secretion which
drives potassium into the cells. Thus, in the presence of endogenous insulin, the standard
dialysate glucose concentration (200 mg/dL [11.1 mmol/L]) results in significantly decreased

cpotassium removal relative to glucose-free dialysate solution [5

Thus, in cases of severe hyperkalemia where potassium removal is critical, a lower dialysate
glucose concentration may be used. We suggest a dialysate glucose concentration of 100
mg/dL (5.6 mmol/L) if severe hyperkalemia (eg, >8.0 meq/L) is present. We do NOT use
glucose-free dialysate because of the risk of hypoglycemia. Standard dialysate glucose
concentration (200 mg/dL [11.1 mmol/L]) should be used in cases of mild to moderate

hyperkalemia

c
 Complications with potassium removal Ͷ The hemodialysis treatment can provoke
ventricular arrhythmias, which are related to dialysis-induced reductions in the serum
potassium. Multiple studies have demonstrated that potentially life-threatening dialysis-
induced arrhythmias with potassium removal are independently associated with risk factors
such as coronary artery disease, left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH), digoxin use,

chypertension, and advanced age [6,7

In one study in chronic dialysis, for example, 23 stable ESRD patients were evaluated using a
Holter monitor [7] . Nine (39 percent) had ventricular tachycardia (VT) during and after
hemodialysis performed with a dialysate potassium concentration of 2.0 meq/L. Episodes of
frequent or complex ventricular arrhythmias were more likely in patients on digoxin (8/9
versus 1/14 without arrhythmias) and those with LVH (9/9 versus 7/14 without arrhythmias).
It was concluded that a low dialysate potassium concentration can induce ventricular
arrhythmias in hemodialysis patients on digoxin and with LVH. It is unknown if, in the
absence of underlying risk factors (cardiac arrhythmias, digoxin, or heart disease), a dialysate

cpotassium concentration of 2.0 meq/L causes serious ventricular arrhythmias [4

To lower the risk of potentially life-threatening dialysis-induced arrhythmias among patients

with underlying risk factors, the goal is to obtain a postdialysis serum potassium
concentration of approximately 4.0 meq/L by using a dialysate potassium concentration no

lower than 3.0 meq/L

Periodic measurements of postdialysis potassium may be helpful. The immediate

postdialysis value is generally the lowest and potassium rebound, while rapid, depends upon
the factors previously discussed. However, the degree of potassium rebound is highly

variable. Poor perfusion states and underlying illnesses all affect potassium rebound

Poor systemic perfusion may have a potentially large impact in two ways. First, potassium
removal during hemodialysis is associated with a larger reduction in serum potassium due to
less potassium efflux from cells. Second, after dialysis, potassium rebound will be less by the
same mechanism. Such patients warrant closer monitoring of the serum potassium, with a

postdialysis measurement at two to four hours

In addition, we recommend that patients with underlying cardiac disorders who undergo
acute hemodialysis should be placed on a cardiac rhythm monitor during the dialysis

session

c
 Sodium modeling and hemodialysis hypotension Ͷ The choice of the dialysate sodium
concentration can have a significant impact on the patient's volume and hemodynamic
status. During the early days of hemodialysis, low dialysate sodium concentrations were
routinely used to help decrease volume overload and hypertension. However, a low
dialysate sodium during a 3 to 4 hour hemodialysis session acutely decreases the
intravascular volume over a short period of time as the result of the net negative sodium
balance that is produced by diffusion. This approach can cause significant hypotension and

discomfort in the form of nausea, vomiting, muscle cramping, fatigue, and dizziness

Since the early 1980s, high-sodium bicarbonate-based dialysate has mostly eliminated
hypotension and discomfort during hemodialysis. However, the widespread use of these
high-sodium solutions has caused dialysis salt loading with resultant postdialysis thirst,
interdialytic weight gain, and hypertension [8] . The problem of postdialytic weight gain and
hypertension is mostly seen in the chronic hemodialysis population, but can also have
bearing in the acute setting, particularly in patients with an intact thirst mechanism and the

ability to drink fluid based on their thirst

During acute intermittent hemodialysis, particularly in the ICU setting, hypotension is

common since patients usually have compromised hemodynamic factors due to cardiac,
hepatic, infectious, or bleeding complications. The hypotension that can develop during

maximal rates of solute removal often compromises clearance and ultrafiltration targets

To avoid hemodynamic instability during acute intermittent hemodialysis, sodium modeling

can be administered by utilizing a higher dialysate sodium concentration at the beginning of
hemodialysis and progressively decreasing it throughout the session to avoid lowering the

plasma osmolarity abruptly

A concise mechanism describing sodium profiling is best described by the following

cquotation [9

A high dialysate sodium concentration is used initially with a progressive reduction toward 
isotonic or hypotonic levels by the end of the procedure. This method allows for a diffusive
sodium influx early in the session to prevent the rapid decline in plasma osmolality resulting
from the efflux of urea and other small molecular weight solutes. During the remainder of
the procedure, when the reduction in osmolality accompanying urea removal is less abrupt,
the lower dialysate sodium level minimizes the development of hypertonicity and any

resultant excessive thirst, fluid gain, and hypertension in the interdialytic period

c
Although sodium modeling has been studied mostly in the chronic hemodialysis population,
a randomized, cross-over study of 10 patients evaluated sodium modeling in acute renal
failure patients in the ICU [10] . The study used either a fixed dialysate sodium regimen (140
mEq/L) with a fixed ultrafiltration (UF) rate spread over the entire dialysis time, or a variable
dialysate sodium profile which varied dialysate sodium (160 mEq/L to 140 mEq/L) in a
stepwise fashion. The group's UF profile was varied in a similar fashion to the sodium
profiling prescription (half of the fluid being removed during the first third of the treatment,

and the remaining half over the last two thirds

The following results were observed: Sodium modeling with variable UF rate was associated
with greater hemodynamic stability compared to the fixed regimen. Significantly less
frequent interventions involving nursing and volume replacement was noted in the sodium
modeling and variable UF rate arm. Relative blood volume changes were less during sodium
c
modeling

The group concluded that sodium and ultrafiltration profiling may be the preferred dialysis
prescription for ARF patients in the ICU at risk for hemodynamic instability while undergoing

cintermittent hemodialysis [10

Several sodium modeling prescriptions exist. Multiple sodium modeling prescriptions are
programmed in most hemodialysis machines. Patients may respond to only one or all
available prescriptions. Thus, trials are required to find the best sodium modeling

prescription in ARF patients on hemodialysis

The same sodium modeling principles used for intradialytic hypotension in the chronic
hemodialysis population can also be used in ARF patients. We recommend using combined
sodium and UF profiling if hypotension occurs while on intermittent hemodialysis (IHD) in

the acute setting

We prefer either of the following two specific strategies: With one high/low sodium
modeling prescription, a high dialysate sodium (eg, 150 meq/L) alternates with a low
dialysate sodium (eg, 130 meq/L), with each level set for an equal amount of time. The
average of the high/low sodium levels (eg, 140 meq/L) is the dialysate sodium usually
prescribed in hemodynamically stable patients with normal serum sodium levels. During the
low sodium period, the ultrafiltration rate is minimized or stopped. Ultrafiltration only
occurs during the high sodium period to draw out intracellular water due to the extracellular
hypernatremia. Another sodium modeling prescription is to set the initial dialysate sodium
at a high level (eg, 150 to 160 meq/L). Subsequently, the dialysate sodium level is then
decreased in stepwise, exponential or linear decrements (depending on clinical effect) to a
 final low level (eg, 140 meq/L). To maintain isonatremia, the time average concentration of
dialysate sodium should be the same or marginally lower than the pre-dialysis serum sodium
concentration (approximately within 1.0 to 2.0 mEq/L). With a linear sodium profile, for
example, the duration (and degree) of dialysis spent below the isonatremic concentration
c
cmust be approximately equal to that spent above it [11

Other methods to treat hypotension are reviewed below. Since lower blood flows through
the dialyzer may result in less hemodynamic instability, sustained low efficiency
hemodialysis (SLED) over 6 to 12 hours or continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) can
be used if sodium modeling on IHD does not improve the blood pressure. (See "Sustained

low efficiency or extended daily dialysis

Dialysate sodium composition Ͷ The choice of dialysate sodium concentration depends

upon the predialysis serum sodium concentration, hemodynamic status, the diffusion
gradient for sodium, method of serum sodium measurement, and Gibbs-Donnan effect.
Issues surrounding dialysate sodium concentration in patients with dysnatremias or
hemodynamic instability are discussed in the next and previous sections, respectively. (See

"Dysnatremias" below and see "Sodium modeling and hemodialysis hypotension" above

With respect to the additional factors that affect the choice of the dialysate sodium
concentration: The diffusion gradient for sodium lies between its ionic activity in dialysate
and blood water [8,12] . Since laboratories use a variety of methods to measure serum
sodium concentration (flame photometry, indirect ionometry and direct ionometry), there is
a subtly different relationship between the gradient and sodium ionic activity for each
method used. The Gibbs-Donnan effect denotes the reduced sieving coefficient of the
dialysis membrane for sodium that arises as a result of negatively charged plasma proteins
c
c[13

As a result of all of these factors, a high sodium dialysate for the majority of patients would
be characterised by a sodium concentration of approximately 141 mEq/L, and a low sodium
dialysate by a sodium concentration of approximately 137 mEq/L. For individual patients,
the dialysate sodium concentration that results in no net transfer of sodium has been
estimated in various studies to be between 0.1 to 3.0 mEq/L below that of the pre-dialysis
serum sodium concentration [11,14-16] . For most patients with normal or near-normal

serum sodium levels, we use a sodium dialysate concentration of approximately 137 mEq/L

Dysnatremias Ͷ Rapid correction of an abnormal serum sodium concentration should be

avoided during dialysis to avoid neurologic complications [17] . Failure to adjust the dialysis
prescription may lead to cerebral edema in the patient with severe chronic hypernatremia
 and osmotic demyelination (pontine and extrapontine myelinolysis) in the patient with
severe chronic hyponatremia. Although uremia may provide some protection against
osmotic demyelination, case reports of this complication following dialysis of severely

hyponatremic patients lead us to recommend a cautious approach in most patients

The overall dialysis strategy for the management of dysnatremias is the same as that in the
non-dialysis general population. Large, rapid changes in the serum sodium concentration are

very rarely indicated

Only patients with hyperacute salt poisoning (eg, due to the suicidal ingestion of sodium
chloride or the inadvertent intravenous infusion of hypertonic saline during a therapeutic
abortion) or hyperacute water intoxication (eg, as a complication of marathon running or
use of the drug, "Ecstasy") should ever be allowed to undergo aggressive initial correction of
their serum sodium concentration. In such patients with hyponatremia, for example,
aggressive initial correction at a rate of 1.5 to 2 meq/L per hour, may be indicated for the
first three to four hours or until the symptoms resolve. However, the plasma sodium
concentration should probably be raised by less than 10 meq/L in the first 24 hours and less

than 18 meq/L in the first 48 hours. (See "Treatment of hyponatremia

In the vast majority of patients with more chronic dysnatremias, the treatment during a
single dialysis session should be adjusted to provide a rate of correction that does not
exceed the generally recommended rate. If the serum sodium concentration is very high or
very low, it may be impractical to avoid a rapid change solely by adjusting the dialysate
sodium concentration. In many such patients, it may be necessary to either cut the dialysis
session short or to offset the effect of dialysis by concurrent infusions of hypertonic saline or
D5W. Hourly measurements of the serum sodium concentration during the course of dialysis

are mandatory. (See "Treatment of hyponatremia", section on rate of correction

Another possibility is to use continuous renal replacement therapy. This modality is far less
efficient at changing serum sodium concentrations, which may therefore change more

slowly than with the use of intermittent hemodialysis

Some authorities also favor the following approach [18] : Among patients with severe
chronic hyponatremia (predialysis serum sodium level less than 130 meq/L), a cautious
strategy is to set the dialysate sodium concentration at a level that is no higher than 15 to 20
meq/L above the plasma level of the patient [18] . The goal would be correction of the
hyponatremia only after multiple hemodialysis sessions that are performed over a period of
several days. In those with hypernatremia, the use of dialysate sodium concentrations more
than 3 to 5 meq/L below the plasma sodium concentration is associated with hypotension,
muscle cramps, and most importantly disequilibrium syndrome. Thus, a reasonable and safe
approach would be to use a dialysate sodium concentration within 2 meq/L of the plasma
sodium concentration in the first dialysis session. Subsequently, correction of the
hypernatremia could be performed with the administration of hypotonic solutions. (See
c
"Treatment of hypernatremia

Buffer solutions Ͷ Acetate was the predominant buffer used during the early days of
hemodialysis. However, acetate is presently not routinely used because of associated cardiac

and hemodynamic instability

The main dialysate buffer currently used in IHD is bicarbonate. This buffer is inexpensive and

generally well tolerated without the hemodynamic problems seen with acetate

The main disadvantage of bicarbonate is that it precipitates as an insoluble salt when stored
together with divalent cations calcium and magnesium, thereby requiring the buffer and
electrolytes to be stored separately prior to hemodialysis [19] . In addition, possible side
effects with bicarbonate include hypoxemia due to decrease respiratory drive with higher
pH, and altered mental status, weakness, cramping, and lethargy due to acute metabolic

calkalosis [20

The dialysate bicarbonate concentration should vary based upon the acid-base status of the
patient. The usual dialysate bicarbonate concentration in chronic hemodialysis is
approximately 33 to 35 mEq/L. We suggest that this high concentration bicarbonate solution
be used in cases of moderate metabolic acidosis in ARF. In severe metabolic acidosis, the
concentration of the bicarbonate solution may be maximized (eg, 40 mEq/L) and extended
duration of hemodialysis may be necessary. In addition, in patients being mechanically
ventilated using low-tidal volume ventilation, an increased dialysate bicarbonate
concentration may be required to compensate for the respiratory acidosis resulting from
"permissive hypercapnea." In contrast, in patients being mechanically hyperventilated to
compensate for metabolic acidosis, the minute ventilation (respiratory rate and/or tidal
volume) may need to be reduced to avoid severe alkalemia as the metabolic acidosis is

corrected with dialysis

Acute hemodialysis patients can also be alkalemic. The severity of the alkalemia and the
process generating the alkalosis are the main issues to help determine the optimal dialysate
bicarbonate concentration. In particular, the clinician must investigate whether there is on-
going generation versus a one-time insult causing the alkalosis. A one-time insult can be
resolved with a single hemodialysis treatment, whereas on-going generation of alkalosis may

require frequent and/or long hemodialysis sessions with a lower bicarbonate dialysate
 c

If the predialysis serum bicarbonate level is above 28 mEq/L or respiratory alkalosis is

present, the usual dialysate bicarbonate concentration should not be used [21] . In this

setting, a lower bicarbonate dialysis concentration would be appropriate

Modern machines can adjust dialysate bicarbonate in 1 mEq/L increments (from 40 to 20

mEq/L). In addition, the frequency and duration of the dialysis treatment(s) as well as the
volume of ultrafiltrate must all be considered when determining the specific concentration

of bicarbonate in the dialysate

Calcium Ͷ In chronic hemodialysis patients, the standard dialysate calcium concentration is

2.5 meq/L. In addition to helping manage secondary hyperparathyroidism, this level is used
to avoid the development of hypercalcemia and elevated calcium-phosphorus product that
can occur with higher dialysate calcium concentrations. (See "Active vitamin D analogs and

calcimimetics to control hyperparathyroidism in chronic kidney disease

In the acute hemodialysis setting, the dialysate calcium concentration may be chosen to
treat the presence of either hypo- or hypercalcemia. According to some authorities, the
dialysate calcium concentration for acute hemodialysis should be 3.0 to 3.5 meq/L, and the
routine use of the standard concentration for chronic hemodialysis is inappropriate
considering the risk of developing hypocalcemia in the acute setting [21] . In addition, a
higher dialysate calcium concentration used in the setting of predialysis hypocalcemia may

cprevent further worsening of hypocalcemia with the correction of acidosis [21

A higher dialysate calcium concentration can also improve intradialytic hypotension by

improving cardiac performance. As an example, one prospective crossover study compared
the effect of high dialysate calcium concentration (3.5 meq/L) with low dialysate calcium
concentration (2.5 meq/L) on hemodynamic stability in patients on IHD [22] . The study
patients had a history of intradialytic hypotension and were also administered therapy with

either midodrine, cool dialysate, or a combination of these two therapies

Compared with low-dialysate calcium, the following results were reported: High-dialysate
calcium significantly increased posthemodialysis mean arterial pressure (MAP). High-
dialysate calcium improved the lowest intradialytic MAP, but was not statistically significant.
The improvements in blood pressure with high-dialysate calcium were not associated with
c
similar reductions in symptoms or interventions for intradialytic hypotension

c
 Hypocalcemia is fairly common in ICU patients, particularly those with sepsis [23] . This

ccombination is reportedly associated with increased mortality [24

This observation has led some to postulate that treatment of hypocalcemia in those with
sepsis may improve outcomes. However, calcium administration to rodents with sepsis
appears to be harmful [25,26] . Its administration may therefore be associated with higher
mortality in critically ill patients with sepsis. Thus, administering calcium to treat
hemodynamic instability during acute intermittent hemodialysis may be harmful to septic
patients and should be considered carefully. (See "Management of severe sepsis and septic
shock in adults

Since total plasma calcium levels are poorly predictive of the ionized

level, the ionized plasma calcium level should be measured prior to

hemodialysis in acutely ill patients with significant hypocalcemia or

hypercalcemia. This is particularly important since acute phase

responses (eg, sepsis) and changes in pH during dialysis and mechanical

ventilation can affect ionized calcium levels independent of the total

plasma calcium concentration. (See "Relation between total and ionized plasma calcium
concentration

We suggest the following concerning the dialysate calcium concentration: We favor

adjusting the dialysate calcium concentration to avoid hypercalcemia or clinical
hypocalcemia. If the measured total plasma calcium level is used in this setting (although
ionized plasma calcium is preferred), it is important that this level is corrected based upon
the serum albumin level and other factors given that the total plasma calcium concentration
will change in parallel to the albumin concentration. (See "Relation between total and
ionized plasma calcium concentration", for details concerning this issue and the correction
formula). We use a dialysate calcium concentration of 3.0 to 3.5 mEq/L in the patient with
significant hypocalcemia (total plasma calcium level <8.0 mg/dL [<2.0 mmol/L]), particularly
if the patient is symptomatic. If the patient has severe hypercalcemia (total plasma calcium
level >12.0 mg/dL [>3.0 mmol/L]), we use a dialysate calcium concentration of 2.0 to 2.5
mEq/L. For patients with mild hypocalcemia, normocalcemia, or mild hypercalcemia (total
plasma calcium level between 8.0 to 12.0 mg/dL [2.0 to 3.0 mmol/L]), we use a dialysate
calcium concentration of 2.5 mEq/L. To treat intradialytic hypotension, increasing the
dialysate calcium may be used in combination with sodium profiling and a lower dialysate
temperature. We do not use a dialysate calcium concentration above 3.5 mEq/L for this
purpose. The development of hypercalcemia must be avoided with this strategy. However,
 the ideal level of ionized calcium in critically ill patients is not known, and may not be the
same as in normal subjects. (See "Ultrafiltration and blood pressure control" below and see
c
"Dialysate sodium composition" above

BLOOD FLOW RATE Ͷ Deciding upon the optimal blood flow rate through the dialyzer is
determined by various factors. For patients with chronic kidney disease who are initiated on
hemodialysis, the blood flow rate is increased incrementally over several sessions to avoid
the rapid removal of accumulated blood solutes that can lead to the development of the
dialysis disequilibrium syndrome and to evaluate the angioaccess. (See "Dialysis

Disequilibrium Syndrome

With ARF, blood solutes have usually not had time to accumulate to the degree observed in
the ESRD population. However, if the BUN has been >100 mg/dL for at least three days in
the patient with ARF, there may be enough osmole accumulation in the CNS to justify a slow
removal for the first and second dialysis sessions. Thus, lower blood flow rates should be
prescribed at the initiation of therapy in such patients.When this is not necessary, high blood
flow rates can be initiated at the onset of acute IHD without fear of precipitating the

disequilibrium syndrome. (See "Dialysis Disequilibrium Syndrome

Blood flow rate in acute hemodialysis is dependent upon temporary dialysis catheter
performance, length, and location. Dialysis catheters must be long enough to reach either
the superior vena cava (SVC) or inferior vena cava, where the venous blood flows are the
highest. Left-sided internal jugular (IJ) and subclavian catheters tend to provide unreliable
blood flow, at a rate that is typically up to 100 mL/min lower than elsewhere because their
tips abut the walls of either the SVC or innominate vein [27] . The best blood flows are
attained with femoral vein and right-sided IJ catheters. (See "Acute hemodialysis vascular

access", for a detailed discussion of these issues

Higher blood flows are necessary during IHD to provide sufficient overall solute clearance
because of the relatively shorter duration of the session, whereas lower blood flows are
sufficient to achieve adequate clearance by CRRT due to its continuous nature [27] .
However, the use of higher blood flows with IHD may result in rapid reduction in serum
osmolality promoting water movement into cells, thus reducing effective circulating volume.
This may exacerbate intradialytic hypotension despite measures to treat intradialytic
hypotension, particularly in critically ill patients suffering from septic shock, cardiac
decompensation, bleeding, or hepatic insufficiency. Non-compliant dialyzers, smaller surface

area dialyzers, and ultrafiltration control minimize the need to decrease blood flow rate

c
 We use a dialysis blood flow rate of 400 mL per minute. If a lower blood flow (or lower
ultrafiltration rate) is required because of hemodynamic instability, the best dialysis
modality is unclear. Until further data are available, we suggest slower solute removal over
six to 12 hours by sustained low-efficiency dialysis (SLED) or by continuous renal
replacement therapy (CCRT). (See "Continuous renal replacement therapy in acute kidney
injury (acute renal failure)" and see "Renal replacement therapy (dialysis) in acute kidney
injury (acute renal failure): Indications, timing, and dialysis dose", section on CRRT versus

intermittent hemodialysis

DIALYSATE TEMPERATURE Ͷ Vasoconstriction due to lower body temperatures has been

used to increase vascular resistance and improve hemodynamic stability during IHD in ESRD.
Cool temperature dialysate typically uses a temperature of 35.0 degrees Celsius, which may
be associated with symptoms. (See "Cool temperature hemodialysis: Hemodynamic effects",

for a discussion of this issue

Hypothermia, however, may be undesirable in critically ill patients due to adverse effects
upon myocardial function, end-organ perfusion, blood clotting, and possibly renal recovery
[28] . With blood temperature monitoring, the patients' blood temperature is maintained
precisely at target value by a series of feedback loops controlling thermal transfer to and
from the dialysate [29] . It is effective in ameliorating hemodynamic instability for ESRD

cpatients [30

Blood temperature monitoring might conceivably allow for controlled cooling in critically ill
ARF patients without the risk of hypothermic damage. However, it has not been evaluated in
this setting. Our recommendations concerning the use of cold temperature hemodialysis are

presented in the next section

ULTRAFILTRATION AND BLOOD PRESSURE CONTROL Ͷ Determining optimal ultrafiltration

(UF) requirements in critically ill ARF patients is challenging. This is determined in part by
physical examination, laboratory values, and hemodynamic indices. In general, no one

specific test or parameter is sufficient in isolation

The following two over-riding principles should be recognized: The target weight in ESRD
patients undergoing chronic maintenance dialysis is usually determined empirically as the
weight at which clinical signs of extracellular fluid expansion are absent, and below which
clinical signs of extracellular depletion arise. In contrast, extracellular volume status in
critically ill ARF patients is not necessarily an end-point itself. The volume expansion that is
frequently observed in such patients is often necessary to maintain optimal circulatory and
oxygen transport status. The clinician should appreciate that the relationship between blood
 volume and hypotension is different in patients with ESRD and critically ill individuals with
ARF. Autonomic function and circulating humoral agents all mediate and mitigate this
relationship, and these factors are not comparable between the two groups. This can be
illustrated by considering blood volume monitoring, which is a biofeedback system that
automatically adjusts ultrafiltration rate and dialysate sodium content in response to a fall in
circulating intravascular volume. Although these systems can convincingly reduce the
occurrence of intradialytic hypotension in ESRD patients [31] , they are ineffective for
ameliorating hypotension in critically ill ARF patients [32] . This lack of a predictable
relationship between volume status and hemodynamic stability means that UF goals for a
given patient should be assessed not only in terms of fluid mass balance or the mandatory
removal of obligatory fluid loads, but also in terms of the effect of intervention on the
cpatient's broader clinical condition and hemodynamic status

In hemodynamically stable patients, the estimation of target intravascular volume can be

made in the usual fashion utilized for ESRD patients. However, in hemodynamically unstable
patients, target intravascular volume should be titrated to invasive or non-invasive (bio-
impedance analysis, pulse contour analysis [PiCCO], or echocardiography) monitoring, which

should guide the UF goals for a given IHD session

Ultrafiltration during IHD can result in significant intradialytic hypotension, which can be
treated by reducing or discontinuing ultrafiltration, and/or a reducing the blood flow rate. In
addition to these maneuvers, modifying other dialysis-dependent factors of intradialytic
hypotension (eg, cooling dialysate temperature and improving autonomic reflexes) can help

deliver effective hemodialysis while optimizing ultrafiltration and hemodynamic tolerance

In order of efficacy, the following measures help prevent intradialytic hypotension during
IHD in ARF: Minimize UF rate requirements by increasing frequency of treatments and/or
increased duration of treatments Sodium/ultrafiltration profiling Cool temperature dialysate
Higher dialysate calcium concentration Midodrine (alpha-1 adrenergic agonist used in
autonomic dysfunction), which may be administered in the absence of more powerful
c
pharmacologic forms of pressor support

See "Hemodynamic instability during hemodialysis: Overview" for further discussion 

concerning intradialytic hypotension in patients undergoing chronic intermittent

hemodialysis

We recommend initially treating intradialytic hypotension with the first three measures
listed above. In addition to these interventions, normal saline intravenous boluses given

during hemodialysis can transiently increase blood pressure
 c

Despite the above-mentioned measures, hemodynamic instability may still occur because of
the various dialysis-independent causes of intradialytic hypotension present in the acute
setting (eg, cardiogenic, vasodilatory, or hypovolemic shock). If measures to improve
hemodynamic stability during IHD sessions are not successful, switching to SLED or CRRT
usually improves hemodynamics while maintaining an acceptable rate of ultrafiltration and

solute clearance

ANTI-COAGULATION Ͷ Issues surrounding anti-coagulation in patients undergoing acute

hemodialysis are presented separately. (See "Hemodialysis Anticoagulation

PRE- AND POSTHEMODIALYSIS LABORATORY VALUE MONITORING Ͷ Specific laboratory

values are usually required either before or after an acute hemodialysis session. A
predialysis basic metabolic profile should be reviewed prior to some acute hemodialysis
sessions since electrolyte and acid/base status can profoundly change between treatments

and require alterations to the dialysate bath

Drug monitoring Ͷ Therapeutic drug monitoring levels can be measured posthemodialysis

to help guide supplemental dosing. The following equation can be used to calculate the
supplemental dose that takes the patient from the measured level to the desired peak level
cof drug [33

c Supplemental Dosage = Vd * IBW * (Desired Peak Level ʹ Measured Levelccc

where Vd is the volume of distribution of the drug and IBW is the ideal body weight

As an example, a patient with an ideal body weight of 70 kg is receiving Vancomycin, with

the Vancomycin Vd 0.75, and the measured Vancomycin level of 12 mg/L. The desired
Vancomycin peak level in this case is 30 mg/L. The calculated supplemental dose of

Vancomycin would be 945 mg after hemodialysis to achieve a peak level of 30 mg/L

DIALYSIS DOSE Ͷ Dialysis dose in acute renal failure is increasingly recognized as an

important issue. This is briefly reviewed in this section, and in detail separately. (See "Renal
replacement therapy (dialysis) in acute kidney injury (acute renal failure): Indications, timing,

and dialysis dose

The delivered IHD dose tends to be low in critically ill ARF patients, and lower than that
prescribed [34,35,35] . Two studies support a relationship between acute IHD dose and
mortality: A retrospective observational study showed that a delivered single pool Kt/V >1.0
per treatment was associated with significantly improved outcome in patients with
intermediate illness severity [36] . This study did not attempt to relate outcomes to the
frequency of IHD. A prospective controlled trial demonstrated substantially improved
outcomes with a cumulative single pool Kt/V of 6.0 per week versus 3.0 per week (by simple
addition), and daily versus alternate day treatments [37] . Despite initial concerns about the
study conduct and methods, there is now general acceptance of this result. However, the
time averaged BUN in the lower dose group (approximately 100 mg/dL) indicates under-
c
dialysis by modern standards, probably exaggerating the benefit in the higher dose group

As described elsewhere in UpToDate, the VA/NIH Acute Renal Failure Trial Network (ATN)
study did not find a difference in mortality associated with a more intensive dosing strategy
for renal replacement therapy. Based on the results of the ATN study, we recommend that
intermittent hemodialysis be provided three times per week with monitoring of the
delivered dose of therapy to ensure a minimum delivered Kt/V of 1.2 per treatment. There is
no evidence that more frequent hemodialysis is associated with improved outcomes unless
necessitated for specific indications (eg, hyperkalemia, volume excess, hypotension, etc).
(See "Renal replacement therapy (dialysis) in acute kidney injury (acute renal failure):

Indications, timing, and dialysis dose

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS Indications for renal replacement therapy (RRT) in

patients with acute renal failure (ARF) generally include volume overload refractory to
diuretics, hyperkalemia, metabolic acidosis, uremia, and toxic overdose of a dialyzable drug.
(See "Indications" above and see "Renal replacement therapy (dialysis) in acute kidney injury
(acute renal failure): Indications, timing, and dialysis dose"). Once the decision to initiate
RRT has been made, the specific modality of dialytic support must be chosen. This includes
peritoneal dialysis or hemodialysis and its variations (eg, hemofiltration), and the acute
dialysis prescription determined. (See "Modality" above and see "Continuous renal
replacement therapy in acute kidney injury (acute renal failure)"). When acute hemodialysis
is chosen as the dialytic support modality, vascular access must be established prior to
initiating treatment. Placement of the venous dialysis catheter must be considered carefully.
(See "Vascular access" above and see "Acute hemodialysis vascular access"). In the setting of
ARF, the optimal choice of artificial dialysis membrane is unclear. We suggest that
biocompatible dialysis membranes be used in this setting. If the water system is of high
quality, high flux biocompatible dialysis membranes should be used. By comparison, low flux
biocompatible dialysis membranes or a prefilter added to the dialysis machine should be
 used if the water system is not of high quality. (See "Hemodialyzer membranes" above). The
dialysate solution composition consists of potassium, sodium, bicarbonate buffer, calcium,
magnesium, chloride, and glucose. The dialysate composition in acute hemodialysis is
routinely altered each treatment to correct the metabolic abnormalities that can rapidly
develop during ARF. (See "Dialysate composition" above). There is not a standard or fixed
dialysate potassium concentration in the acute hemodialysis prescription because of wide
variability in the serum potassium level prior to initiating the hemodialysis session. The
typical potassium concentration in the dialysate for acute hemodialysis ranges from 2.0 to
4.0 mEq per L. The dialysate bath potassium is determined by both the absolute predialysis
serum potassium and the rate of rise in the inter-dialytic period. A rapid rate of rise of the
serum potassium may best be treated by daily hemodialysis rather than lowering the
dialysate potassium bath concentration. (See "Potassium dialysate composition" above). The
hemodialysis treatment can provoke ventricular arrhythmias, which are related to dialysis-
induced reductions in the serum potassium. They are independently associated with
numerous risk factors such as coronary artery disease, left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH),
digoxin use, systolic blood pressure, and advanced age. We therefore recommend that
patients with underlying cardiac disorders who undergo acute hemodialysis should be
placed on a cardiac rhythm monitor during the dialysis session. (See "Complications with
potassium removal" above). The choice of the dialysate sodium concentration can have a
significant impact on the patient's volume and hemodynamic status. (See "Sodium modeling
and hemodialysis hypotension" above). The dialysate bicarbonate concentration should vary
based upon the acid-base status of the patient. The usual dialysate bicarbonate
concentration in chronic hemodialysis is approximately 33 to 35 mEq/L. We recommend that
this high concentration bicarbonate solution be used in cases of moderate metabolic
acidosis in ARF. In severe metabolic acidosis, the concentration may be maximized (eg, 40
mEq/L) and extended duration of hemodialysis may be necessary. Acute hemodialysis
patients can also be alkalotic. The severity of the alkalosis and the process generating the
alkalosis are the main issues to help determine the optimal dialysate bicarbonate
concentration. (See "Buffer solutions" above). We recommend adjusting the dialysate
calcium concentration to avoid hypercalcemia or clinical hypocalcemia. (See "Calcium"
above). We use a dialysis blood flow rate of 400 mL per minute. If a lower blood flow rate is
required because of hemodynamic instability, the best dialysis modality is unclear and the
subject of ongoing study. Until further data are available, we suggest slower solute removal
over six to 12 hours by sustained low-efficiency dialysis (SLED) or by continuous renal
replacement therapy (CCRT). (See "Blood flow rate" above). Determining the ultrafiltration
goals in ARF patients can be challenging. The estimation of target intravascular volume will
guide the ultrafiltration goals for a given intermittent hemodialysis session. Ultrafiltration
during IHD can result in significant intradialytic hypotension. This can be treated by
minimizing UF rate requirements by increasing frequency of treatments and/or increased
duration of treatments, as well as sodium/ultrafiltration profiling, and using cool
temperature dialysate. (See "Ultrafiltration and blood pressure control" above). We
recommend that intermittent hemodialysis be provided at least three-times per week
(alternate days) with monitoring of the delivered dose of dialysis to ensure delivery of a Kt/V
of at least 1.2 per treatment (Grade 1B). (See "Dialysis dose" above). However, more
 frequent dialysis may be necessary for specific clinical scenarios, such as intractable
c
hyperkalemia, volume overload, or severe hypotension

cUse of UpToDate is subject to the Subscription and License Agreement. REFERENCES

Marshall, MR, Golper, TA. In: Intermittent Hemodialysis in Intensive Care in Nephrology,
Murray, P, Brady, H, Hall, J, (Eds), Taylor & Francis, Oxford, 2005. Daugirdas, JT, Blake, PG,
Ing, TS. Handbook of dialysis, 4th ed, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia, 2007.
Zehnder, C, Gutzwiller, JP, Huber, A, et al. Low-potassium and glucose-free dialysis maintains
urea but enhances potassium removal. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2001; 16:78. Hou, S., et al.
Safety and efficacy of low-potassium dialysate. Am J Kidney Dis 1989; 13:137. Ward, RA, et
al, Hemodialysate composition and intradialytic metabolic, acid-base and potassium
changes. Kidney Int 1987; 32:129. Ahmed, J, Weisberg, LS. Hyperkalemia in dialysis patients.
Semin Dial 2001; 14:348. Morrison, G, et al. Mechanism and prevention of cardiac
arrhythmias in chronic hemodialysis patients. Kidney Int 1980; 17:811. Flanigan, M. Dialysate
composition and hemodialysis hypertension. Semin Dial 2004; 17:279. Henrich, WL.
Principles and practice of dialysis, 3rd ed, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2004. p. 696.
Paganini, EP, Sandy, D, Moreno, L, et al. The effect of sodium and ultrafiltration modelling on
plasma volume changes and haemodynamic stability in intensive care patients receiving
haemodialysis for acute renal failure: a prospective, stratified, randomized, cross-over study.
Nephrol Dial Transplant 1996; 11 Suppl 8:32. Song, JH, Lee, SW, Suh, CK, Kim, MJ. Time-
averaged concentration of dialysate sodium relates with sodium load and interdialytic
weight gain during sodium-profiling hemodialysis. Am J Kidney Dis 2002; 40:291. Kooman,
JP, van der, Sande F, Leunissen, K, Locatelli, F. Sodium balance in hemodialysis therapy.
Semin Dial 2003; 16:351. Locatelli, F, Di Filippo, S, Manzoni, C. Sodium kinetics during
dialysis. Semin Dial Suppl 1999; 12:S41. Locatelli, F, Ponti, R, Pedrini, L, et al. Sodium kinetics
across dialysis membranes. Nephron 1984; 38:174. Gotch, FA, Evans, MC, Keen, ML.
Measurement of the effective dialyzer Na diffusion gradient in vitro and in vivo. Trans Am
Soc Artif Intern Organs 1985; 31:354. Flanigan, MJ, Khairullah QT, Lim VS: Dialysate sodium
delivery can alter chronic blood pressure management. Am J Kidney Dis 1997; 29:383. Oo,
TN, Smith, CL, Swan, SK. Does uremia protect against the demyelination associated with
correction of hyponatremia during hemodialysis? A case report and literature review. Semin
Dial 2003; 16:68. Daugirdas, JT, Ross, EA, Nissenson, AR, Chapter on Acute hemodialysis
Prescription in Daugirdas, JT, Blake, PG, Ing, SA. Handbook of Dialysis. Lippincott Williams &
Wilkins, Philadelphia, 2007. Brause, M, Deppe, CE, Hollenbeck, M, et al. Congestive heart
failure as an indication for continuous renal replacement therapy. Kidney Int Suppl 1999;
:S95. Henrich, WL. Principles and practice of dialysis. 3rd ed, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins,
2004. p. 696. Daugirdas, JT, et al. Handbook of Dialysis. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins,
Philadelphia, 2007. Alappan, R, Cruz, D, Abu-Alfa, AK et al. Treatment of Severe Intradialytic
Hypotension With the Addition of High Dialysate Calcium Concentration to Midodrine
and/or Cool Dialysate. Am J Kidney Dis 2001; 37:294. Zaloga, GP, Chernow, B, Cook, D, et al.
Assessment of calcium homeostasis in the critically ill surgical patient. The diagnostic pitfalls
 of the McLean-Hastings nomogram. Ann Surg 1985; 202:587. Zaloga, GP, Chernow, B. The
multifactorial basis for hypocalcemia during sepsis. Studies of the parathyroid hormone-
vitamin D axis. Ann Intern Med 1987; 107:36. Malcolm, DS, Zaloga, GP, Holaday, JW. Calcium
administration increases the mortality of endotoxic shock in rats. Crit Care Med 1989;
17:900. Zaloga, GP, Sager, A, Black, KW, Prielipp, R. Low dose calcium administration
increases mortality during septic peritonitis in rats. Circ Shock 1992; 37:226. Marshall, MR,
Golper, TA. In: Intermittent Hemodialysis in Intensive Care in Nephrology, Murray, P, Brady,
H, Hall, J, (Eds), Taylor & Francis, Oxford, UK, 2005. Zager, RA, Gmur, DJ, Bredl, CR, Eng, MJ.
Temperature effects on ischemic and hypoxic renal proximal tubular injury. Lab Invest 1991;
64:766. Schneditz, D. Temperature and thermal balance in hemodialysis. Semin Dial 2001;
14:357. Maggiore, Q, Pizzarelli, F, Santoro, A, et al. The effects of control of thermal balance
on vascular stability in hemodialysis patients: results of the European randomized clinical
trial. Am J Kidney Dis 2002; 40:280. Santoro, A, Mancini, E, Basile, C, et al. Blood volume
controlled hemodialysis in hypotension-prone patients: a randomized, multicenter
controlled trial. Kidney Int 2002; 62:1034. Tonelli, M, Astephen, P, Andreou, P, et al. Blood
volume monitoring in intermittent hemodialysis for acute renal failure. Kidney Int 2002;
62:1075. Aronoff, GR, et al. Drug prescribing in renal failure: dosing guidelines for adults, 4th
ed, American College of Physicians, Philadelphia, 1999. p.176. Evanson JA, Himmelfarb J,
Wingard R, et al. Prescribed versus delivered dialysis in acute renal failure patients. Am J
Kidney Dis 1998; 32:731. American Society of Nephrology 30th annual meeting. San Antonio,
Texas, November 2-5, 1997. Abstracts. J Am Soc Nephrol 1997; 8:1A. Paganini, EP.
Establishing a dialysis therapy/patient outcome link in intensive care unit acute dialysis for
patients with acute renal failure. Am J Kidney Dis 1996; 28:S81. Schiffl, H, Lang, SM, Fischer,
cc
R. Daily hemodialysis and the outcome of acute renal failure. N Engl J Med 2002; 346:305

cc

cc

UpToDate, Inc. All rights reserved. | Subscription and License Agreementc2009c

cLicensed to: fadel el zein

cc