Selection of transport parameters in judging membrane performance

  • Lee W. Henderson
Part of the Developments in Nephrology book series (DINE, volume 39)


The measurement of solute clearance has historical roots for the nephrologist and has contributed materially to the quantitative understanding of the performance of the native kidney in both glomerular and tubular function [1]. The logic then of designing an analogous term for use with the artificial kidney was persuasive for AN. Wolf et al. [2]. While initially helpful the interpretation of artificial kidney clearance has become overly complex as a result of the proliferation of artificial kidney techniques with subsequent “customization” of the clearance term for the new techniques. This has led to confusion and conceptual errors in intermodality comparisons of performance and outcome when clearance based terms like Kt/V urea are used to quantitate the amount of therapy rendered [3].


Peritoneal Dialysis Continuous Ambulatory Peritoneal Dialysis Native Kidney Plasma Water Artificial Kidney 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Smith H. Measurement of the rate of glomerular filtration. In Principles of renal physiology. New York, Oxford University Press, 1956.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wolf AN, Remp DG, Kiley JE and Currie JD. Artificial kidney function: kinetics of hemodialysis. J Clin Invest 1951; 39:1062–70.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Henderson LW, Leypoldt JK, Lysaght MJ and Cheung AK. Death on dialysis and the time/flux trade-off. J Blood Purif 1997; 15:1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Depner TA, Keshaviah PR, Ebben JP, Emerson PF, Collins AJ, Jindal KK et al. Multicenter clinical validation of an online monitor of dialysis adequacy J Am Soc Nephrol 1996; 7:464 71.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Henderson LW. Biophysics of ultrafiltration and hemofiltration. In Maher JF, editor. Replacement in renal function by dialysis, 4th edn. Dordrecht, Kluwer, 1996; 114–45.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Descombes F, Perriard F and Fellay G. Diffusion kinetics of urea, creatinine, and uric acid in blood during hemodialysis: clinical implication. Clin Nephrol 1993; 40:286–95.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Charra B, Calemard E, Ruffet M, Chazot C, Terrat JC, Vanel T et al. Survival as an index of adequacy of dialysis. Kidney Int 1992; 41:1286–91.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Leypoldt JK, Cheung AK, Carroll CE, Stannard D, Pereira B, Agadoa L et al. Removal of middle molecules enhances survival in hemodialysis patients (abstract). J Am Soc Nephrol 1996; 7:1454.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gotch F and Sargent JA. A mechanistic analysis of the National Cooperative Dialysis Study. Kidney Int 1985; 28:526.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Keshaviah PR, Nolph KD and Van Stone JC. The peak concentration hypothesis: a urea kinetic approach to comparing the adequacy of continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) and hemodialysis. Perit Dial Int 1989; 9:257–60.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gotch FA and Keen ML. Kinetic modeling in peritoneal dialysis. In Nissenson AR, Fine AR and Gentile DE, editors. Clinical dialysis, 3rd edn. Norwalk, Appleton & Lange, 1995; 343–75.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Depner TA. Quantifying hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis: examination of the peak concentration hypothesis. Semin Dial 1994; 7:315–17.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Keshaviah P. The solute removal index: a unified basis for comparing disparate therapies. Perit Dial Int 1995; 15:101–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Watson PE, Watson ID and Batt RD. Total body water volumes for adult males and females estimated from simple anthropometric measurements. Am J Clin Nutr 1980; 33:27–39.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Keshaviah PR and Star RA. A new approach to dialysis quantification: An adequacy index based on solute removal. Semin Dial 1994; 7:85–90.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Keshaviah PR, Nolph KD, Moore HL, Prowant B, Emerson PF, Meyer M et al. Lean body mass estimation by creatinine kinetics J Am Soc Nephrol 1994: 4:1475–85.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lee W. Henderson

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations