Backenroth R, Spinowitz B S, Galler M, Golden R A, Rascoff J H, Charytan C
Am J Kidney Dis. 1986 Sep;8(3):186-91. doi: 10.1016/s0272-6386(86)80023-3.
Eosinophilia (E) has been noted in hemodialysis (HD) patients, but its etiology is not clear. In an effort to clarify this phenomenon, we prospectively studied patients initiating dialysis in our outpatient HD and peritoneal dialysis programs. Rate of E was greatest for a small group of four continuous cycling peritoneal dialysis patients (75%), less for 63 HD patients (41%), and least for 66 continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) patients (21%, P less than .05, HD v CAPD). Increasing E rates among the groups paralleled increased frequency of tubing changes. There were no differences in etiology of renal disease, medications, types of dialyzers, types of access, or transfusion frequency that could account for the E. IgE levels did not correlate with E. The data suggest that the dialysis procedure or the tubing changes may be causing the E, but the possibility that uremia, itself, is important in the pathogenesis of dialysis E is also discussed.
血液透析(HD)患者中已发现嗜酸性粒细胞增多(E),但其病因尚不清楚。为了阐明这一现象,我们对在我们门诊血液透析和腹膜透析项目中开始透析的患者进行了前瞻性研究。一小群4名持续循环腹膜透析患者的E发生率最高(75%),63名血液透析患者的发生率较低(41%),66名持续非卧床腹膜透析(CAPD)患者的发生率最低(21%,P小于0.05,血液透析与CAPD相比)。各组中E发生率的增加与更换管路频率的增加平行。在肾病病因、药物、透析器类型、血管通路类型或输血频率方面没有差异可以解释E。IgE水平与E无关。数据表明透析过程或管路更换可能导致E,但也讨论了尿毒症本身在透析性E发病机制中起重要作用的可能性。