Levin N, Zasuwa G, Klinkmann H
Division of Nephrology & Hypertension, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI 48202.
Nephrol Dial Transplant. 1993;8 Suppl 2:2-7. doi: 10.1093/ndt/8.supp2.2.
The International Cooperative Biocompatibility Study was planned to analyse the symptomatic and laboratory response to seven different dialysers studied in five centres in four countries. The dialysers used were the G10-3N, G120 M, CD 4000, T 150, Duo-Flux, F 60, and Filtral (see below for full description). A total of 37 patients in the Veterans Administration Lakeside Medical Center, Chicago; Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit; Osaka City University Hospital, Osaka; Wilhelm Pieck University Hospital, Rostock; and Huddinge University Hospital, Stockholm were studied. All patients had been dialysed for a minimum of 6 months, were non-diabetic, stable, and compliant; and most were middle-aged and male. Patients were treated three times per week for 2 weeks with each new dialyser with random assignment to one of four orders of dialyser use. The same manufacturing lot of each dialyser, blood line sets and needles were used by all centres. Delivery systems were volumetric controlled except for some patients in Osaka treated with negative-pressure equipment. Individual patient prescriptions (Kt/Vs for urea), in use prior to the study, were continued. Kt/Vs for all treatments were derived from reported blood flows and blood water corrected mass transfer coefficients multiplied by dialyser surface area. Clinical data were measure pre-, intra- and postdialysis. Hourly signs, symptoms, drugs, and nursing interventions were recorded using the identical treatment record at all centres. In addition, patients completed a questionnaire form (translated into the appropriate language) at least weekly, relating symptoms experienced with each dialyser. Laboratory investigations were performed during the sixth consecutive treatment.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
国际合作生物相容性研究旨在分析四个国家五个中心对七种不同透析器的症状及实验室反应。所使用的透析器为G10 - 3N、G120 M、CD 4000、T 150、Duo - Flux、F 60和Filtral(完整描述见下文)。对芝加哥退伍军人管理局湖滨医疗中心、底特律亨利·福特医院、大阪市立大学医院、罗斯托克威廉·皮克大学医院以及斯德哥尔摩胡丁厄大学医院的37名患者进行了研究。所有患者均已接受至少6个月的透析治疗,无糖尿病,病情稳定且依从性良好;大多数为中年男性。患者每周接受三次治疗,每次使用一种新透析器,共治疗2周,随机分配使用四种透析器顺序中的一种。所有中心使用同一生产批次的每种透析器、血路管和针头。除大阪的部分患者使用负压设备治疗外,其余均采用容量控制的输送系统。研究前使用的个体患者处方(尿素的Kt/V值)保持不变。所有治疗的Kt/V值均根据报告的血流量和经血水校正的传质系数乘以透析器表面积得出。在透析前、透析中和透析后测量临床数据。所有中心使用相同的治疗记录记录每小时的体征、症状、用药及护理干预情况。此外,患者至少每周填写一份问卷(翻译成相应语言),报告每种透析器出现的症状。在连续第六次治疗期间进行实验室检查。(摘要截选至250词)