↓ Skip to main content

Is incremental hemodialysis ready to return on the scene? From empiricism to kinetic modelling

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Nephrology, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
30 Mendeley
Title
Is incremental hemodialysis ready to return on the scene? From empiricism to kinetic modelling
Published in
Journal of Nephrology, March 2017
DOI 10.1007/s40620-017-0391-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carlo Basile, Francesco Gaetano Casino, Kamyar Kalantar-Zadeh

Abstract

Most people who make the transition to maintenance dialysis therapy are treated with a fixed dose thrice-weekly hemodialysis regimen without considering their residual kidney function (RKF). The RKF provides effective and naturally continuous clearance of both small and middle molecules, plays a major role in metabolic homeostasis, nutritional status, and cardiovascular health, and aids in fluid management. The RKF is associated with better patient survival and greater health-related quality of life, although these effects may be confounded by patient comorbidities. Preservation of the RKF requires a careful approach, including regular monitoring, avoidance of nephrotoxins, gentle control of blood pressure to avoid intradialytic hypotension, and an individualized dialysis prescription including the consideration of incremental hemodialysis. There is currently no standardized method for applying incremental hemodialysis in practice. Infrequent (once- to twice-weekly) hemodialysis regimens are often used arbitrarily, without knowing which patients would benefit the most from them or how to escalate the dialysis dose as RKF declines over time. The recently heightened interest in incremental hemodialysis has been hindered by the current limitations of the urea kinetic models (UKM) which tend to overestimate the dialysis dose required in the presence of substantial RKF. This is due to an erroneous extrapolation of the equivalence between renal urea clearance (Kru) and dialyser urea clearance (Kd), correctly assumed by the UKM, to the clinical domain. In this context, each ml/min of Kd clears the urea from the blood just as 1 ml/min of Kru does. By no means should such kinetic equivalence imply that 1 ml/min of Kd is clinically equivalent to 1 ml/min of urea clearance provided by the native kidneys. A recent paper by Casino and Basile suggested a variable target model (VTM) as opposed to the fixed model, because the VTM gives more clinical weight to the RKF and allows less frequent hemodialysis treatments at lower RKF. The potentially important clinical and financial implications of incremental hemodialysis render it highly promising and warrant randomized controlled trials.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 30 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Professor 5 17%
Student > Bachelor 4 13%
Student > Master 4 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 7%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 8 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 50%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 9 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 October 2019.
All research outputs
#6,673,439
of 23,999,200 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Nephrology
#284
of 1,003 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#103,298
of 312,214 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Nephrology
#4
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,999,200 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,003 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 312,214 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.