==== Front Ann Saudi MedAnn Saudi MedAnnals of Saudi Medicine0256-49470975-4466King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Centre 2703873910.5144/0256-4947.2016.3.4.1735asm-2-121Original ArticleRelationship between the target dose for hemodialysis adequacy and nutritional assessment Kaya Tezcan aSipahi Savas bCinemre Hakan aKaracaer Cengiz cVarim Ceyhun aNalbant Ahmet cTamer Ali a a Department of Internal Medicine, Sakarya University Faculty of Medicine, Sakarya, Turkey b Department of Nephrology, Sakarya University Faculty of Medicine, Sakarya, Turkey c Department of Internal Medicine, Sakarya University Training and Research Hospital, Sakarya, TurkeyCorrespondence: Dr. Tezcan Kaya, Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Sakarya University, Sakarya, 54100, Turkey, T: +90 264 2956630 F: 90 264 2956629, tezcankaya@gmail.comMar-Apr 2016 36 2 121 127 Copyright © 2016, Annals of Saudi Medicine2016This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.BACKGROUND Some studies have shown an increased relative risk of death for patients with higher levels of Kt/V, which may be associated with marked malnutrition. OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between the target dose for hemodialysis adequacy, as measured by Kt/V, and various nutritional parameters in hemodialysis patients. DESIGN Cross-sectional. SETTINGS Sakarya University Faculty of Medicine, Turkey between February 2014 and March 2014. PATIENTS AND METHODS For consecutive patients who met criteria, the following were recorded: nutritional status, dialysis malnutrition score (DMS), the geriatric nutritional risk index (GNRI), serum albumin level, anthropometric measurements, and bioelectrical impedance analysis. Patients were classified into two groups according to the target hemodialysis dose for single-pool Kt/V: patients with spKt/V ≥1.4 and patients with spKt/V <1.4. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S) Association of hemodialysis adequacy by nutritional assessment. RESULTS The prevalence of malnutrition in 286 patients with target dose hemodialysis (spKt/V ≥ 1.4) was significantly higher according to body mass index (BMI), DMS, and GNRI (P=.001, P=.006, and P=.004, respectively) compared with patients with a lower target dose (spKt/V < 1.4). BMI, biceps skinfolds, mid-arm circumference, calf circumference, fat free mass, and total body water were statistically significantly lower in patients at a higher target dose (spKt/V ≥ 1.4) (P<.001, P=.034, P=.010, P<.001, P<.001, and P<.001 respectively). CONCLUSIONS Malnutrition was more frequent in chronic hemodialysis patients who received the target hemodialysis. Evaluation of nutritional status in patients at the target hemodialysis dose should be considered. LIMITATIONS Data collected from a single region; small sample size; cross-sectional design is disadvantageous. ==== Body Malnutrition is one of the most important causes of mortality and morbidity among hemodialysis (HD) patients.1 Loss of appetite, dietary limitations, depression, hypermetabolism, metabolic acidosis, decreased physical activity, decreased anabolism, comorbidities, and dialysis all contribute to the development of malnutrition in these patients.2 The results of several studies suggest that the prevalence of malnutrition among maintenance HD patients ranges between 20% and 70%.3 In addition to biochemical and anthropometric nutrition assessment tools, bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA), the dialysis malnutrition score (DMS), the malnutrition inflammation score, and the geriatric nutritional risk index (GNRI) can be used to identify malnourished HD patients.3 The goal of HD is to effectively eliminate uremic toxins from the body. The adequacy of HD is directly related to the patient’s quality of life, morbidity, rate of hospital admissions, and mortality.3,4 The kinetic model of urea (Kt/V) is the standard of care for measurement method of HD efficiency.5 Furthermore, Kt/V urea is the primary prescription parameter in current guidelines for HD adequacy,6,7 and adequate Kt/V urea values significantly decrease mortality.8 In addition, a correlation between inadequate dialysis and poor outcomes among HD patients has also been demonstrated.3,4,8 On the other hand, some studies have showed an increased relative risk of death for patients with a high level of HD adequacy.9–11 The Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (KDOQI) guidelines currently recommend that the minimally adequate HD dose should be a single-pool Kt/V (spKt/V) of 1.2, and the target HD dose should be a spKt/V of 1.4 for HD patients with minimal residual renal function.6 In this context, we designed this study to investigate a possible association between the level of hemodialysis adequacy and malnutrition, which are both related to morbidity and mortality among our HD patients. There are a paucity of data on the relationship between the target HD dose of spKt/V and DMS and GNRI. In the current study, we also investigated the relationship between the target dose of HD and different nutritional assessment methods such as DMS, GNRI, biochemical and antropometric tools, and BIA. PATIENTS AND METHODS This was a cross-sectional study conducted on all consecutive patients at our HD centers who fulfilled inclusion criteria. Inclusion criteria were age >18 years old, receiving conventional HD treatment for at least three months, and a minimal residual renal function (<2 mL/min per 1.73 m2). The patients were recruited from the three HD centers in our city between February 2014 and March 2014. HD sessions required 4 hours and were performed three times per week for all patients. Patients received dialysis with a standard bicarbonate-containing dialysate bath using a biocompatible HD membrane (Polysulfone, FX series, Fresenius, Germany). Dialysate flow rates were 500 mL/min and blood flow rates were 250–350 mL/min. Exclusion criteria were pregnancy, active infection, malignancy, thyroid dysfunction, unstable clinical conditions such as severe cardiac-pulmonary-hepatic or neurological disease, having a metal prosthesis or a cardiac pacemaker (due to possible interference with the BIA), having fistula or catheter dysfunctions, major amputation of the leg (for BIA), and having advanced dementia that would prevent patients from answering questions. In addition, we excluded patients who did not receive their prescribed dialysis dose, or were diagnosed with liver cirrhosis, or showed persistent non-compliance with their dialysis therapy such as missed and shortened dialysis sessions. Patients followed a nutrition program with a diet appropriate for end-stage renal disease12 and comorbidities (e.g. diabetes) under the control of a dietitian. The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the our University Faculty of Medicine. Written informed consent was obtained from all participants before study inclusion. Study patients were classified into two groups according to the target HD dose of spKt/V. While first group consisted of patients receiving the recommended target HD dose (spKt/V ≥1.4), second group consisted of patients receiving a non-target HD dose (spKt/V <1.4). Nutritional parameters and malnutrition rates were compared between these groups. Definition of the target HD dose of spKt/V Dialysis efficiency, expressed as spKt/V urea, was calculated according to the single-pool second generation equation of Daugirdas.5 Daugirdas second-generation formula is as following: spKt/V = –ln(R–0.008×t) + [(4–3.5×R) ×UF/W] (UF=ultrafiltration (in liters), W=postdialysis weight (in kilograms), t=duration of dialysis session, R=Ct/Co, Ct=urea concentration at the end of dialysis session, Co=urea concentration at the start of dialysis session).5 Blood sample collection during pre- and post-dialysis used the slow flow/stop pump sampling method recommended by the guidelines.6 Arithmetic average of the last three months spKt/V urea values were calculated for all patients. In accordance with the KDOQI guidelines, the target HD dose Kt/V was defined as a value of spKt/V ≥1.4.6 Dialysis malnutrition score Developed by Kalanter Zadeh et al,13 DMS is a method used for nutritional evaluation of HD patients on the basis of a subjective global assessment, including nutrition-related medical history and a brief physical examination. This modified quantitative subjective global assessment of nutrition has seven components: weight changes, gastrointestinal symptoms, dietary intake, functional capacity, comorbidities, loss of subcutaneous fat, and muscle wasting.13 Each component is scored between 1 (normal) and 5 (very severe). Therefore, the DMS score is a number between 7 (normal nutrition) and 35 (severe malnutrition). The DMS scores of patients were calculated and those with a score of 11–35 were considered to have malnutrition.13 Geriatric nutritional risk index The GNRI was calculated as reported by Yamada et al: GNRI=[14.89×albumin (g/dL)]±[41.79×(body weight/ideal body weight)].14 We used the value at the end of the dialysis session as the body weight, and it was also used for the calculation of the body mass index (BMI). Body weight/ideal body weight was set to 1 when the patient’s body weight exceeded the ideal body weight.14 Ideal body weight was calculated using height and a BMI of 22 in accordance with the study by Yamada et al14 Patients whose GNRI was lower than 92 were considered to have malnutrition.15 Anthropometric measurements The triceps skinfolds (TSF), biceps skinfolds (BSF), midarm circumferences (MAC), and calf circumferences (CC) of all patients were measured between 10–20 minutes after the dialysis session. Measurements were performed using standard techniques, and after three measurements, an average of these measurements was taken.16 All measurements were performed on the non-fistula arm. TSF and BSF were measured with a standard skinfold caliper, and MAC and CC were measured with a metal tape measure by the same trained researcher. Mid-arm muscle circumference (MAMC) was calculated using the following formula: MAMC=MAC–(3.1415×TSF).16 BMI was calculated after dialysis as the body weight in kilograms divided by the square of the height in meters (kg/m2).17 Patients with a BMI <18.5 kg/m2 were considered malnourished in accordance with the World Health Organization criteria.17 Laboratory evaluation All laboratory values were obtained from patients’ dialysis records. Predialysis blood samples were taken after an overnight fast for serum total cholesterol, triglyceride, albumin, total protein, parathyroid hormone (PTH), calcium, phosphorus, C-reactive protein (CRP), creatinine, urea, uric acid, ferritin, total iron binding capacity, and hemoglobin. CRP was assayed using the immunoturbidimetric method (normal range of CRP: 0–5 mg/L), whereas the quantitative colorimetric method was used for serum albumin mesurement. PTH was measured by chemiluminescence (reference values: 16–87 pg/mL). All other laboratory parameters were measured using standard laboratory methods. Patients with albumin < 3.5 g/dL were considered malnourished.15 Body composition measurements Body compositions were analyzed using the Body Composition Analyzer (Tanita SC 330S) 30 minutes after dialysis. BIA measurements were performed while patients stood barefoot on the metal surface of the device and kept their arms loose and in parallel with the body. Measurement took 1–2 minute(s) for each patient, and results were automatically printed out from the device. Body fat percentage, fat free mass (FFM), and total body water (TBW) were measured by BIA. Statistical analysis Continuous variables with a normal distribution (based on the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test) were reported as mean and standard deviation (SD), whereas median and interquartile range (IR) were used for non-normally distributed data. Categorical variables were expressed as number and percentage. Normally-distributed continuous parameters were compared using the t test, and non-normally distributed parameters were compared using the Mann–Whitney U-test. Spearman’s correlation test was used to determine the relationship between the markers of nutritional status and spKt/V. A P value of <.05 was considered as statistically significant. SPSS version 17.0 was used to conduct the statistical analyses. RESULTS Among the 286 patients included in the study, 168 were male (58.7%), and the average age was 60.8 (13.9) years. Patient demographics are presented in Table 1. The rate of patients with spKt/V ≥1.4 was 73.7% among women and 46.4% among men (P<.001). Table 2 shows the parameters related to the nutritional status of patients according to the target spKt/V. The anthropometric measurements such as BMI, BSF, MAC, and CC values were significantly lower in the spKt/V ≥1.4 group (P<.001, P=.034, P=.010, and P<.001, respectively). Similarly, the mean FFM and TBW values from the BIA evaluation were lower in the spKt/V ≥1.4 group (P<.001 and P<.001, respectively). While the mean DMS was higher in the group with spKt/V ≥1.4, the mean GNRI was lower (P=.011 and P=.001, respectively). Prevalence of malnutrition in female and male patients were same according to albumin, BMI, and GNRI (P=.133, P=.117, and P=.065, respectively). However, according to DMS, malnutrition was higher in women compared to men (61% vs 41.6%, respectively) (P=.001). The prevalence of malnutrition was significantly higher in the group with spKt/V ≥1.4 according to BMI, DMS, and GNRI (P=.001, P=.006, and P=.004, respectively; Table 3). In the group with spKt/V ≥1.4, a significant negative correlation was found between spKt/V and albumin, BMI, GNRI, MAMC, and CC, whereas there was a significant positive correlation between spKt/V and DMS (Table 4). However, while there were positive correlations between spKt/V and albumin and GNRI in the group with spKt/V <1.4, a negative correlation was observed between the same parameters in the group with spKt/V ≥1.4 (Table 4). DISCUSSION Among the chronic HD patients evaluated in the current study, we found that the prevalence of malnutrition was significantly higher in those in whom the spKt/V value was ≥1.4 as compared with those whose spKt/V value was <1.4 using DMS, GNRI, and BMI. To the best of our knowledge, the current study is the first to examine the relationship between the target adequate HD dose of spKt/V and DMS and GNRI in chronic HD patients. The nutritional status impairment observed in dialysis patients is strongly associated with increased morbidity and mortality.1,3,4 In additoin, nutritional status is an important predictor of survival in HD patients.1,3 Protein-energy wasting (PEW) may develop in HD patients for multifactorial reasons mentioned above.2 On the other hand, there is an increased relative risk of death for patients with a high level (>1.6) of Kt/V.9,10 This increased death rate may be associated with marked malnutrition in such patients.9,10 Similarly, Salahudeen et al defined a “paradox of Kt/V urea” as having a Kt/V urea >1.6 associated with higher mortality compared to patients whose Kt/V urea was 1.2–1.3.11 In this prospective study of 9 months on 1151 patients, it was postulated that the paradox of Kt/V urea was common in HD patients whose weight was lower than 70 kg and who had low values of prealbumin.11 In the current study, malnutrition was more frequent among patients whose spKt/V values were higher by comparison. The results of our study indicated that anthropometric parameters, such as BMI, BSF, MAC, and CC, were lower in patients whose spKt/V value was ≥1.4 as compared with those in whom spKt/V value was <1.4. BMI has been correlated with body fat and can be used as a nutritional status indication.18 Low BMI is an independent risk factor for death in HD patients.3 Lowrie et al found that smaller HD patients had an increase in mortality risk with lower dialysis doses.19 Furthermore, additional studies demonstrated that patient mortality depended on both body size and a dialysis dose parameter.20 Similar to results obtained in the current study, Nunes et al reported that height and weight values for HD patients whose Kt/V value was <1.2 were higher.21 Malnutrition may cause a smaller body mass, and therefore, a lower volume and a higher Kt/V value. Patients with severe malnutrition generally have a reduced body weight, and therefore, might appear to have a high Kt/V value.21 Many studies have reported a relationship between the increase in Kt/V and hospitalization and mortality.20–24 Body composition measurements provide important information on the nutritional status of dialysis patients. 24 Muscle mass is important for HD patients, as it is a marker of protein nutritional status.24 In addition, the decrease in muscle mass in HD patients is significantly correlated with higher mortality.25 In the current study, we found significantly lower FFM and TBW values in patients with spKt/V ≥1.4 than in those with spKt/V <1.4 in the BIA evaluation. Serum creatinine levels were also lower in patients with spKt/V ≥1.4. Various factors affect protein metabolism in HD patients, and as catabolism increases, a decrease in lean body mass ensues.2 A low plasma creatinine level may indicate decreased muscle mass in malnourished patients. Serum creatinine may also affect hydration status, residual renal function, and dietary protein intake.3 On the other hand, Kt/V is not an independent variable; it may be affected by protein intake and body composition. For example, some studies have reported that Kt/V is high when the muscle mass of patients is low, regardless of HD efficacy.10,26 Therefore, all of these conditions should be taken into consideration when Kt/V values of patients are evaluated. In the current study, target spKt/V ≥1.4 was higher in female patients than in male patients. Dialysis efficiency is inversely proportional with urea distribution volume. Therefore, lower dialysis efficiency is expected in patients with greater body surface areas. As the body surface areas of males are genetically larger than those of females, dialysis efficiency may be lower in males in general. In addition, the HEMO study reported a lower mortality rate in female patients receiving a high dose of HD as compared with those who received a standard dose of HD.27 However, this difference has not been determined for males.27 Although this difference may be attributable to differences in body size, some currently unidentified factors may also be involved. Similarly, no relationship was found between dialysis dose and age, diabetes, other comorbidities, and serum albumin in the HEMO study.27 In the current study, spKt/V was found to be significantly and negatively correlated with albumin, BMI, GNRI, MAMC, and CC among patients with spKt/V ≥1.4, whereas it was found to be significantly and positively correlated with DMS. While high rates of BMI, GNRI, MAMC, and CC indicate good nutritional status, the increase in DMS demonstrates a malnutrition status. These results have collectively indicated that there is a relationship between an increase in spKt/V and malnutrition in patients with spKt/V ≥1.4. In other words, severe PEW may occur with weight loss and muscle mass loss in patients with target spKt/V values. Nunes et al. reported a negative correlation between Kt/V and BMI, but did not find a correlation between most anthropometric parameters and Kt/V.21 Our study shows that patients with high spKt/V might have poor nutritional status. On the other hand, adequate HD and good nutritional status are associated with better survival.3,4 Thus, we suggest that patients who have adequate HD but poor nutritional status might benefit from expert nutritional support. Limitations of our study were that data were from a single center, the sample size was relatively small, and the cross-sectional study design is disadvantageous. In conclusion, the current study demonstrated that malnutrition is significantly higher in HD patients with spKt/V ≥1.4. When spKt/V is considered as dialysis adequacy in patients on maintenance HD, it is important to review the nutritional status of such patients, along with factors such as dialyzer size, blood flow, HD treatment duration, and fistula integrity.6 Therefore, it may be beneficial to evaluate the nutritional status of patients whose Kt/V value is on or above the target HD dose with parameters such as BMI, GNRI, DMS, MAMC, and CC. Table 1 Characteristics of chronic hemodialysis patients. All patients (n=286) Kt/V urea <1.4 (n=121) Kt/V urea ≥1.4 (n=165) P Age (year) 60.8 (13.9) 59.8 (11.5) 61.6 (15.5) .302 Gender (female/male) 118/168 31/90 87/78 <.001 Dialysis vintage (month) 42 (20–80) 34 (18–72.5) 50 (21–84.5) .076 Diabetes %, (n) 33.6 (96) 33.9 (41) 33.3 (55) .922 Hypertension %, (n) 73 (209) 74.3 (90) 72.1 (119) .343 History of CAD %, (n) 18.5 (53) 20.7 (25) 17 (28) .260 Previous CVD %, (n) 5.5 (16) 6.6 (8) 5.4 (9) .363 spKt/V urea 1.5 (1.3–1.6) 1.3 (1.2–1.4) 1.6 (1.5–1.7) <.001 Urea reduction rate (%) 71 (67–76) 66 (63–68) 75 (71–78) <.001 Creatinine (mg/dL) 7.2 (6–8.8) 7.4 (6.4–9) 7.1 (5.8–8.5) .090 Hemoglobin (g/dL) 10.8 (1.2) 10.8 (1.2) 10.7 (1.2) .378 Total protein (g/dL) 6.6 (6.2–7) 6.6 (6.2–7.1) 6.6 (6.3–6.9) .534 LDL cholesterol (mg/dL) 103 (35) 104 (39) 102 (32) .507 Triglyceride (mg/dL) 139 (105–193) 146 (105–219) 137 (105–180) .517 PTH (pg/mL) 350 (181–564) 360 (210–535) 332 (176–591) .722 Calcium (mg/dL) 8.5 (0.8) 8.5 (0.8) 8.5 (0.8) .995 Phosphorus (mg/dL) 4.8 (3.8–5.7) 4.9 (3.9–5.6) 4.7 (3.7–5.8) .594 Uric acid (mg/dL) 5.5 (4.8–6.1) 5.5 (5–6.1) 5.4 (4.8–6.3) .708 TIBC (μg/dL) 177 (153–205) 177 (157–221) 176 (152–201) .163 Ferritin (ng/mL) 439 (287–650) 417 (276–568) 470 (293–669) .063 CRP (mg/L) 5.6 (2.2–11.3) 7.3 (3.2–11.2) 4.6 (1.9–12.1) .200 CAD: Coronary artery disease; CVD: Cerebrovascular disease; LDL: low density lipoprotein; PTH: parathyroid hormone; TIBC: total iron binding capacity; CRP: C reactive protein. Table 2 Nutritional parameters of hemodialysis patients according to target hemodialysis dose of spKt/V urea. All patients (n=286) Kt/V urea <1.4 (n=121) Kt/V urea ≥1.4 (n=165) P Albumin (g/dL) 3.9 (0.4) 3.9 (0.4) 3.9 (0.4) .603 Total cholesterol (mg/dL) 172 (46) 173 (50) 171 (44) .707 BMI (kg/m2) 24.8 (4.9) 26.1 (4.9) 23.9 (4.7) <.001 Height (cm) 165 (156–170) 168 (163–175) 160 (155–168) <.001 Weight (kg) 67.2 (15.1) 74.1 (14.6) 62.1 (13.5) <.001 TSF (mm) 11 (8–15) 11 (8–14) 10 (7–15) .507 BSF (mm) 10 (8–14) 10 (8–10) 9 (7–14) .034 MAMC (cm) 22.3 (2.9) 22.9 (3.1) 21.9 (2.7) .003 MAC (cm) 26.1 (24–28.2) 26.2 (24–29) 25.2 (23–28) .010 Calf circumference (cm) 32.5 (4.1) 34 (4) 31.4 (3.9) <.001 Percentage body fat 25.3 (9.9) 23.7 (9) 26.5 (10.4) .058 Fat mass (kg) 16.6 (10.8–23.2) 16.6 (10.9–22.3) 16.7 (10.7–23.8) .943 Fat free mass (kg) 49 (9.6) 54.9 (8.1) 44.9 (8.3) <.001 Total body water (kg) 36 (6.7) 40.2 (5.9) 36 (6.7) <.001 DMS 10 (9–13) 10 (9–12) 11 (9–14) .011 GNRI 105.6 (11.9) 108.2 (12.1) 103.6 (11.5) .001 BMI: body mass index; TSF: triceps skinfold thickness; BSF: biceps skinfold thickness; MAMC: mid-arm muscle circumference; MAC: mid-arm circumference; DMS: dialysis malnutrition score; GNRI: geriatric nutritional risk index. Table 3 The prevalence of malnutrition according to target hemodialysis dose of spKt/V urea. Nutritional evaluation All patients %, (n=286) Kt/V urea <1.4 %, (n=121) Kt/V urea ≥1.4 %, (n=165) P Albumin <3.5 gr/dL 12.5 (36) 12.3 (15) 12.7 (21) .541 BMI <18.5 kg/m2 8.7 (25) 2.4 (3) 13.3 (22) .001 DMS 11–35 49.6 (142) 40.4 (49) 56.3 (93) .006 GNRI <92 11.8 (34) 5.7 (7) 16.3 (27) .004 BMI: body mass index;DMS: dialysis malnutrition score; GNRI: geriatric nutritional risk index. Table 4 Correlation coefficients between spKt/V urea and nutrition related parameters in chronic hemodialysis patients. Parameters Kt/V urea (Kt/V urea <1.4 group) Kt/V urea (Kt/V urea ≥1.4 group) Albumin (gr/dL) 0.306 (P=.001) −0.212 (P=.006) BMI (kg/m2) 0.057 (P=.532) −0.105 (P=.180) GNRI 0.209 (P=.021) −0.210 (P=.007) Dialysis malnutrition score −0.111 (P=.227) 0.198 (P=.011) MAMC (cm) 0.094 (P=.306) −0.195 (P=.012) Calf circumference (cm) −0.039 (P=.672) −0.192 (P=.013) BMI: body mass index; GNRI: geriatric nutritional risk index; DMS: dialysis malnutrition score; MAMC: mid arm muscle circumference; CC: calf circumference. ==== Refs REFERENCES 1 Dwyer JT Larive B Leung J Rocco MV Greene T Burrowes J Are nutritional status indicators associated with mortality in the Hemodialysis (HEMO) Study? Kidney Int 2005 68 4 1766 76 16164653 2 Carrero JJ Stenvinkel P Cuppari L Ikizler TA Kalantar-Zadeh K Kaysen G Etiology of the Protein-Energy Wasting Syndrome in Chronic Kidney Disease: A Consensus Statement From the International Society of Renal Nutrition and Metabolism (ISRNM) J Ren Nutr 2013 23 2 77 90 23428357 3 Ikizler TA Hakim RM Nutrition in end-stage renal disease Kidney Int 1996 50 2 343 57 8840260 4 Held PJ Levin NW Bovbjerg RR Pauly MV Diamond LH Mortality and duration of hemodialysis treatment JAMA 1991 265 7 871 75 1899455 5 Daugirdas JT Second generation logarithmic estimates of single-pool variable volume Kt/V: an analysis of error J Am Soc Nephrol 1993 4 5 1205 13 8305648 6 National Kidney Foundation KDOQI clinical practice guidelines and clinical practice recommendations for 2006 updates: hemodialysis adequacy, peritoneal adequacy, and vascular access Am J Kidney Dis 2006 48 suppl 1 S2 90 16813990 7 Tattersall J Martin-Malo A Pedrini L Basci A Canaud B Fouque D EBPG guideline on dialysis strategies Nephrol Dial Transplant 2007 22 Suppl 2 ii5 21 17507427 8 Hakim RM Breyer J Ismail N Schulman G Effect of dose of dialysis on mortality and morbidity Am J Kidney Dis 1994 23 5 661 9 8172208 9 McClellan WM Soucie JM Flanders WD Mortality in end-stage renal disease is associated with facility-to-facility differences in adequacy of hemodialysis J Am Soc Nephrol 1998 9 10 1940 7 9773796 10 Chertow GM Owen WF Lazarus JM Lew NL Lowrie EG Exploring the reverse J-shaped curve between urea reduction ratio and mortality Kidney Int 1999 56 5 1872 78 10571796 11 Salahudeen AK Dykes P May W Risk factors for higher mortality at the highest levels of spKt/V in haemodialysis patients Nephrol Dial Transplant 2003 18 1339 44 12808171 12 NKF-DOQI clinical practice guidelines for nutrition in chronic renal failure Am J Kidney Dis 2000 35 6 Suppl 2 S17 S104 10.1053/kd.2000.6671 13 Kalantar-Zadeh K Kleiner M Dunne E Lee GH Luft FC A modified quantitative subjective global assessment of nutrition for dialysis patients Nephrol Dial Transplant 1999 14 7 1732 8 10435884 14 Yamada K Furuya R Takita T Maruyama Y Yamaquchi Y Ohkawa S Kumaqai H Simplified nutritional screening tools for patients on maintenance hemodialysis Am J Clin Nutr 2008 87 1 106 13 18175743 15 Panichi V Cupisti A Rosati A Di Giorqio A Scatena A Menconi O Geriatric nutritional risk index is a strong predictor of mortality in hemodialysis patients: data from the Riscavid cohort J Nephrol 2014 27 2 193 201 24430765 16 Fouque D Vennegoor M Wee PT Wanner C Basci A Canaud B EBPG Guideline on nutrition Nephrol Dial Transplant 2007 22 Suppl 2 ii45 87 17507426 17 Physical status: the use and interpretation of anthropometry. Report of a WHO Expert Committee World Health Organ Tech Rep Ser 1995 854 1 452 8594834 18 Leavey SF Strawderman RL Jones CA Port FK Held PJ Simple Nutritional Indicators as Independent predictors of Mortality in hemodialysis patients Am J Kidney Dis 1998 31 6 997 1006 9631845 19 Lowrie EG Li Z Ofsthun N Lazarus JM Body size, dialysis dose and death risk relationships among hemodialysis patients Kidney Int 2002 62 5 1891 7 12371994 20 Port FK Ashby VB Dhingra RK Roys EC Wolfe RA Dialysis dose and body mass index are strongly associated with survival in hemodialysis patients J Am Soc Nephrol 2002 13 4 1061 6 11912267 21 Teixeira Nunes F de Campos G Xavier de Paula SM Merhi VA Portero-McLellan KC da Motta DG de Oliveira MR Dialysis adequacy and nutritional status of hemodialysis patients Hemodialysis Int 2008 12 1 45 51 22 Miller JE Kovesdy CP Nissenson AR Mehrotra R Streja E Van Wyck D Association of hemodialysis treatment time and dose with mortality and the role of race and sex Am J Kidney Dis 2010 55 1 100 12 19853336 23 Depner TA Gotch FA Port FK Wolfe RA Lindsay RM Blake PG Locatelli F How will the results of the HEMO study impact dialysis practice? Semin Dial 2003 16 1 8 21 12535292 24 Chumlea WC Poor nutritional status and inflammation. Anthropometric and body composition assessment in dialysis patients Semin Dial 2004 17 6 466 70 15660577 25 Huang CX Tighiouart H Beddhu S Cheung AK Dwyer JT Eknoyan G Both low muscle mass and low fat are associated with higher all-cause mortality in hemodialysis patients Kidney Int 2010 77 7 624 29 20072111 26 Li Z Lew NL Lazarus JM Lowrie EG Comparing the urea reduction ratio and the urea product as outcome-based measures of hemodialysis dose Am J Kidney Dis 2000 35 4 598 605 10739778 27 Depner T Daugirdas J Greene T Allon M Beck G Chumlea C Dialysis dose and the effect of gender and body size on outcome in the hemo study Kidney Int 2004 65 4 1386 94 15086479