Suppr超能文献

不同透析类型对维持性血液透析患者残余肾功能的保护作用:一项系统评价和荟萃分析。

The protective effect of different dialysis types on residual renal function in patients with maintenance hemodialysis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

作者信息

Lu Wenwen, Ren Chong, Han Xin, Yang Xiaoli, Cao Yanpei, Huang Bihong

机构信息

Nursing Department, Huashan Hospital Affiliated to Fudan University, Shanghai, China.

出版信息

Medicine (Baltimore). 2018 Sep;97(37):e12325. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000012325.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Residual renal function (RRF) is an important determinant of mortality and morbidity in patients undergoing hemodialysis. Different dialysis types may have different effects on RRF. We therefore conducted this meta-analysis to examine the RRF protective effect of different dialysis types for hemodialysis patients.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed on PubMed, EMbase, Web of Science, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, Wanfang database, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure for randomized controlled trials and cohort studies. Dialysis types included low-flux hemodialysis (LFHD), high-flux hemodialysis (HFHD), hemodiafiltration (HDF), and hemodialysis and hemoperfusion (HD+HP). The mean of endogenous creatinine clearance rate (CCR) and urea clearance rate (Curea), or urine volume was used to estimate RRF [95% confidence interval (95% CI), 6.05-16.80].

RESULTS

There were 12 articles involving 1224 patients, including 11 random controlled trials and 1 cohort study. Meta-analysis showed that the RRF protective effect of HFHD [mean difference (MD) = 1.48, 95% CI (2.11 to 0.86), P < .01] and HD+HP [MD = 0.41, 95% CI (0.69 to 0.12), P = .005] was better than that of LFHD, and the RRF decline rate was the lowest in HFHD group [MD = 0.13, 95% CI (0.17 to 0.09), P < .01]. Descriptive analysis showed that HDF could better protect RRF when compared with LFHD. However, there was no consistency among other interventions when removing LFHD due to limited data.

CONCLUSION

For patients undergoing maintenance hemodialysis, the HFHD, HD+HP and HDF may better protect RRF, compared with LFHD.

摘要

背景

残余肾功能(RRF)是血液透析患者死亡率和发病率的重要决定因素。不同的透析方式可能对RRF有不同影响。因此,我们进行了这项荟萃分析,以研究不同透析方式对血液透析患者RRF的保护作用。

方法

对PubMed、EMbase、Web of Science、中国生物医学文献数据库、万方数据库和中国知网进行系统检索,以查找随机对照试验和队列研究。透析方式包括低通量血液透析(LFHD)、高通量血液透析(HFHD)、血液透析滤过(HDF)以及血液透析联合血液灌流(HD+HP)。采用内生肌酐清除率(CCR)和尿素清除率(Curea)的均值或尿量来评估RRF[95%置信区间(95%CI),6.05 - 16.80]。

结果

共有12篇文章涉及1224例患者,包括11项随机对照试验和1项队列研究。荟萃分析表明,HFHD[平均差值(MD)=1.48,95%CI(2.11至0.86),P<0.01]和HD+HP[MD = 0.41,95%CI(0.69至0.12),P = 0.005]对RRF的保护作用优于LFHD,且HFHD组的RRF下降率最低[MD = 0.13,95%CI(0.17至0.09),P<0.01]。描述性分析表明,与LFHD相比,HDF对RRF的保护效果更好。然而,由于数据有限,去除LFHD后其他干预措施之间缺乏一致性。

结论

对于维持性血液透析患者,与LFHD相比,HFHD、HD+HP和HDF可能对RRF有更好的保护作用。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b797/6156018/308178119a4a/medi-97-e12325-g001.jpg

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