Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Comparison of multiple fluid status assessment methods in patients on chronic hemodialysis
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Comparison of multiple fluid status assessment methods in patients on chronic hemodialysis
Do you wish to request the book?
Comparison of multiple fluid status assessment methods in patients on chronic hemodialysis
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Comparison of multiple fluid status assessment methods in patients on chronic hemodialysis
2017
Overview
Purpose
Control of hydration status is an important constituent of adequate and efficient hemodialysis (HD) treatment. Nevertheless, there are no precise clinical indices for early recognition of small changes in fluid status of patients undergoing chronic hemodialysis therapy. This study aimed to evaluate and compare the widely used and reliable method of indexed inferior vena cava diameter (IVCDi) with established and more recently available techniques (bioelectrical impedance analysis [BIA], continuous blood volume monitoring [Crit-line], and the B-line score [BLS] with lung ultrasonography) for estimating the hydration status of patients on HD.
Methods
Fifty-three patients undergoing chronic HD thrice weekly were included in the study. Evaluation of hydration status methods (IVCDi, BLS, BIA, and Crit-line) was performed thrice weekly before and after HD. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was performed to evaluate the discriminative power of (methods) the BLS, BIA, and Crit-line for predicting over- and underhydration of patients, as determined by the reference method, IVCDi.
Results
BLS showed the most promising results in predicting overhydration, as determined by IVCDi, compared with BIA and Crit-line and presented a sensitivity of 77% and specificity of 74%. The accuracy of the BLS was higher than that of BIA (0.81 vs. 0.71,
p
= 0.032) and Crit-line (0.61,
p
= 0.001). BLS also showed more promising results in predicting underhydration, as determined by IVCDi, than BIA and Crit-line and presented a sensitivity of 78% and a specificity of 73%. The accuracy of the BLS was higher than that of BIA (0.83 vs. 0.76,
p
= 0.035) and Crit-line (0.50,
p
< 0.001).
Conclusions
The BLS is a useful and easily performed technique that has recently become available for accurate evaluation of dry weight and fluid status in patients with end-stage renal disease undergoing chronic HD. This method might help recognize asymptomatic lung congestion in these patients.
Publisher
Springer Netherlands,Springer Nature B.V
