Division of Nephrology,1 Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, Wuhu, China.
Perit Dial Int. 2011 Mar-Apr;31(2):160-7. doi: 10.3747/pdi.2010.00055. Epub 2011 Jan 31.
Volume control is critical for the success of peritoneal dialysis (PD) but dry weight in PD has been difficult to obtain. Edema free is, in general, accepted clinically as a target for volume control in PD patients. However, PD patients can be free of edema despite significant volume overload. The present study investigates the possible factors that influence the formation of pitting edema in volume-overloaded PD patients.
In this cross-sectional study, patients' fluid status was evaluated by multifrequency bioelectrical impedance spectroscopy analysis. Values for overhydration were obtained. Patients with overhydration ≥ 2.0 kg were considered volume overloaded and were eligible for inclusion. From 1 March 2009 to 1 December 2009, a total of 96 patients on continuous ambulatory PD were included. Endothelial function was evaluated by flow-mediated dilatation (FMD). Other clinical indicators, such as blood pressure, dialysis adequacy, nutrition status, and biochemical parameters, were recorded. Patients were divided into 2 groups based on edema status: the edema group (n = 35 volume-overloaded patients with bilateral pitting edema) and the non-edema group (n = 61 volume-overloaded patients without bilateral pitting edema).
Overhydration in the edema group was significantly higher than in the non-edema group (4.28 ± 1.75 kg vs 3.12 ± 0.81 kg, p < 0.001), whereas both FMD and serum albumin in the edema group were significantly lower than in the non-edema group (6.65% ± 5.2% vs 10.3% ± 5.1%, p = 0.001; 37.6 ± 4.2 g/L vs 39.3 ± 3.5 g/L, p = 0.047, respectively). Edema status (edema = 1, non-edema = 0) was positively correlated with overhydration (r = 0.341, p < 0.001), gender (male = 1, female = 2: r = 0.184, p = 0.072), and total fluid removal (r = 0.188, p = 0.074) and negatively correlated with endothelial function, as assessed by FMD (r = -0.33, p = 0.001), and serum albumin (r = -0.18, p = 0.055). Logistic regression analysis showed that FMD [odds ratio (OR) 0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.81 - 0.99; p = 0.036], gender (male = 1, female = 2: OR 4.06, 95% CI 1.23 - 13.35; p = 0.021), overhydration (OR 3.06, 95% CI 1.53 - 6.13; p = 0.002), and serum albumin (OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.75 - 0.99; p = 0.035) were independent factors affecting the edema status of the study population.
Our study showed that endothelial function (assessed by FMD), gender, serum albumin, and overhydration are independent determinants of edema status in PD patients. This may explain why some PD patients can maintain free of edema despite significant volume overload.
容量控制对腹膜透析(PD)的成功至关重要,但 PD 中的干体重一直难以获得。一般来说,PD 患者的水肿消退被临床接受为容量控制的目标。然而,尽管 PD 患者存在显著的容量超负荷,但仍可能没有水肿。本研究旨在探讨可能影响容量超负荷 PD 患者出现凹陷性水肿的因素。
在这项横断面研究中,通过多频生物电阻抗谱分析评估患者的液体状态。获得了水过多的值。水过多≥2.0kg 的患者被认为是容量超负荷,并符合纳入标准。2009 年 3 月 1 日至 2009 年 12 月 1 日,共有 96 名持续非卧床 PD 患者入选。通过血流介导的扩张(FMD)评估内皮功能。记录其他临床指标,如血压、透析充分性、营养状况和生化参数。根据水肿状态将患者分为 2 组:水肿组(n=35 例有双侧凹陷性水肿的容量超负荷患者)和非水肿组(n=61 例无双侧凹陷性水肿的容量超负荷患者)。
水肿组的水过多明显高于非水肿组(4.28±1.75kg 比 3.12±0.81kg,p<0.001),而水肿组的 FMD 和血清白蛋白明显低于非水肿组(6.65%±5.2%比 10.3%±5.1%,p=0.001;37.6±4.2g/L 比 39.3±3.5g/L,p=0.047)。水肿状态(水肿=1,非水肿=0)与水过多呈正相关(r=0.341,p<0.001),与性别(男性=1,女性=2:r=0.184,p=0.072)和总液体清除量呈正相关(r=0.188,p=0.074),与内皮功能呈负相关,用 FMD 评估(r=-0.33,p=0.001),与血清白蛋白呈负相关(r=-0.18,p=0.055)。Logistic 回归分析显示,FMD[比值比(OR)0.90,95%置信区间(CI)0.81-0.99;p=0.036]、性别(男性=1,女性=2:OR 4.06,95%CI 1.23-13.35;p=0.021)、水过多(OR 3.06,95%CI 1.53-6.13;p=0.002)和血清白蛋白(OR 0.86,95%CI 0.75-0.99;p=0.035)是影响研究人群水肿状态的独立因素。
我们的研究表明,内皮功能(用 FMD 评估)、性别、血清白蛋白和水过多是 PD 患者水肿状态的独立决定因素。这可能解释了为什么一些 PD 患者尽管存在显著的容量超负荷,但仍能保持无水肿。