Buradasınız

Anasayfa » Content

HEMODİYALİZ HİPOTANSİYONUNDA FARKLI SODYUM VE ULTRAFİLTRASYON PROFİLİNİN ETKİNLİĞİ

EFFECTMTY OF DIFFERENT SODIUM AND ULTRAFILTRATION PROFILES ON HEMODIALYSIS-INDUCED HYPOTENSION

Journal Name:

  • Türk Nefroloji, Diyaliz ve Transplantasyon Dergisi

Publication Year:

  • 2003

Key Words:

Keywords (Original Language):

Author NameUniversity of AuthorFaculty of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
Dialysate sodium (Na) and ultrafitration (UF) profiling are two methods to reduce dialysis-induced hypotension. The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy of combining these techniques to reduce dialysis-induced hypotension in chronic hemodialysis (HD) patients. In our hemodialysis center there were 69 patients. Initially standard dialysis with constant dialysate sodium and ultrafiltration protocol were used in all patients. In nineteen patients (27%) dialysis-induced hypotension was established.Their ages were 48.53±16.92 years. (14 female and 5 male). Their dialysis duration were 36.00±40.45months.In these patients; six different sodium and ultrafiltration profiling were used to prevent dialysis-induced hypotension. In ten (52.6%) patients sodium and ultrafiltration profiling (I) were used and dialysis-induced hypotension was prevented. In five (15.7%) patients sodium and ultrafiltration profiling (V) were used and dialysis-induced hypotension was prevented. In two (10.4%) patients sodium and ultrafiltration profiling (IV)7 were used and dialysis-induced hypotension was prevented. In one (5.2%) patient sodium and ultrafitration profiling (111) were used and dialysis induced hypotension was prevented. In three (15.7%) patients different sodium and ultrafitration profiles were used, but dialysis-induced hypotension could not be prevented. In conclusion, we demonstrated that combined dialysate sodium concentration and ultrafitration profiling significantly reduce dialysis-induced hypotension comparing to standard dialysis with constant dialysate sodium and ultrafiltration. We recommend that Na and UFprofiles should be used routinely in hemodialysis practice.
Abstract (Original Language): 
Diyalizat sodyum ve ultrafiltrasyon (UF profili diyaliz hipotansiyonunu azaltmada kullanılan metodlardandır. Bu çalışmanın amacı kronik hemodiyalizde diyaliz hipotansiyonunu azaltmak için bu tekniklerin kombine kullanımının etkinliğini değerlendirmektir. Hemodiyaliz merkezimizde kronik hemodiyalize girmekte olan 69 hasta (36 K, 33 E) çalışmaya alındı. Başlangıçta, tüm hastalarda standart diyaliz protokolü uygulandı. Diyaliz hipotansiyonu 19 hastada (%27) saptandı. Bu hastalarda, diyaliz hipotansiyonunu önlemek için sırasıyla 6 farklı sodyum ve UF profili uygulandı. Sodyum ve UFprofilIile çalışmaya başlandı. Şayet profil Iile ardışık 10 hemodiyaliz seansı boyunca hipotansiyon gelişmezse aynı profil ile devam edildi. Hipotansiyon gelişen hastalarda ise sırasıyla diğer profil tiplerine geçildi. Hipotansiyon gelişen 19 hastadan 10'unda (%52.6) sodyum ve UF profili I uygulanması ile diyaliz hipotansiyonu önlendi. Sodyum ve UF profili V ile 5 hastada (%15.7), sodyum ve UF profili IV ile 2 hastada (%10.4), sodyum ve UF profili III ile 1 hastada (%5.2) diyaliz hipotansiyonu önlendi. Ama 3 hastada ise sodyum ve UF profili kullanımına rağmen diyaliz hipotansiyonu önlenemedi. Kombine diyalizat sodyum ve UF profili kullanımı ile standart diyaliz protokolü ile karşılaştırıldığında diyaliz hipotansiyonunda anlamlı azalma gösterilmiştir. Hemodiyaliz pratiğinde sodyum ve UF profili kullanılmalıdır.
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon pdf_tndt_420.pdf

REFERENCES

References: 

1. Levin NW,
Kupi
n WL, Zasuwa G, Venkat KK Complications during hemodialysis. In: Clinical Dialysis. Nissensen AR, (ed) Norwalk, CT, Appleton & Lange,
1990, pp 172201.
2. Henrich WL, Woodard TD, Blachley JD et al. Role oi
osmolality in blood pressure stability aiter dialysis and
ultraiiltration. Kidney Int 1980;18:480-488.
3. Kimura G, Van Stone JC. Model prediction oi plasma volume changes induced by hemodialysis. J Lab Clin Med 1984;104:932-938.
4. Perschel WT, Rockel A, Klinke B et al. Variation oi ultraiiltration and dialysat sodium. Improvements in dialysis therapy. Contrib Nephrol. Basel, Karger, 1989;74:176-181.
5. Dumler F, Grandin G, Levin NW. Sequential high/low sodium hemodialysis: An alternative to ultraiiltration. Trans Am SocArtif Intern Organs. 1990;25:821-824.
6. De Vires PMJM, Olthof CG, Self A, Schuenemann B et al. Fluid balance during hemofltration: the effect of dialysate sodium and a variable ultrafiltration rate. Nephrol Dial Transplant 6: 257-263, 1991.
7. Po CL, Afolabi M, Raja RM. The role of sequential ultrafiltration and varying diyalisate sodium on vascular
stability during hemodialysis. ASAIO 39: M798-M800, 1993.
8. Stefoni S, Coli L, Zaca F, et al. Modulated Dialysis: A new strategy for the treatment of intradialytic intolerance.
Nephrol Dial Transplant suppi. I: 154-157,1990.
9. Oliver MJ, Edwars LJ, Churchill DV. Impact of Sodium and Ultrafiltration Profiling on Hemodialysis-Related
Syptoms. J Am Soc Nephrol 2001;12:151-156.
10. Sang GL Kovithavongs C, Ulan R, Kjellstrand CM.
32
Sodium ramping in hemodialysis: A study of beneficial and adverse effects. Am J Kidney Dis 1997;29: 669677.
11.
Siti
l A, Çavdar C, Çelik A, Çamsan T. Kombine sodyum ve ultrafıltrasyon modellemesinin hemodiyalizde görülen semptomlar üzerine etkisi. Türk Nefroloji Diyaliz ve Transplantasyon Dergisi 1999;1:9-13.
12. Acchiardo SR, Hayden AJ. Is Nal modeling necessary in high flux dialysis? ASAIO Trans 1991;37: 135137.
13. Sadowski RH, Alfred EN, Jabs K Sodium modeling ameliorates intradialytic and interdialytic symptoms in young hemodialysis patients. J Am Soc Nephrol 1993;4:
1192-1198.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com