首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Peritoneal Dialysis International : Journal of the International Society for Peritoneal Dialysis >Automated Peritoneal Dialysis Prescriptions for Enhancing Sodium and Fluid Removal: A Predictive Analysis of Optimized Patient-Specific Dwell Times for the Day Period
【2h】

Automated Peritoneal Dialysis Prescriptions for Enhancing Sodium and Fluid Removal: A Predictive Analysis of Optimized Patient-Specific Dwell Times for the Day Period

机译:自动化腹膜透析处方以改善钠和液体的去除:对一天中患者特定的最佳驻留时间进行优化的预测分析

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

♦ Background: Remaining edema-free is a challenge for many automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) patients, especially those with fast (“high”) transport characteristics. Although increased use of peritoneal dialysis (PD) solutions with high glucose concentrations may improve volume control, frequent use of such solutions is undesirable.♦ Methods: We used the 3-pore kinetic model to evaluate 4 alternative therapy prescriptions for the APD day exchange in anuric patients with high, high-average, and low-average transport characteristics. Four prescriptions were modeled: class="simple" style="list-style-type:none">Therapy 1: Optimal, individualized dwell times with a dry periodTherapy 2: Use of a midday exchangeTherapy 3: Use of an icodextrin-containing dialysate during a 14-hour dwellTherapy 4: Use of optimal, individualized dwell times, followed by an icodextrin dwell to complete the daytime periodThe alternative therapies were compared with a reference standard therapy using glucose solution during a 14-hour dwell. The nighttime prescription was identical in all cases (10 L over 10 hours), and all glucose solutions contained 2.27% glucose. Net ultrafiltration (UF), sodium removal (NaR), total carbohydrate (CHO) absorption, and weekly urea Kt/V for a 24-hour period were computed and compared.♦ Results: The UF and NaR were substantially higher with therapy 1 than with standard therapy (1034 mL vs 621 mL and 96 mmol vs 51 mmol respectively), without significant changes in CHO absorption or urea Kt/V. However, therapy 1 resulted in reduced β2-microglobulin clearance (0.74 mL/min vs 0.89 mL/min with standard therapy). Compared with therapy 1, therapy 2 improved UF and NaR (1062 mL vs 1034 mL and 99 mmol vs 96 mmol); however, that improvement is likely not clinically significant. Therapy 2 also resulted in a higher Kt/V (2.07 vs 1.72), but at the expense of higher glucose absorption (difference: 42 g). The UF and NaR were highest with a long icodextrin-containing daytime dwell either preceded by a short optimized dwell (1426 mL and 155 mmol) or without such a dwell (1327 mL and 148 mmol).♦ Conclusions: The 3-pore model predictions revealed that patient-specific optimal dwell times and regimens with a longer day dwell might provide improved UF and NaR options in APD patients with a variety of peritoneal membrane transport characteristics. In patients without access to icodextrin, therapy 1 might enhance UF and NaR and provide a short-term option to increase fluid removal. Although that approach may offer clinicians a therapeutic option for the overhydrated patient who requires increased UF in the short term, APD prescriptions including icodextrin provide a means to augment sodium and fluid removal. Data from clinical trials are needed to confirm the predictions from this study.
机译:♦背景:对于许多自动腹膜透析(APD)患者,尤其是具有快速(“高”)转运特征的患者,保持无水肿是一个挑战。尽管增加使用高血糖浓度的腹膜透析(PD)溶液可以改善容量控制,但不希望频繁使用此类溶液。♦方法:我们使用3孔动力学模型评估了4种替代疗法的处方,用于APD日间交换高,高平均和低平均转运特性的无尿患者。建模了四个处方: class =“ simple” style =“ list-style-type:none”> <!-list-behavior = simple prefix-word = mark-type = none max-label-size = 0- -> 治疗方法1:在干燥期间具有最佳的个性化停留时间 治疗方法2:使用午间交换疗法 治疗方法3:在治疗期间使用含艾考糊精的透析液14小时的停留时间 疗法4:使用最佳的个性化停留时间,然后进行艾考糊精停留以完成白天 将替代疗法与参考标准进行比较在14小时的停留时间内使用葡萄糖溶液进行治疗。夜间处方在所有情况下都是相同的(10小时10升),并且所有葡萄糖溶液均含有2.27%的葡萄糖。计算并比较了24小时内的净超滤(UF),钠去除(NaR),总碳水化合物(CHO)吸收和每周尿素Kt /V。♦结果:治疗1的UF和NaR显着高于治疗1使用标准疗法(分别为1034 mL对621 mL和96 mmol对51 mmol),而CHO吸收或尿素Kt / V没有明显变化。但是,疗法1导致β2-微球蛋白清除率降低(标准疗法为0.74 mL / min,而标准疗法为0.89 mL / min)。与治疗1相比,治疗2改善了UF和NaR(1062 mL对1034 mL和99 mmol对96 mmol);但是,这种改善在临床上可能并不重要。疗法2还导致较高的Kt / V(2.07对1.72),但以较高的葡萄糖吸收为代价(差异:42 g)。 UF和NaR在含有艾考糊精的日间停留时间较长的情况下最高,或者是短暂的优化停留(1426 mL和155 mmol)或没有这种停留时间(1327 mL和148 mmol)。♦结论:3孔模型预测揭示了针对特定患者的最佳停留时间和较长停留时间的方案可能会为具有多种腹膜转运特性的APD患者提供更好的UF和NaR选择。在无法使用艾考糊精的患者中,治疗1可能会增强UF和NaR,并提供短期的选择以增加液体的去除。尽管该方法可能为需要短期内增加UF的水合过度患者提供临床治疗选择,但是包括艾考糊精的APD处方提供了增加钠和液体去除的方法。需要来自临床试验的数据来确认这项研究的预测。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号