Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Based on real-world data, this retrospective investigation discusses the impact of high-flux hemodialysis (HFHD) versus conventional hemodialysis (HD) on clinical outcomes in patients with chronic renal failure (CRF) of the uremic stage. METHODS: We selected 192 CRF (uremic stage) cases and conducted grouping based on intervention schemes: the HFHD group (n=100) received HFHD, while the HD group (n=92) received HD. We then conducted comparative analyses between the groups, with the dimensions covering: clinical efficacy; dialysis adequacy; toxin clearance efficiency; complications; inflammation; nutrition; bone metabolism (serum calcium [Ca], serum phosphorus [P], intact parathyroid hormone [iPTH]); and all-cause mortality. RESULTS: HFHD was associated with markedly higher therapeutic efficacy than HD. While demonstrating a dialysis adequacy equivalent to that of HD group, HFHD showed superior toxin clearance efficiency, induced fewer complications, and led to markedly lower one-year all-cause mortality rates. In addition, the post-interventional inflammatory markers, P, and iPTH of HFHD group displayed greater reductions compared to the control group, along with more pronounced increases in nutritional indices and Ca. CONCLUSION: HFHD outperforms conventional HD in clinical efficacy in managing uremic-stage CRF patients.