Bosticardo G M, Alloatti S
Nephron. 1996;74(4):674-9. doi: 10.1159/000189473.
From a review of the literature regarding kinetic models used for assessing the adequacy of hemodialysis, no definite conclusions can be drawn as to whether the classical urea kinetic model (UKM) or modified direct dialysis quantification (mDDQ) is more reliable. We compared mDDQ with classical UKM and with a modified UKM that employs an equilibrated urea value. From the theoretical viewpoint, no substantial conflict is found between the two models as regards the dialysis dose, if urea rebound is considered. From the practical viewpoint, in our opinion direct quantification lends itself better for experimental purposes whereas for routine Kt/V evaluation UKM is easier and accurate enough, provided that rebound is taken into account.
从有关用于评估血液透析充分性的动力学模型的文献综述来看，关于经典尿素动力学模型（UKM）或改良直接透析定量法（mDDQ）哪个更可靠，无法得出明确结论。我们将mDDQ与经典UKM以及采用平衡尿素值的改良UKM进行了比较。从理论角度来看，如果考虑尿素反弹，这两种模型在透析剂量方面不存在实质性冲突。从实际角度来看，我们认为直接定量法更适合实验目的，而对于常规的Kt/V评估，只要考虑到反弹，UKM就足够简单且准确。
