...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of the American Society of Nephrology: JASN >A Randomized, Controlled Trial of Albumin versus Saline for the Treatment of Intradialytic Hypotension
【24h】

A Randomized, Controlled Trial of Albumin versus Saline for the Treatment of Intradialytic Hypotension

机译:白蛋白与盐水对比治疗透析内低血压的随机对照试验

获取原文

摘要

ABSTRACT. Intradialytic hypotension (IDH) is the most common complication of hemodialysis. Symptomatic IDH requires the administration of fluid and often results in the early termination of dialysis, both of which may prevent adequate fluid removal. The optimal fluid for the treatment of IDH remains unknown. A randomized, double-blind, crossover trial was performed in 72 chronic hemodialysis patients to determine whether 5% albumin was more effective than normal saline for the treatment of IDH. The primary outcome measure was the percentage of target ultrafiltration achieved, which was defined as the actual ultrafiltration volume divided by target ultrafiltration volume. Secondary outcome measures included postdialysis BP, time to restore BP, recurrent IDH, and treatment failure (inability to restore BP with 750 ml of study fluid). The percentage of target ultrafiltration achieved was 0.84 ?± 0.17 for 5% albumin compared with 0.80 ?± 0.16 for saline (P = 0.14). The postdialysis systolic BP (121 ?± 19 mmHg versus 117 ?± 19 mmHg; P = 0.32), postdialysis diastolic BP (63 ?± 9 mmHg versus 61 ?± 9 mmHg; P = 0.33), volume of study fluid used to treat IDH (403 ?± 170 ml versus 428 ?± 191 ml; P = 0.34), time required to restore the BP (7.9 ?± 6.6 min versus 9.9 ?± 7.5 min; P = 0.09), total nursing time required to manage the hypotensive episode (15.1 ?± 7.2 min versus 15.9 ?± 7.3 min; P = 0.47), number of treatment failures (22% versus 24%; P = 1.0), and the frequency of recurrent IDH (36% versus 36%) were not significantly different when 5% albumin was used compared with saline. It is concluded that 5% albumin is no more effective than normal saline for the treatment of IDH in chronic hemodialysis patients. Normal saline should be used as the initial fluid for the treatment of IDH.
机译:抽象。透析内低血压(IDH)是血液透析的最常见并发症。有症状的IDH需要输液,通常会导致透析的尽早终止,这两种情况都可能阻止充分的输液。治疗IDH的最佳液体仍然未知。在72位慢性血液透析患者中​​进行了一项随机,双盲,交叉试验,以确定5%的白蛋白是否比生理盐水更有效地治疗IDH。主要结果指标是目标超滤百分比,其定义为实际超滤量除以目标超滤量。次要结果指标包括透析后血压,恢复血压的时间,IDH复发和治疗失败(用750毫升研究液无法恢复血压)。 5%白蛋白的目标超滤百分比为0.84±0.17,而盐水为0.80±0.16(P = 0.14)。透析后的收缩压(121±19 mmHg相对于117±19 mmHg; P = 0.32),透析后的舒张压(63±9 mmHg相对于61±9 mmHg; P = 0.33),用于治疗的研究液量IDH(403±170 ml vs 428±191 ml; P = 0.34),恢复血压所需的时间(7.9±6.6 min vs 9.9±±7.5 min; P = 0.09),管理血压所需的总护理时间高血压发作(15.1±7.2分钟vs 15.9±7.3分钟; P = 0.47),治疗失败的次数(22%vs 24%; P = 1.0)和IDH复发频率(36%vs 36%)与盐水相比,使用5%白蛋白时无明显差异。结论是5%的白蛋白在慢性血液透析患者中​​治疗IDH并不比生理盐水有效。生理盐水应用作治疗IDH的初始液体。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

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