Suppr超能文献

[生物反馈直流电控制模块在血浆电导率和离子质量转移自动编程中的实用性]

[Usefulness of the Biofeedback Diacontrol module in the automatic programming of plasmatic conductivity and ionic mass transfer].

作者信息

Hernández-Jaras J, García-Pérez H, Torregrosa E, Calvo C, Cerrillo V

机构信息

Servicio de Nefrología, Hospital General de Castellón.

出版信息

Nefrologia. 2003;23(1):62-70.

Abstract

Programmed variable sodium in the dialysate can improve hypotension during hemodialysis but may also alter sodium balance and thus resulting in a increase of water intake and weight gain between dialysis sessions. The aim of this study was to evaluate the changes on plasma volume (PV), Ionic Mass Transfer (IMT) and plasma conductivity (PC) with two different hemodialysis techniques. We studied 10 patients during a four-period protocol (one week each: PF1-DC1-DC2PF2): 120 dialysis sessions. During periods PF1 and PF2, the dialysis procedure was as usual, with exponential decrease of dialysate conductivity (DC) profile (15.7 mS/cm at start, 14.4 mS/cm at middle and 13.8 mS/cm at the end of the session) and UF profile (1.7 1/h at start and 0.1 1/h at the end). During periods DC1 and DC2, DC was automatically determined by a biofeedback modulae (Diacontrol) in order to reach a plasma water conductivity fixed at 14 mS/cm. All hemodialysis parameters were the same for the four periods: duration, blood and dialysate flow rates, dialysis membrane. A lower reduction of PV was evident on PF1 and PF2 (104 +/- 3.26% and -4.36 +/- 2.7%) compared with DC 1 and DC2 (-6.53 +/- 3.31% and -6.67 +/- 3.12%) (p < 0.001). No significant differences were seen in systolic, mean and diastolic blood pressure pre-HD or post-HD, UF, and weight gain, between the four periods. Hypotensive episodes were seen in 33.3% of PF1, 20% of DC1, 23.3% of DC2 and 26.6% of PF2 sessions (NS). PF1 and PF2 periods resulted in a significantly higher 30', mid and post-dialysis PC as compared to DC1 and DC2 periods (p < 0.001). The mean difference between the actual value and the prescribed value of PC at the end of the session was -0.01 +/- 0.07 mS/cm (n: 60). There was a negative correlation between the mean DC during session and the PC at 30' of session. IMT was 420.73 +/- 126.9 mEq in PF1, 311.96 +/- 161.75 in DC1, 278.34 +/- 153.14 in DC2 and 417.66 +/- 152.17 in PF2 (p > 0.001 PF1 and PF2 vs. DC1 and DC2). Diacontrol determines automatically an individualized DC profile for each patient, and accurately reaches the prescribed PC target. By reaching both the dry weight and PC settings, the water and sodium pool is maintained lower in the hemodialysis session using a biofeedback module. Clinical tolerance was similar in the two different dialysis procedures.

摘要

透析液中的程序化可变钠可改善血液透析期间的低血压,但也可能改变钠平衡,从而导致透析间期水摄入量增加和体重增加。本研究的目的是评估两种不同血液透析技术对血浆容量(PV)、离子质量转移(IMT)和血浆电导率(PC)的影响。我们在一个为期四个阶段的方案(每个阶段一周:PF1 - DC1 - DC2 - PF2)中研究了10名患者,共进行了120次透析治疗。在PF1和PF2阶段,透析程序如常,透析液电导率(DC)呈指数下降(开始时为15.7 mS/cm,中间为14.4 mS/cm,结束时为13.8 mS/cm),超滤率(UF)也呈指数下降(开始时为1.7 l/h,结束时为0.1 l/h)。在DC1和DC2阶段,DC由生物反馈模块(Diacontrol)自动确定,以使血浆水电导率固定在14 mS/cm。四个阶段的所有血液透析参数均相同:透析时间、血液和透析液流速、透析膜。与DC1和DC2阶段(-6.53±3.31%和-6.67±3.12%)相比,PF1和PF2阶段PV的降低幅度明显较小(-4.36±2.7%和-4.36±2.7%)(p<0.001)。四个阶段之间在透析前或透析后的收缩压、平均血压和舒张压、超滤量及体重增加方面均无显著差异。PF1阶段33.3%的透析治疗、DC1阶段20%的透析治疗、DC2阶段23.3%的透析治疗以及PF2阶段26.6%的透析治疗出现了低血压发作(无显著性差异)。与DC1和DC2阶段相比,PF1和PF2阶段在透析30分钟时、透析中期及透析后PC显著更高(p<0.001)。透析结束时PC的实际值与规定值之间的平均差异为-0.01±0.07 mS/cm(n = 60)。透析期间的平均DC与透析30分钟时的PC之间存在负相关。PF1阶段的IMT为420.73±126.9 mEq,DC1阶段为311.96±161.75,DC2阶段为278.34± 153.14,PF2阶段为417.66±152.17(PF1和PF2与DC1和DC2相比,p>0.001)。Diacontrol为每位患者自动确定个性化的DC曲线,并准确达到规定的PC目标。通过达到干体重和PC设置,使用生物反馈模块可使血液透析期间的水和钠池维持在较低水平。两种不同透析程序的临床耐受性相似。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验