Abbas Samer R, Zhu Fansan, Kaysen George A, Kotanko Peter, Levin Nathan W
Renal Research Institute, New York, New York; and.
Renal Research Institute, New York, New York; and
J Appl Physiol (1985). 2014 Jun 1;116(11):1382-9. doi: 10.1152/japplphysiol.01361.2013. Epub 2014 Mar 27.
This study explored divergence (error) between ultrafiltration volumes (UFV) and intradialytic changes in extracellular volume (ΔECV) in hemodialysis (HD) patients measured by whole body (wBIS) and sum of segmental bioimpedance spectroscopy (sBIS). The primary aim of the study was to evaluate the effect of different ultrafiltration rates (UFR) on error of estimation of ΔECV by changes in their distribution in body segments (arm, trunk, and leg). Forty-four HD patients (26 men, age 63.5 ± 14.3 yr) were studied twice in the same week following high and low UFR treatments. ΔECV and distributions (segmental ΔECV/Σsegmental ΔECV, %) in arm, trunk, and leg were measured. ΔECV by wBIS underestimated UFV (0.58 ± 0.43 in high vs. 0.36 ± 0.5 liters at low UFR; P < 0.001, respectively); however, using sBIS no significant difference between UFV and ΔECV was present. Divergence using wBIS but not sBIS correlated positively with UFR. ΔECV distribution in trunk and leg at high UFR (44.1 ± 8.3, 47.2 ± 8.5, %) differed significantly (P < 0.01) from low UFR (36 ± 15.7, 53.8 ± 14.7) respectively, but in arm did not differ between UFR. Primary sources of whole body resistance are arms and legs. Due to different cross-sectional areas between trunk and limbs, wBIS is insensitive to detection of changes in trunk volume. At higher UFR, plasma water was rapidly and largely removed from the trunk but with only a small change in whole body resistance. As a result, accuracy of estimation of ECV by wBIS is further decreased by high UFR, while sBIS remains accurate using separate measurements of segmental volumes.
本研究探讨了通过全身生物电阻抗光谱法(wBIS)和节段生物电阻抗光谱法总和(sBIS)测量的血液透析(HD)患者超滤量(UFV)与透析期间细胞外液量变化(ΔECV)之间的差异(误差)。该研究的主要目的是评估不同超滤率(UFR)对通过其在身体各节段(手臂、躯干和腿部)分布变化来估计ΔECV误差的影响。44名HD患者(26名男性,年龄63.5±14.3岁)在同一周内接受高UFR和低UFR治疗后进行了两次研究。测量了ΔECV以及手臂、躯干和腿部的分布(节段性ΔECV/Σ节段性ΔECV,%)。wBIS测量的ΔECV低估了UFV(高UFR时为0.58±0.43,低UFR时为0.36±0.5升;P均<0.001);然而,使用sBIS时,UFV与ΔECV之间无显著差异。使用wBIS而非sBIS的差异与UFR呈正相关。高UFR时躯干和腿部的ΔECV分布(44.1±8.3,47.2±8.5,%)分别与低UFR时(36±15.7,53.8±14.7)有显著差异(P<0.01),但手臂在不同UFR之间无差异。全身电阻的主要来源是手臂和腿部。由于躯干和四肢的横截面积不同,wBIS对检测躯干容积变化不敏感。在较高UFR时,血浆水迅速且大量地从躯干中清除,但全身电阻仅有微小变化。结果,高UFR进一步降低了wBIS估计ECV的准确性,而sBIS通过单独测量节段容积仍保持准确。