Flanigan M J, Fangman J, Lim V S
Department of Medicine, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City 52242.
Am J Kidney Dis. 1991 Mar;17(3):295-302. doi: 10.1016/s0272-6386(12)80477-x.
Three urea kinetic analyses were applied to hemodialysis and their conformity assessed. Sixteen patients underwent 50 measurements of dialyzer clearance (K), protein catabolic rate (PCR), and dialysis quantification (Kt/V) using the urea kinetic model (UKM) of Gotch and Sargent, Malchesky's direct dialysis quantification (DDQ), and the graphic technique of urea reduction analysis (URA) devised by Keshaviah. Additionally, the equations proposed by Jindal (percent urea reduction), and Daugirdas were used to calculate Kt/V values for each study. Dialyzer performance determined by whole blood urea clearance consistently exceeded simultaneous dialysate urea removal and was 55% greater than the clearance calculated by DDQ. Despite these variations, dialysis adequacy (Kt/V) and normalized protein catabolic rate (nPCR) were remarkably constant when derived by fixed-volume single-pool analyses (ie, UKM, DDQ, and URA). Application of variable-volume corrections increased Kt/V and nPCR, but caused DDQ values to diverge from those of UKM and URA. During rapid high-efficiency dialysis (RHED), the UKM predicted urea removal in excess of that documented by DDQ. During this trial (low-level RHED with K = 2.98 mL.kg-1 per min), urea dysequilibrium across blood-cell interfaces was sufficient to cause UKM to overestimate protein catabolism by 5%. The basic assumption of single-pool kinetics may be inappropriate during RHED, and further increases in dialyzer clearance will increase the discrepancy between projected and actual urea removal. Future comparisons of RHED prescriptions should employ mass balance data, or redesigned kinetic analyses.
对血液透析应用了三种尿素动力学分析方法,并评估了它们的一致性。16名患者使用戈奇和萨金特的尿素动力学模型(UKM)、马尔切斯基的直接透析定量法(DDQ)以及凯沙维亚设计的尿素清除率分析图形技术(URA),进行了50次透析器清除率(K)、蛋白质分解代谢率(PCR)和透析量化(Kt/V)的测量。此外,金达尔(尿素清除率百分比)和道吉尔达斯提出的方程被用于计算每项研究的Kt/V值。通过全血尿素清除率确定的透析器性能始终超过同时进行的透析液尿素清除率,并且比DDQ计算的清除率高55%。尽管存在这些差异,但通过固定容积单池分析(即UKM、DDQ和URA)得出的透析充分性(Kt/V)和标准化蛋白质分解代谢率(nPCR)非常恒定。应用可变容积校正增加了Kt/V和nPCR,但导致DDQ值与UKM和URA的值出现偏差。在快速高效透析(RHED)期间,UKM预测的尿素清除量超过了DDQ记录的量。在该试验期间(K = 2.98 mL·kg-1每分钟的低水平RHED),血细胞界面的尿素失衡足以使UKM高估蛋白质分解代谢5%。单池动力学的基本假设在RHED期间可能不合适,透析器清除率的进一步提高将增加预测和实际尿素清除之间的差异。未来RHED处方的比较应采用质量平衡数据,或重新设计动力学分析。