de Jesús Ventura M, Amato D, Correa-Rotter R, Paniagua R
Unidad de Investigación Médica en Enfermedades Nefrológicas, Hospital de Especialidades, Mexico City, Mexico.
Perit Dial Int. 2000 Mar-Apr;20(2):188-93.
To determine changes in intraperitoneal pressure (IPP) when dialysate fill volume is increased from 2.0 L to 2.5 L to 3.0 L per exchange, and to evaluate the relationship with subjective discomfort perception.
Cross-sectional survey.
Seven Mexican hospital-based dialysis centers.
Eighty-one adult patients on continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) without restriction criteria for age, gender, or time on dialysis, were studied. Patients seropositive for HIV or hepatitis B, and those with cancer or receiving immunosuppressive drugs were excluded. Participants were studied as outpatients.
Blindly and in random order, 2.0-, 2.5-, and 3.0-L volumes of dialysate were infused consecutively. Body surface area (BSA) was calculated from patient height and weight. IPP was assessed with the patient lying supine, measuring the height of the dialysate column inside the peritoneal dialysis bag tubing. Blood pressure and subjective discomfort perception (using a visual analog scale of 0-100 mm) were also evaluated and registered after each of the three exchanges.
The IPP rose with each increase of dialysate volume and was higher in males than in females for each fill volume level. For males IPP was 18.9 +/- 6.9, 20.8 +/- 7.1, and 22.9 +/- 7.5 cm H2O; and for females it was 16.5 +/- 5.7, 18.4 +/- 5.5, and 19.7 +/- 6.2 cm H2O for 2.0-, 2.5-, and 3.0-L fill volumes respectively (p < 0.01 among fill volumes and between genders). Intraperitoneal pressure showed significant negative correlation with the fill volume corrected for patient body size as reflected by the dialysate volume/ BSA ratio (r= -0.393, p < 0.01; r= 0.319, p < 0.01; and r= -0.274, p < 0.02 for 2.0-, 2.5-, and 3.0-L fill volumes respectively). Discomfort score rose as fill volume rose, with a median of 0, 2.5, and 13.0 for 2.0-, 2.5-, and 3.0-L fill volumes respectively (p< 0.001). It is interesting, however, that with 2.5-L and 3.0-L dialysate infusion volumes, 64% and 44% of the patients, respectively, had no discomfort at all.
Dialysate volume increase is associated with higher IPP, which is modulated by the gender and body size of the patients. Although the mean discomfort score was higher with larger dialysate volumes, there was no significant correlation between discomfort and IPP or the dialysate volume/BSA ratio. Many patients had no discomfort with 2.5-L or even with 3.0-L dialysate infusions; theoretically, they can be treated with larger volumes.
确定每次透析时透析液填充量从2.0L增加到2.5L再增加到3.0L时腹腔内压力(IPP)的变化,并评估其与主观不适感受的关系。
横断面调查。
墨西哥七个以医院为基础的透析中心。
研究了81例接受持续性非卧床腹膜透析(CAPD)的成年患者,这些患者在年龄、性别或透析时间方面无限制标准。排除HIV或乙肝血清学阳性患者,以及患有癌症或正在接受免疫抑制药物治疗的患者。参与者作为门诊患者进行研究。
以盲法和随机顺序,依次注入2.0L、2.5L和3.0L的透析液。根据患者身高和体重计算体表面积(BSA)。患者仰卧位时评估IPP,测量腹膜透析袋管路内透析液柱的高度。在三次交换中的每一次之后,还评估并记录血压和主观不适感受(使用0 - 100mm的视觉模拟量表)。
随着透析液量的每次增加,IPP升高,并且在每个填充量水平上男性的IPP高于女性。对于男性,2.0L、2.5L和3.0L填充量时的IPP分别为18.9±6.9、20.8±7.1和22.9±7.5cmH₂O;对于女性,相应填充量时的IPP分别为16.5±5.7、18.4±5.5和19.7±6.2cmH₂O(填充量之间以及性别之间p<0.01)。腹腔内压力与根据患者体型校正后的填充量呈显著负相关,这通过透析液量/BSA比值反映(2.0L、2.5L和3.0L填充量时r分别为 - 0.393,p<0.01;r = 0.319,p<0.01;r = - 0.274,p<0.02)。不适评分随着填充量增加而升高,2.0L、2.5L和3.0L填充量时的中位数分别为0、2.5和13.0(p<0.001)。然而,有趣的是,在注入2.5L和3.0L透析液量时,分别有64%和44%的患者完全没有不适。
透析液量增加与较高的IPP相关,IPP受患者性别和体型的调节。虽然透析液量较大时平均不适评分较高,但不适与IPP或透析液量/BSA比值之间无显著相关性。许多患者在注入2.5L甚至3.0L透析液时没有不适;理论上,他们可以用更大的量进行治疗。