Dataset Information

Understand the difference between clinical measured ultrafiltrationand real ultrafiltration in peritoneal dialysis

ABSTRACT:

Background

It has been noticed for years that ultrafiltration (UF) is important for survival in peritoneal dialysis. On the other hand, precise and convenient UF measurement suitable for patient daily practice is not as straight forward as it is to measure UF in the lab. Both overfill and flush before fill used to be source of measurement error for clinical practice. However, controversy finding around UF in peritoneal dialysis still exists in some situation. The current study was to understand the difference between clinical measured UF and real UF. The effect of evaporation and specific gravity in clinical UF measurement were tested in the study.

Methods

Four different brands of dialysate were purchased from the market. The freshest dialysate available in the market were intentionally picked. The bags were all 2 L, 2.5% dextrose and traditional lactate buffered PD solution. They were stored in four different conditions with controlled temperature and humidity. The bags were weighted at baseline, 6 months and 12 months of storage. Specific gravity was measured in mixed 24 h drainage dialysate from 261 CAPD patients when they come for their routine solute clearance test.

Results

There was significant difference in dialysate bag weight at baseline between brands. The weight declined significantly after 12 month’s storage. The weight loss was greater in higher temperature and lower humidity. The dialysate in non-PVC package lose less weight than PVC package. The specific gravity of dialysate drainage was significantly higher than pure water and it was related to dialysate protein concentration.

Conclusion

Storage condition and duration, as well as the type of dialysate package have significant impact in dialysate bag weight before use. Evaporation is likely to be the reason behind. The fact that specific gravity of dialysate drainage is higher than 1 g/ml overestimates UF in manual exchanges, which contributes to systemic measurement error of ultrafiltration in CAPD.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT03864120 (March 8, 2019) (Understand the Difference Between Clinical Measured Ultrafiltration and Real Ultrafiltration).

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12882-021-02589-3.

SUBMITTER: Yu Z

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8594243 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionUF insufficiency is a major limitation in PD efficiency and sustainability. Our study object to investigate the efficacy of intraperitoneal inflammation marker, IL-6 level as a predictor of UF insufficiency in continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) patients.MethodsStable prevalent CAPD patients were enrolled in this prospective study. IL-6 concentration in the overnight effluent was determined and expressed as the IL-6 appearance rate (IL-6 AR). Patients were divided into two groups according to the median of IL-6 AR and prospectively followed up until death, transfer to permanent HD, recovery of renal function, kidney transplantation, transfer to other centers, lost to follow-up or to the end of study (January 31, 2021). Factors associated with UF capacity as well as dialysate IL-6 AR were assessed by multivariable linear regression. Cox proportional hazards model was used to examine the association between dialysate IL-6 AR and UF insufficiency.ResultsA total of 291 PD patients were enrolled, including 148 males (51%) with a mean age of 56.6 ± 14.1 years and a median PD duration of 33.4 (12.7-57.5) months. No correlation was found between dialysate IL-6 AR and UF capacity at baseline. PD duration was found positively correlated with baseline dialysate IL-6 AR, while 24h urine volume was negatively correlated with baseline dialysate IL-6 AR (P < 0.05). By the end of study, UF insufficiency was observed in 56 (19.2%) patients. Patients in the high IL-6 AR group showed a significantly inferior UF insufficiency-free survival when compared with their counterparts in the low IL-6 AR group (P = 0.001). In the multivariate Cox regression analysis, after adjusting for DM, previous peritonitis episode and 24h urine volume, higher baseline dialysate IL-6 AR (HR 3.639, 95% CI 1.776-7.456, P = 0.002) were associated with an increased risk of UF insufficiency. The area under the ROC curve (AUC) for baseline IL-6 AR to predict UF insufficiency was 0.663 (95% CI, 0.580-0.746; P < 0.001).ConclusionOur study suggested that the dialysate IL-6 AR could be a potential predictor of UF insufficiency in patients undergoing PD.

Project description:BackgroundFrailty and obesity contribute to the adverse clinical outcome of peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients, but the interaction between frailty and obesity remains uncertain.ObjectiveTo examine the interaction between frailty and obesity on the clinical outcome of PD patients.DesignSingle centre prospective observational cohort study.Patients267 prevalent Chinese PD patients were recruited.MeasurementsFrailty was identified by a standard score. General and central obesity were determined by body mass index (BMI) and waist-hip ratio (WHR), respectively. Body composition was assessed by bioimpedance spectroscopy. All patients were followed for two years. Outcome measures included all-cause as well as cardiovascular mortality and hospitalization.ResultsOf the 267 patients, 120 (44.9%) were frail. Frail individuals were more likely to have central obesity (p < 0.001) but not general obesity. Although WHR did not predict patient survival, there was a significant interaction between WHR and frailty on patient survival and cardiovascular survival (p = 0.002 and p = 0.038, respectively). For patients without frailty, the two-year cardiovascular survival was 91.3% and 74.4% for those with and without central obesity, respectively (p = 0.002). For patients with frailty, however, the two-year cardiovascular survival was 64.6% and 66.7% for those with and without central obesity, respectively (p = 0.6). For patients without frailty, the number of hospital admission for cardiovascular disease over 2 years were 0.12 ± 0.37 and 0.34 ± 0.72 for those with and without central obesity, respectively (p = 0.03). For frail patients, however, the number of hospital admission was similar between those with and without central obesity.ConclusionThere is a significant interaction between frailty and central obesity on the outcome of PD patients. The protective role of central obesity is only apparent in PD patients without frailty but not the frail ones, and there is a little prognostic value of general (non-central) obesity.

Project description:Background and objectivesThere is conflicting evidence comparing peritonitis rates among patients treated with continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) or automated peritoneal dialysis (APD). This study aims to clarify the relationship between peritoneal dialysis (PD) modality (APD versus CAPD) and the risk of developing PD-associated peritonitis.Design, setting, participants, & measurementsThis study examined the association between PD modality (APD versus CAPD) and the risks, microbiology, and clinical outcomes of PD-associated peritonitis in 6959 incident Australian PD patients between October 1, 2003, and December 31, 2011, using data from the Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry. Median follow-up time was 1.9 years.ResultsPatients receiving APD were younger (60 versus 64 years) and had fewer comorbidities. There was no association between PD modality and time to first peritonitis episode (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] for APD versus CAPD, 0.98; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.91 to 1.07; P=0.71). However, there was a lower hazard of developing Gram-positive peritonitis with APD than CAPD, which reached borderline significance (HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.80 to 1.00; P=0.05). No statistically significant difference was found in the risk of hospitalizations (odds ratio, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.93 to 1.35; P=0.22), but there was a nonsignificant higher likelihood of 30-day mortality (odds ratio, 1.33; 95% CI, 0.93 to 1.88; P=0.11) at the time of the first episode of peritonitis for patients receiving APD. For all peritonitis episodes (including subsequent episodes of peritonitis), APD was associated with lower rates of culture-negative peritonitis (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 0.81; 95% CI, 0.69 to 0.94; P=0.002) and higher rates of gram-negative peritonitis (IRR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.13 to 1.46; P=0.01).ConclusionsPD modality was not associated with a higher likelihood of developing peritonitis. However, APD was associated with a borderline reduction in the likelihood of a first episode of Gram-positive peritonitis compared with CAPD, and with lower rates of culture-negative peritonitis and higher rates of Gram-negative peritonitis. Peritonitis outcomes were comparable between both modalities.