From its introduction in 1943 and until the late 1970s, hemodialysis (HD) has been a lengthy and cumbersome treatment administered by a few skilled physicians and technicians to a very limited number of terminal kidney patients. The technological innovations introduced over the years made HD a treatment administered and supervised by nursing personnel to a very large numbers of kidney patients, hopefully until recovery of kidney functions or kidney transplantation. In 2013, it is estimated that 2.250.00 kidney patients were treated worldwide, and their number is steadily increasing. Shortage of transplant kidneys and quality of current treatments has contributed to increasing the survival of HD patients. Today, it is not unusual to find patients who have been on HD for longer than twenty years. All this generated the feeling that performance of membranes and dialysis technology has reached its limit. Recently, the increasing economic burden of healthcare caused by people ageing and the increasing incidence of degenerative diseases (e.g. diabetes and cardiovascular diseases), and the economic crisis has pushed many governments and health insurances to cut resources for healthcare. The main consequence is that investments in research and development in HD have been significantly reduced. The question is whether there is indeed no need for innovation in HD.
In this paper, it is discussed how the paradigm of HD has changed and what possibly are now the drivers for innovation in HD. A few ideas are proposed that could be developed by adapting existing technologies to the future needs of HD.
AnandS., KhamanM.A., FinkelsteinF.O.Global perspective of kidney disease. In: Byham-GrayL.D., eds. Nutrition in Kidney Disease.2nd ed. New York, NY: Springer Science + Business Media. 2014; 11–23.
4.
SaranR., LiY., RobinsonB.. US renal data system 2014 annual data report: epidemiology of kidney disease in the United States. Am J Kidney Dis.2015; 66(1)(Suppl 1): S1–S305. Erratum in: Am J Kidney Dis. 2015 Sep;66(3): 545.
5.
HeafJ.G., WehbergS.Relative survival of peritoneal dialysis and haemodialysis patients: effect of cohort and mode of dialysis initiation. PLoS One.2014; 9(3): e90119.
6.
JofréR., Rodriguez-BenitezP., López-GómezJ.M., Pérez-GarciaR.Inflammatory syndrome in patients on hemodialysis. J Am Soc Nephrol.2006; 17(12)(Suppl 3): S274–S280.
7.
SehgalA.R., DorA., TsaiA.C.Morbidity and cost implications of inadequate hemodialysis. Am J Kidney Dis.2001; 37(6): 1223–1231.
8.
WetmoreJ.B., CollinsA.J.Global challenges posed by the growth of end-stage renal disease. Renal Replacement Therapy.2016; 2: 15–21.
9.
Annual Data Report USRDS. Atlas of Chronic Kidney Disease and End-Stage Renal Disease in the United States, National Institutes of Health, National Institutes of Diabetes and Digestive and kidney Diseases, Bethesda, 2006.
10.
LetsiosA.The effect of the expenditure increase in the morbidity and the mortality of patients with end stage renal disease: the USA case. Hippokratia.2011; 15(Suppl 1): 16–21.
11.
KlarenbachS., StafinskiT., LongobardiT., JacobsP.The effect of renal insufficiency on workforce participation in the United States: an analysis using National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey III data. Am J Kidney Dis.2002; 40(6): 1132–1137.
12.
Gianotti FrancoM.R., da Silva FernandesN.M.Dialysis in the elderly patient: a challenge of the XXI century– narrative review. J Bras Neurol.2012; 34(3): 132–141.
13.
ShihC-J, ChenY-T, OuS-M, YangW-C, KuoS-C, TarngD-C; Taiwan Geriatric Kidney Disease Research (TGKD) Group. The impact of dialysis therapy on older patients with advanced chronic kidney disease: a nationwide population-based study. BMC Med.2014; 12: 169–179.
14.
AgarJ.W.M.It is time for green dialysis. Hemodial Int.2013; 17(4): 474–478.
15.
ConnorA., LillywhiteR., CookeM.W.The carbon footprints of home and in-center maintenance hemodialysis in the United Kingdom. Hemodial Int.2011; 15(1): 39–51.
16.
ShaldonS., VienkenJ.Biocompatibility: is it a relevant consideration for todays haemodialysis?Int J Artif Organs.1996; 19(4): 201–214.
KjellstrandP., OkmarkP., OdseliusR., ThysellH., RiedeG., HolmquistB.Adherence of blood cells to dialyzer membranes as a measure of biocompatibility. Int J Artif Organs.1991; 14(11): 698–702.
19.
BiaginiG., StefoniS., SolmiR.. Fibroblast proliferation over dialysis membrane: an experimental model for tissue biocompatibility evaluation. Int J Artif Organs.1994; 17(12): 620–628.
20.
De SanctisL.B., StefoniS., CiancioloG.. Effect of different dialysis membranes on platelet function. A tool for biocompatibility evaluation. Int J Artif Organs.1996; 19(7): 404–410.
21.
GuthH.J., GruskaS., KraatzG.The measurement of cytokine production capacity during dialysisa new dynamic method for the evaluation of biocompatibility?Int J Artif Organs.2000; 23(10): 675–679.
22.
TeatiniU., BalleriniL., Romei LonghenaG.. Microcirculation as a novel marker of membrane biocompatibility. Int J Artif Organs.2006; 29(12): 1117–1120.
23.
BrodbeckK., NeubauerM., SchnitzerS., DietrichR., HulkoM., KrauseB.Real-time PCR as a new in vitro biocompatibility method to measure leukocyte response to surface contact in dialysis filter devices. Int J Artif Organs.2013; 36(4): 240–250.
24.
DumlerF., LevinN.W.Membrane biocompatibility: clinical significance and therapeutic implications. Int J Artif Organs.1985; 8(5): 257–262.
25.
QueredaC., OrofinoL., MarcenR., SabaterJ., MatesanzR., OrtuñoJ.Influence of dialysate and membrane biocompatibility on hemodynamic stability in hemodialysis. Int J Artif Organs.1988; 11(4): 259–264.
26.
RaultR.M.Effects of dialyzer membrane on serum albumin levels in patients receiving hemodialysis. Int J Artif Organs.2003; 26(11): 1002–1004.
27.
AlhamdaniM.S., Al-NajjarA.F., Al-KassirA.H.The effect of hemodialysis and dialyzer biocompatibility on erythrocyte glutathione-defense system in chronic hemodialysis patients. Int J Artif Organs.2005; 28(6): 576–582.
28.
HakimR.M.Clinical implications of biocompatibility in blood purification membranes. Nephrol Dial Transplant.2000; 15(Suppl 2): 16–20.
29.
HörlW.H.Hemodialysis membranes: interleukins, biocompatibility, and middle molecules. J Am Soc Nephrol.2002; 13(Suppl 1): S62–S71.
30.
WalterR., MischakH., HallerH.Haemodialysis, atherosclerosis and inflammation-identifying molecular mechanisms of chronic vascular disease in ESDR patients. Nephrol Dial Transplant.2002; 17(Suppl 3): 24–29.
31.
MatataB.M., CourtneyJ.M.sundaram S, Wrd S, Bowry SK, Vienken J, Lowe GDO. Determination of contact phase activation by the measurement of the activity of supernatant and membrane surface-adsorbed factor XII (FXII): its relevance as a useful parameter for the in vitro assessment of hemodialysis membranes. J Biomed Mater Res.1996; 31: 63–70.
32.
MatsudaT.Biological responses at non-physiological interfaces and molecular design of biocompatible surfaces, Nephrol Dial Transplant.1989; 4(Suppl 2); 60–66.
33.
WegmüllerE., MontandonA., NydeggerU., DescoeudresC.Biocompatibility of different hemodialysis membranes: activation of complement and leukopenia. Int J Artif Organs.1986; 9(2): 85–92.
34.
AmatoM., SalvadoriM., BergesioF., MesseriA., FilimbertiE., MorfiniM.Aspects of biocompatibility of two different dialysis membranes: cuprophane and polysulfone. Int J Artif Organs.1988; 11(3): 175–180.
35.
StegmayrB.G., EsbensenK., GutierrezA.. Granulocyte elastase, beta-thromboglobulin, and C3d during acetate or bicarbonate hemodialysis with Hemophan compared to a cellulose acetate membrane. Int J Artif Organs.1992; 15(1): 10–18.
36.
DiamantoglouM., LemkeH.D., VienkenJ.Cellulose-ester as membrane materials for hemodialysis. Int J Artif Organs.1994; 17(7): 385–391.
37.
BonominiV., ColìL., FeliciangeliG., Nanni CostaA., ScolariM.P.Long-term comparative evaluation of synthetic and cellulosic membranes in dialysis. Int J Artif Organs.1994; 17(7): 392–398.
38.
DaugirdasJ.T., DepnerT.A.A nomogram approach to hemodialysis urea modeling. Am J Kidney Dis.1994; 23(1): 33–40.
39.
Hemodialysis Adequacy 2006 Work Group.Clinical practice guidelines for hemodialysis adequacy, update 2006. Am J Kidney Dis.2006; 48(Suppl 1): S2–S90.
LowrieE.G., LairdN.M., ParkerT.F., SargentJ.A.Effect of the hemodialysis prescription of patient morbidity: report from the National Cooperative Dialysis Study. N Engl J Med.1981; 305(20): 1176–1181.
42.
EknoyanG., BeckG.J., CheungA.K.. Hemodialysis (HEMO) Study Group. Effect of dialysis dose and membrane flux in maintenance hemodialysis. N Engl J Med.2002; 347(25): 2010–2019.
43.
LocatelliF., Martin-MaloA., HannedoucheT.. Membrane Permeability Outcome (MPO) Study Group. Effect of membrane permeability on survival of hemodialysis patients. J Am Soc Nephrol.2009; 20(3): 645–654.
44.
AsciG., TzH., OzkahyaM.. EGE Study Group. The impact of membrane permeability and dialysate purity on cardiovascular outcomes. J Am Soc Nephrol.2013; 24(6): 1014–1023.
45.
KleinE., HollandF.F., EberleK.Comparison of solute permeability and rejection characteristics of normal and high flux cellulose haemodialysis membranes. Proc. EDTA.1979; 16: 198–203.
46.
TattersallJ., CanaudB., HeimburgerO., PedriniL., SchneditzD., Van BiesenW.European Renal Best Practice advisory Board. High-flux or low-flux dialysis: a position statement following publication of the Membrane Permeability Outcome study. Nephrol Dial Transplant.2010; 25(4): 1230–1232.
47.
CheungA.K., GreeneT.Effect of membrane permeability on survival of hemodialysis patients. J Am Soc Nephrol.2009; 20(3): 645–654.
48.
MahioutA., MeinholdH., KesselM., SchulzeH., BaurmeisterU.Dialyzer membranes: effect of surface area and chemical modification of cellulose on complement and platelet activation. Artif Organs.1987; 11(2): 149–154.
49.
Laude-SharpM., CaroffM., SimardL., PusineriC., KazatchkineM.D., Haeffner-CavaillonN.Induction of IL-1 during hemodialysis: transmembrane passage of intact endotoxins (LPS). Kidney Int.1990; 38(6): 1089–1094.
50.
UreñaP., HerbelinA., ZingraffJ.. Permeability of cellulosic and non-cellulosic membranes to endotoxin subunits and cytokine production during in-vitro haemodialysis. Nephrol Dial Transplant.1992; 7(1): 16–28.
51.
SchindlerR., BoenischO., FischerC., FreiU.Effect of the hemodialysis membrane on the inflammatory reaction in vivo. Clin Nephrol.2000; 53(6): 452–459.
52.
SchaeferR.M., HuberL., GilgeU., BauseweinK., VienkenJ., HeidlandA.Clinical evaluation of a new high-flux cellulose acetate membrane. Int J Artif Organs.1989; 12(2): 85–90.
53.
FrascàG.M., SagripantiS., DArezzoM.. Post-dilution hemodiafiltration with a heparin-grafted polyacrylonitrile membrane. Ther Apher Dial.2015; 19(2): 154–161.
54.
EvenepoelP., DejagereT., VerhammeP.. Heparin-coated polyacrylonitrile membrane versus regional citrate anticoagulation: a prospective randomized study of 2 anticoagulation strategies in patients at risk of bleeding. Am J Kidney Dis.2007; 49(5): 642–649.
MatsumuraM., SasakiH., SekizukaK.. Improved management of intradialytic hypotension (IDH) using vitamin E-bonded polysulfone membrane dialyzer. Int J Artif Organs.2010; 33(3): 147–153.
57.
AritomiM., GalliF.Review of the effectiveness of cellulose- and polysulfone-based vitamin E-bonded dialysis membranes. In: PenidoM Goretti, ed. Technical problems in patients on hemodialysis.Rijeka Croatia: InTech Europe. 2011; 295–302.
58.
TakouliL., HadjiyannakosD., MetaxakiP.. Vitamin E-coated cellulose acetate dialysis membrane: long-term effect on inflammation and oxidative stress. Ren Fail.2010; 32(3): 287–293.
59.
CatapanoG., VienkenJ.Biomedical applications of membranes. In: LiN., FaneA.G., HoW.S.W., MatsuuraT., eds. Advanced Membrane Technology and Applications.New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons. 2008; 489–517.
LuzR.A.S., lostR.M., CrespilhoF.N.Nanomaterials for biosensors and implantable devices. In: CrespilhoF.N., ed. Nanobioelectrochemistry.Berlin-Heidelberg (Germany): Springer-Verlag2013; 27–48.
62.
OliveiraO.N.Jr., lostR.M., SiqueiraJ.R.Jr., CrespilhoF.N., CaseliL.Nanomaterials for diagnosis: challenges and applications in smart devices based on molecular recognition. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces.2014; 6(17): 14745–14766.
63.
MaksymovI.S.Magneto-plasmonic nanoantennas: basics and applications, Reviews in Physics.2016; 1: 36–51.
64.
ChangC-W, ChiouJ-C. A wireless and batteryless microsystem with implantable grid electrode/3-dimensional probe array for ECoG and extracellular neural recording in rats. Sensors (Basel).2013; 13(4): 4624–4639.
65.
KimT-l, McCallJ.G., JungY.H.. Injectable, cellular-scale optoelectronics with applications for wireless optogenetics. Science.2013; 340(6129): 211–216.
ZhangX., GuanY., ZhangY.Ultrathin hydrogel films for rapid optical biosensing. Biomacromolecules.2012; 13(1): 92–97.
68.
MurakamiY., MaedaM.DNA-responsive hydrogels that can shrink or swell. Biomacromolecules.2005; 6(6): 2927–2929.
69.
LakardB., HerlemG., LakardS., AntoniouA., FahysB.Urea potentiometric biosensor based on modified electrodes with urease immobilized on polyethylenimine films. Biosens Bioelectron.2004; 19(12): 1641–1647.
70.
MoraesM.L., RodriguesU.P., OliveiraONJr, FerreiraM.Immobilization of uricase in layer-by-layer films used in amperometric biosensors for uric acid. J Solid State Electrochem.2007; 11: 1489–1495.
71.
SinghS., ChaubeyA., MalhotraB.D.Amperometric cholesterol biosensor based on immobilized cholesterol esterase and cholesterol oxidase on conducting polypyrrole films. Anal Chim Acta.2004; 502: 229–234.
72.
DeyR.S., RajC.R.Development of an amperometric cholesterol biosensor based on graphene-Pt nanoparticle hybrid material. J Phys Chem C.2010; 114(49): 21427–21433.
73.
CrespiF.Wireless in vivo voltammetric measurements of neurotransmitters in freely behaving rats. Biosens Bioelectron.2010; 25(11): 2425–2430.
74.
KrieterD.H., LemkeH-D, WannerC.A new synthetic dialyzer with advanced permselectivity for enhanced low-molecular weight protein removal. Artif Organs.2008; 32(7): 547–554.
75.
CatapanoG., FilosaM., IorioG.. Capillary polysulphone membranes with entrapped whole cells: influence of cell loading and filler molecular weight on membrane mechanical and kinetic performance. J Mol Catal.1990; 58: 277–286.
76.
LaliaB.S., KochkodanV., HashaikehR., HilalN.A review on membrane fabrication: structure, properties and performance relationship. Desalination.2013; 326: 77–95.
77.
SoltysP.J., OfsthunN.J., ZydneyA.L.Asymmetric solute transport and solvent flux in dual-skinned hollow fiber membranes. J Membr Sci.1996; 118: 199–212.
78.
DukhinS.S., TabaniY., LaiR., LabibO.A., ZydneyA.L., LabibM.E.Out-side-in hemofiltration for prolonged operation without clogging. J Memb Sci.2014; 464: 173–178.
79.
SoltysP.J., ZydneyA., LeypoldtJ.K., HendersonL.W., OfsthunN.J.Potential of dual-skinned, high-flux membranes to reduce back-transport in hemodialysis. Kidney Int.2000; 58(2): 818–828.
80.
CatapanoG., LegallaisC., von HartenB., BaurmeisterU.Use of a predictive model of HD/HDF based on a cascade of communicating CSTs to design modules with enhanced HMW solute clearance. Desalination.2002; 145(1-3): 233–235.
81.
WangP., LuoL., ChungT-S. Tri-bore ultra-filtration hollow fiber membranes with a novel triangle-shape outer geometry. J Membr Sci.2014; 452: 212–218.
82.
BonyadiS., ChungT.S., KrantzW.B.Investigation of corrugation phenomenon in the inner contour of hollow fibers during the non-solvent induced phase-separation process. J Membr Sci.2007; 299: 200–210.
MalcheskyP.S., NoséY.The use of membranes and sorbents for blood detoxification: Cuprophan sorbent membranes. In: ChangT.M.S., ed. Artificial Kidney, Artificial Liver, and Artificial Cells.New York, NY: Plenum Press. 1978; 185–192.
CastroL.A., HampelG., GebhardtR., FatehA., GurlandH.J.Combination of hemodialysis and hemoperfusion in a single hollow-fiber unit for treatment of uremia. In: ChangT.M.S., ed. Artificial Kidney, Artificial Liver, and Artificial Cells.New York, NY: Plenum Press. 1978; 193–198.
87.
TijinkM.S.L., WesterM., GlorieuxG.. Mixed matrix hollow fiber membranes for removal of protein-bound toxins from human plasma. Biomaterials.2013; 34(32): 7819–7828.
88.
CatapanoG., BerginsM., WodetzkiA., PapenfussH.D., RintelenT., BaurmeisterU.Mass and Momentum Transport in Extra-Luminal Flow (ELF) Membrane Devices for Blood Oxygenation. J Membr Sci.2001; 184: 123–135.
89.
CatapanoG., WodetzkiA., BaurmeisterV.Blood flow outside regularly spaced hollow fibers: the future concept of membrane devices?Int J Artif Organs.1992; 15(6): 327–330.
