==== Front Med Sci MonitMed. Sci. MonitMedical Science MonitorMedical Science Monitor : International Medical Journal of Experimental and Clinical Research1234-10101643-3750International Scientific Literature, Inc. 3006369610.12659/MSM.909404909404Clinical ResearchAssociation of Dose and Frequency on the Survival of Patients on Maintenance of Hemodialysis in China: A Kaplan-Meier and Cox-Proportional Hazard Model Analysis Sun Yan 12BWang Yankui 1CYu Wenhong 3DZhuo Yan 3EYuan Qian 3EFWu Xiongfei 1AG 1 Department of Nephrology, East Campus, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, Hubei, P.R. China 2 Department of Nephrology, Urological Center, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, P. R. China 3 Department of Nephrology, Southwest Hospital, Third Military Medical University, Chongqing, P.R. ChinaCorresponding Author: Xiongfei Wu, e-mail: AudreyxWrightgx@yahoo.comA Study Design B Data Collection C Statistical Analysis D Data Interpretation E Manuscript Preparation F Literature Search G Funds Collection 2018 31 7 2018 24 5329 5337 07 2 2017 01 3 2018 © Med Sci Monit, 20182018This work is licensed under Creative Common Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)Background Dialysis frequency and dose are controversial prognostic factors of hemodialysis morbidity and mortality. The aim of this study was to find out the effect of frequency and dosage of dialysis on mortality and survival in a group of Chinese hemodialysis patients. Material/Methods In total, 183 patients seen from February 2008 to January 2018, who were on maintenance hemodialysis for at least 3 months, were included in the study cohort. An anonymized database of age, gender, diabetic status, comorbidities, date of initiation of dialysis, hematological characters, biochemical variables, and status of survived or died was established from DICOM (Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine) files of patients. Kaplan-Meier and Cox-proportional hazard model was used for calculation of survival over time at 95% confidence level. Results Overall, the 10-year survival rate was 27%. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed patient survival as 94% at one-year, 59% at 5-years, and 27% at 10-years. Hemoglobin, serum albumin, calcium, potassium, phosphorous, calcium-phosphorous-products, and hemodialysis frequency and the dose had a significant effect on survival. Cox regression proportional hazard model showed that patients with serum albumin level of >4 g/dL were better associated with survival. Patients who underwent twice-weekly hemodialysis had 4.26 times less chance of survival as compared to patients with thrice-weekly hemodialysis. A higher dialysis dose of >1.2 spKt/V offered better survival as compared to a lower dose of <1.2 spKt/V. Conclusions Hypoalbuminemia, hemodialysis time, and hemodialysis frequency were significantly associated with mortality. MeSH Keywords Glomerular Filtration RateHemodialysis Units, HospitalHypoalbuminemiaKaplan-Meier EstimateKidney Failure, ChronicMorbidity ==== Body Background In recent decades, end-stage renal disease (ESRD) has become a major health concern with an alarming increase in incidence as well as prevalence. The number of ESRD patients continues to increase rapidly with an estimated annual growth rate of nearly 7%, that in turn poses an enormous financial burden on society. Worldwide, a large number of patients with ESRD undergo dialysis treatment (either hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis) and kidney transplantation [1]. In China, the most populous country of Asia comprising 20% of worlds’ population, the estimated prevalence of dialysis patients in 2012 was 215 per million population [2]. Hemodialysis remains the predominant choice of renal replacement therapy over the options of peritoneal dialysis and kidney transplantation [3]. Even with major research efforts to identify better management of dialysis patients, morbidity and mortality continued to increase in ESRD patients. In addition to higher mortality and morbidity, there are several other factors that have been shown to influence patient outcomes for ESRD patients [4]. Although all prognostic factors predictive of survival and better quality of life in hemodialysis patients are not yet known, there are a number of factors that have a well-known and widely accepted influence on survival among hemodialysis patients. Such factors include advanced age, malnutrition, difficult vascular access, the presence of cardiovascular disease, comorbidities such as diabetes mellitus and hypertension, and their associated complications [5]. The higher prevalence of such factors explains higher mortality among hemodialysis patients. According to the Chinese Renal Data System, glomerular disease followed by diabetic nephropathy and hypertension constitute the major causes of ESRD among hemodialysis patients. The increased incidence of hypertension, obesity, and type 2 diabetes mellitus, along with advanced age, further increases the risk of ESRD in China, thus demanding more economic and disease management facilities [2]. Apart from these well-known and widely accepted prognostic factors for survival in hemodialysis patients, there are some controversial factors that may also influenced morbidity and mortality among hemodialysis patients. One such globally accepted controversial prognostic factor is dialysis frequency [6] and its dose [7]. The gold standard of dialysis treatment in terms of dialysis frequency, duration, and dose of dialysis is yet to be determined. Recently, many research studies have suggested that higher morbidity accompanied by frequent heart complications, malnutrition, depression, and other bone-related disorders are partly caused by inadequate dialysis dose and frequency [8]. Dialysis dose and frequency directly affects the quality of life and leads to diminished longevity. In order to improve overall mortality rates and achieve an acceptable survival prognosis for hemodialysis patients, we conducted a Cox-proportional hazard model analysis to find out the association of dialysis dose and frequency as prognostic factors in assessing survival of hemodialysis patients. The objective of this observational study was to find out the effect of hypoalbuminemia, hemodialysis time and frequency, and gender on mortality and survival among Chinese hemodialysis patients. Material and Methods Ethical consideration and consent to participate An exception for this study was granted from the World Health Organization trial registry by Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, China and Southwest Hospital, Third Military Medical University, China. However, the study was registered in the research registry (www.researchregistry.com), UID No.: researchregistry3667, dated January 15, 2008. The protocol (OS/RH/HU/15/08 dated December 15, 2007) of the study was approved by Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, China and Southwest Hospital, Third Military Medical University, China. The study adhered to the law of PR China, STROBE guidelines, and 2013 Declarations of Helsinki. Written consent was obtained from all patients or their guardian by signing a pre-designed patient consent Performa regarding the study and publication of it in all formats (hard and/or electronic) irrespective to time and language. Inclusion criteria The current study analyzed an incident cohort of ESRD patients of Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, China and Southwest Hospital, Third Military Medical University, China from February 2008 to January 2018. Incident patients who were on maintenance hemodialysis for at least 3 months were included in the study cohort. Patients included in the study were diagnosed with ESRD if they suffer an irreversible decline in glomerular filtration rate for more than 3 months as calculated by Cockcroft-Gault renal function estimating formula [9]. Moreover, patients who had underlying kidney disease diagnosed on the basis of clinical and laboratory parameters, such as the volume of daily diuresis less than 250 mL, were also included in the study. In total, 37 children (age <18 years) and 150 adults (age ≥18 years) were included in the analysis. Exclusion criteria Participants were not considered eligible for enrollment if they suffered from acute renal failure, were transferred from any other modality of renal replacement therapy to hemodialysis or if they died or ceased hemodialysis (for any reason) before 3 months. Patients who ever received nocturnal hemodialysis, home hemodialysis, or peritoneal dialysis during follow-up were excluded from the analysis. Patients who were transferred to the other dialysis center during the 10-year study period were also excluded from the analysis because the data collected from the other dialysis centers were difficult to obtain and did not provide complete information related to the study hypothesis. Methods of data collection An anonymized database was established with the intent of prospective data collection of all the patients included in the study cohort from DICOM (Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine) files of patients. Briefly, the database captured demographic variables such as age, gender, diabetic status, comorbidities, date of initiation of dialysis as well as hematological and biochemical variables and status during follow-up (i.e., survived or died). Patients were censored if they died during the follow-up period or were lost to follow-up due to change of dialysis modality (transplantation, conversion to peritoneal dialysis) or other reasons. Details of hemodialysis All patients were dialyzed using standard bicarbonate hemodialysis for 4 hours twice- or thrice-weekly. Polyethylene glycol substituted cellulose delivered dialysis dose was measured by spKt/V with maximum dialysis dose of 1.6 spKt/V and a minimum targeted dose of ≥1.2 spKt/V. According to the Kidney Disease Outcome Quality Initiative (KDOQI) guidelines, dialysis dose >1.2 spKt/V is considered as the minimum dialysis dose [10]. Therefore, a cutoff value of 1.2 spKt/V of dialysis dose was used for hemodialysis to study the effect of dialysis dose in relation to survival. Dialysate flow rate was controlled at 500 mL/min while blood flow rate was targeted according to individual patient requirements. Statistical analysis Mean ± standard deviation and number (percentages) were used for initial summarization of data. Continuous variables were analyzed using independent t-test, while categorical variables were studied using chi square or Fisher exact test [11]. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to identify independent factors that had an impact on mortality [12]. Results of the study were pooled if clinical heterogeneity of patient outcomes, interventions, and populations was minimal [6]. As the primary endpoint of analysis was death, Kaplan-Meier and Cox-proportional hazard model were used for calculation of survival over time [12]. A confidence interval of 95% (P<0.05) was considered statistically significant. SPSS Statistics (IBM Inc., USA) was used for statistical analysis. Intention-to-treat analysis method was performed. Results Eight hundred and two patients receiving maintenance hemodialysis for a minimum of 3 months from February 2008 to January 2018 were recruited for the current study. Out of these patients, 183 patients met inclusion criteria and were included in the study. STROBE flow chart of a multicentric cohort study is reported in Figure 1. The demographic and clinical characteristics of the study population are summarized in Table 1. The majority of the study population were male (58%); the mean age was 51.3±13.5 years. Seventy-one patients (39%) were diabetics. The details of the underlying kidney diseases among the study patients is shown in Figure 2. Among the underlying kidney diseases, diabetic nephropathy was the most common (41.7%) while lupus nephritis was the least common (2%) cause of kidney disease. Overall, the 10-year survival rate in the study group was 27%. Survival of the whole cohort by Kaplan-Meier analysis showed patient survival as 94% at one year, 59% at 5 years and 27% at 10 years. The hemodialysis characteristics and laboratory values of patients are shown in Table 2. Nearly 69% of patients were on a twice-weekly hemodialysis schedule while the remaining 31% were hemodialyzed thrice weekly. At baseline, 3%, 87%, and 10% of patients were dialyzed using a central permanent catheter, arteriovenous fistulae (AVFs), or arteriovenous grafts (AVGs) respectively. All the variables associated with mortality were assessed by cross-tabulation. Among laboratory values, there was a significant difference in the mean values of survivors and non-survivors with respect to hemoglobin, serum albumin, calcium, potassium, phosphorous, and CPP (calcium phosphorous product). Hemodialysis frequency and dose were the only characteristics that showed significant differences in both groups. All the statistically significant variables (significant phi and Cramer’s V coefficient) were then subjected to univariate analysis. Significant variables (P<0.1) in univariate analysis were further subjected to multivariate analysis (Table 3). The variables that showed significant P value (<0.05) in multivariate analysis were then finally subjected to Cox regression proportional hazard model (Table 4). Among the variables included for assessing survival functions using the Cox model, serum albumin delivered dialysis dose and frequency of hemodialysis were found to be statistically significantly affecting survival. Patients with serum albumin level of >4 g/dL were better associated with survival (HR 1.17, P=0.001). Similarly, those who underwent twice-weekly hemodialysis had 4.26 times less chance of survival as compared to patients with thrice-weekly hemodialysis (P=0.043). Lastly, a higher dialysis dose of >1.2 spKt/V offered better survival as compared to a lower dose of <1.2 spKt/V (P=2.03). The most common cause of overall mortality was observed to be sepsis (39%) followed by ischemic heart disease (Figure 3). Discussion The current study reports on the prospective long-term follow-up of a large cohort of incident hemodialysis patients in a hemodialysis centers in Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, China and Southwest Hospital, Third Military Medical University, China. The main findings of the study were that at the end of 10-years follow-up, 133 out of 183 patients died with an estimated mortality rate of 72.7%. The overall mortality rate reported in the study was considerably higher but compared favorably with the United States renal data system (USRDS) [13]. Another reason for overall high mortality in our study was the long follow-up period in the study. To the best of our knowledge, there have been few studies conducted where the study examined the effect of dialysis efficiency in an incident cohort of hemodialysis patients with long-term follow-up [14–16]. The overall 10-year mortality rate in available studies was 75% [16] that coincides with the mortality rate reported in our analysis. The analysis of our study data showed that serum albumin level, hemodialysis frequency, and hemodialysis dose as measured by spKt/V were independently associated with increased survival. In our study there was no significant differences in the delivered dialysis dose between males and females. Although in the univariate analysis, females had a greater risk of death with an odds ratio of 2.88, however, in the multivariate analysis this difference was insignificant. Similar findings were seen in a study in which females are found to have a greater risk of death [17] with an adjusted risk odds ratio of 3.9, and this difference remained significant in a multivariate analysis [18]. This is in contrast with findings that demonstrated no significant difference for survival between dialyzing women and men [19,20]. The results of our observational study revealed discrimination in the dialysis of men and women. According to one dialysis study, an inadequate hemodialysis dose was associated with mortality and treatment failure [21]. Similarly, our study showed increasing hemodialysis dose >1.2 spKt/V resulted in better survival regardless of age and gender. These findings were contrary to the findings of the HEMO study, which is the largest trial of hemodialysis patients. Results of the HEMO trial showed that increasing dialysis dose did not improve clinical outcome in hemodialysis patients but rather it increased the relative risk of death especially with higher dose i.e., >1.6 spKt/V. These differences in study results can be explained by different study population, methodological differences, and longer follow-up time (3 years versus 10 years). Furthermore, it is worth noting that the HEMO study excluded patients with low serum albumin while the study did not exclude such patients specifically [22]. A crossover pilot trial reported that frequent hemodialysis improved blood pressure control, but also time and financial burden [23]. Similar results were seen in our study, where patients who were on twice-weekly hemodialysis sessions were significantly associated with mortality (P=0.03, OR 0.45). With respect to the results of hemodialysis characteristics, the trial revealed that more frequent hemodialysis improved overall survival. Malnutrition is another well-known risk factor for adverse outcomes and mortality in hemodialysis patients. Studies have demonstrated an increased mortality with hypoalbuminemia [18,24,25]. A plasma albumin concentration of less than 4 g/dl is independently associated with mortality. Our study also revealed similar results, that patients with lower albumin level <4 g/dl had statistically significant increased mortality. Since hypoalbuminemia is associated with malnutrition, effective strategies to prevent malnutrition and infectious complications may ultimately increase survival outcomes in hemodialysis patients. The majority of deaths in our study were due to sepsis followed by ischemic heart disease leading to 67.5% of total deaths. These findings are consistent with the findings of the United States Renal Data System (USRDS) [13]. Out of 67.5% of reported deaths, 38% of the deaths were due to sepsis alone, the majority of which were vascular access related infections. Withdrawal from dialysis is another important cause of mortality among hemodialysis patients. In our study, 4% of deaths were due to withdrawal from dialysis, which was less than rates reported by USRDS in which withdrawal from dialysis was the third most common cause of death [13]. Our study showed that neither the type of kidney disease nor the comorbid diseases affected survival. This was in agreement with another reported study [18]. There were several limitations to our study. For example, the study failed to evaluate the effect of blood urea nitrogen on ischemic heart disease. The long time required for the study may have introduced patient variabilities. The study was most reliable with regards to the DICOM data for patients; at the time of drafting and editing the report, several patients died or were transferred to the other care center. Conclusions The current study attempted to rule out factors that affect mortality and survival outcomes in hemodialysis patients. The study indicated that hypoalbuminemia, hemodialysis time, and frequency were significantly associated with mortality. The dialysis time and frequency are beneficial to patient survival. However, large randomized clinical trials are needed to confirm these findings in larger settings, as all hemodialysis patients are not able to tolerate enhanced dialysis delivery. The observational study suggests the potential clinic benefits for routine practice in dialysis center for the future. Acknowledgements Authors are thankful to all medical staff, non-medical staff, and technicians of RRenmin Hospital of Wuhan University, China and Southwest Hospital, Third Military Medical University, China for their help during the study. Conflict of interest None. Source of support: Departmental sources Figure 1 STROBE flow chart of a multicentric cohort study. Intention-to-treat analysis. Figure 2 Underlying kidney disease among study participants. Figure 3 Causes of overall mortality in among study participants. Table 1 Demographic profile of study participants. Characteristics Variables Overall patients (n = 183) Age (years, mean ±SD) 51.37±13.5 Gender Male 106 (58) Female 77 (42) Anthropometric characteristics (mean ±SD) Weight (kg) 67.3±9.6 Height (cm) 159.45±17.5 BMI (kg/m2) 24.2±2.7 Marital status Married 161 (88) Single 22 (12) Race Chinese 164 (90) Indians 11 (6) Others 8 (4) Smoking status Current smoker 124 (68) Ex-smoker 13 (7) Non-smoker 46 (25) Employment status Employed 142 (78) Unemployed 20 (11) Student 7 (4) House wife 14 (7) Blood pressure (mean ±SD) Systolic blood pressure (mmHg) 142.12±17.31 Diastolic blood pressure (mmHg) 86±11.32 Co-morbidities Diabetes 71 (39) Hypertension 53 (29) Ischemic heart disease 60 (33) Peripheral vascular disease 40 (22) Cerebrovascular accident 18 (10) Myocardial infarction 20 (11) Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease 11 (6) Hypothyroidism 5 (3) Hyperlipidemia 15 (8) Hepatitis B 5 (3) Hepatitis C 11 (6) Pericarditis 7 (4) Cardiac arrhythmia 13 (7) Categorical data were represented as a number (percentage), continuous data were represented as mean ±SD. Table 2 Laboratory values and hemodialysis characteristics. Measures Overall n=183 Death n=133 Survived n=50 *p-Value Laboratories values (mean ±SD) Serum albumin (g/dl) 3.8±1.8 3.2±1.1 3.7±2.3 0.021 Cholesterol (mg/dl) 173.2±4.2 162.1±7.6 169.2±3.4 0.634 BUN (mg/dl) Pre-dialysis 69.3±8.1 71.7±4.2 64.5±3.3 0.071 Post dialysis 37.2±4.8 44.3±2.3 33.6±1.8 0.101 Bilirubin (mg/dl) 0.48±0.07 0.59±0.5 0.51±0.08 0.092 Hemoglobin (g/dl) 9.2±3.4 8.7±2.2 9.7±1.7 0.012 Serum Calcium (mg/dl) 9.1±4.2 10.8±2.8 9.3±1.1 0.046 Serum Potassium (mEq/L) 5.1±2.1 4.8±2.6 5.8±1.7 0.028 Serum Phosphorous (g/dl) 4.9±1.7 4.4±2.1 5.1±1.6 0.041 CPP (mg2/dl2) 42±17 46.3±6.2 42.4±4.1 0.038 Hemodialysis characteristics Hemodialysis frequency twice 126 (69) 102 (77) 24 (48) 0.089 thrice 57 (31) 31 (23) 26 (52) Dialysis dose (spKt/V) 1.26±1.1 0.88±0.25 1.72±0.24 0.003 Blood flow rate (mL/min) 219.5±10.1 221.5±12.6 217.6±29.4 0.578 Dialysate flow rate (mL/min) 500 500 500 >0.99 Interdialytic weight gain (kg) 2.32±0.98 2.52±0.94 2.12±1.03 0.245 Vascular access AVF 159 (87) 116 (87) 43 (86) 0.99 AVG 19 (10) 13 (10) 6 (12) 0.654 Permanent catheter 5 (3) 4 (3) 1 (2) 0.845 BUN – blood urea nitrogen; CPP – calcium phosphorous product; AVF – arteriovenous fistula; AVG – arteriovenous graft. Categorical data were represented as a number (percentage), continuous data were represented as mean ±SD. * Chi-Square test for categorical data, independent student t-test for continuous data Association. Table 3 Logistic regression analysis for prediction of factors affecting mortality. Variables Univariate analysis Multivariate analysis p-Value* OR 95% CI for OR p-Value* OR 95% CI for OR Age (years) 0.071 1.1 0.9–1.35 0.456 1.4 1.12–2.04 Female gender 0.032 2.88 1.02–13.15 0.025 4.23 2.56–8.96 BMI (<20 kg/m2) 0.312 1.78 0.45–5.16 – – – Hemoglobin (<11.5 g/dl) 0.043 1.74 0.13–25.02 0.723 1.96 1.23–5.67 Serum K (<4 mEq/L) 0.093 1.33 1.02–7.96 0.041 7.45 2.14–45.46 Serum K (>5.5 mEq/L) 0.541 1.81 0.56–7.12 – – – Serum P (<5 mg/dl) 0.0621 1.39 0.43–8.12 0.712 0.41 0.045–11.56 Serum P (>5 mg/dl) 0.827 0.64 0.21–3.12 – – – Serum calcium (<8 mg/dl) 0.061 0.87 1.01–2.56 0.412 3.22 0.78–8.95 Serum calcium (>9.6 mg/dl) 0.201 1.24 0.25–5.63 – – – CPP (mg2/dl2) (<45) 0.054 1.72 0.32–8.65 0.601 0.72 0.05–4.67 CPP (mg2/dl2) (>55) 0.671 0.77 0.15–4.14 – – – Serum albumin (<4 g/dl) 0.031 2.01 0.12–17.6 0.051 7.34 2.67–24.56 IHD 0.041 1.67 1.12–8.92 0.416 2.11 1.55–9.78 Diabetes mellitus (Fasting plasma glucose level ≥7.0 mmol/l (126 mg/dl) 0.048 1.34 0.94–1.43 0.456 0.95 0.05–3.21 Hyperlipidemia (LDL >130 mg/dL) 0.172 0.78 0.15–3.48 – – – Hypertension (≥140 mmHg systolic, ≥90 mmHg diastolic BP) 0.231 1.10 1.04–7.8 – – – Peripheral vascular disease 0.412 0.67 0.34–5.34 – – – Dialysis dose (<1.2 spKt/V) 0.022 1.4 0.21–5.32 0.051 4.43 2.78–16.34 Dialysis dose (>1.2 spKt/V) 0.318 0.1 0.03–1.65 – – – Twice weekly HD 0.031 2.21 0.56–7.12 0.031 0.45 0.16–2.98 Nephropathy 0.09 1.11 0.9–1.25 0.52 1.5 1.11–2.13 Nephritis 0.098 1.12 0.9–1.26 0.61 1.6 1.11–2.12 Uropathy 0.097 1.13 0.9–1.27 0.63 1.7 1.11–2.11 HD – hemodialysis; P – phosphorous; BMI – body mass index; IHD – ischemic heart disease; CPP – calcium phosphate product; CI – confidence of interval; BP – blood pressure. Table 4 Assessment of survival predictors by using Cox regression proportional hazard function. Risk factors p-Value Exp (B) or Hazard ratio (HR) Female gender (1) 0.261 0.72 Serum K 0.334 0.45 Serum albumin (>4 g/dl) 0.001 1.17 Dialysis dose (spKt/V >1.2) 0.01 2.03 Twice weekly HD 0.043 4.26 p<0.05 were considered significant. ==== Refs References 1 Roggeri DP Roggeri A Salomone M Chronic kidney disease: Evolution of healthcare costs and resource consumption from predialysis to dialysis in Piedmont region, Italy Adv Nephrol 2014 2014 680737 2 Liu ZH Nephrology in china Nat Rev Nephrol 2013 9 9 523 28 23877587 3 Kapellas K Singh A Bertotti M Perio-CKD collaboration Periodontal and chronic kidney disease association: A systematic review and meta-analysis Nephrology (Carlton) 2018 [Epub ahead of print] 4 Collins AJ Foley RN Gilbertson DT Chen SC The state of chronic kidney disease, ESRD, and morbidity and mortality in the first year of dialysis Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2009 4 Suppl 1 S5 11 19996006 5 Khan S Hussain T Salahuddin N Mehreen S Risk factors of end-stage renal disease in Peshawar, Pakistan: Odds ratio analysis Maced J Med Sci 2016 4 3 381 87 6 Slinin Y Greer N Ishani A Timing of dialysis initiation, duration and frequency of hemodialysis sessions, and membrane flux: A systematic review for a KDOQI clinical practice guideline Am J Kidney Dis 2015 66 5 823 36 26498415 7 Lertdumrongluk P Streja E Rhee CM Dose of hemodialysis and survival: A marginal structural model analysis Am J Nephrol 2014 39 5 383 91 24776927 8 Tattersall J Martin-Malo A Pedrini L EBPG guideline on dialysis strategies Nephrol Dial Transpl 2007 22 Suppl 2 ii5 21 9 Hekmat R Eshraghi H Esmailpour M Hassankhani GG Kinetic glomerular filtration rate estimation compared with other formulas for evaluating acute kidney injury stage early after kidney donation Exp Clin Transplant 2017 15 Suppl 1 104 9 28260446 10 Cozzolino M Messa P Brancaccio D FARO Study Group Achievement of NKF/K-DOQI recommended target values for bone and mineral metabolism in incident hemodialysis patients: Results of the FARO-2 cohort Blood Purif 2014 38 1 37 45 25277167 11 Antlanger M Josten P Kammer M Blood volume-monitored regulation of ultrafiltration to decrease the dry weight in fluid-overloaded hemodialysis patients: A randomized controlled trial BMC Nephrol 2017 18 238 28716046 12 Ribeiro FM Fabris CL Bendet I Lugon JR Survival of lupus patients on dialysis: A Brazilian cohort Rheumatology (Oxford) 2013 52 3 494 500 23148092 13 Collins AJ Foley RN Chavers B US Renal Data System 2013 Annual Data Report Am J Kidney Dis 2014 63 Suppl 1 A7 24360288 14 Hsu CY Iribarren C McCulloch CE Risk factors for end-stage renal disease: 25-year follow-up Arch Intern Med 2009 169 4 342 50 19237717 15 Stankuviene A Ziginskiene E Kuzminskis V Bumblyte IA Impact of hemodialysis dose and frequency on survival of patients on chronic hemodialysis in Lithuania during 1998–2005 Medicina (Kaunas) 2010 46 8 516 21 20966627 16 Singh S Choi P Power A Ten-year patient survival on maintenance haemodialysis: Association with treatment time and dialysis dose J Nephrol 2013 26 4 763 70 23147685 17 Manfred H Brian AB Jean E Sex-specific differences in hemodialysis prevalence and practices and the male-to-female mortality rate: The dialysis outcomes and practice patterns study (DOPPS) PLoS Med 2014 11 10 e1001750 25350533 18 Chandrashekar A Ramakrishnan S Rangarajan D Survival analysis of patients on maintenance hemodialysis Indian J Nephrol 2014 24 4 206 13 25097332 19 Artan AS Kircelli F Ok E Dialyzing women and men: Does it matter? An observational study Clin Kidney J 2016 9 3 486 93 27274838 20 Flythe JE Curhan GC Brunelli SM Disentangling the ultrafiltration rate – mortality association: The respective roles of session length and weight gain Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2013 8 7 1151 61 23493384 21 Fernandez P Nunez S de Arteaga J Inadequate doses of hemodialysis. Predisposing factors, causes, and prevention Medicina (B Aires) 2017 77 2 111 16 28463216 22 Mc Causland FR Brunelli SM Waikar SS Dialysis dose and intradialytic hypotension: results from the HEMO study Am J Nephrol 2013 38 5 388 96 24192428 23 Jones JP Leonard EF Sandhu G Daily ultrafiltration results in improved blood pressure control and more efficient removal of small molecules during hemodialysis Blood Purif 2012 34 3–4 325 31 23306592 24 Zha Y Qian Q Protein nutrition and malnutrition in CKD and ESRD Nutrients 2017 9 3 E208 28264439 25 Ikizler TA Optimal nutrition in hemodialysis patients Adv Chronic Kidney Dis 2013 20 2 181 89 23439378