Kaufman A M, Morris A T, Lavarias V A, Wang Y, Leung J F, Glabman M B, Yusuf S A, Levoci A L, Polaschegg H D, Levin N W
Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, Beth Israel Medical Center, New York, New York 10128, USA.
J Am Soc Nephrol. 1998 May;9(5):877-83. doi: 10.1681/ASN.V95877.
Although the use of cooled dialysate during hemodialysis is associated with stabilization of intradialytic BP, the effects of blood cooling on hemodynamics and urea kinetics in high-efficiency hemodialysis have not been completely studied. In particular, the effects of blood cooling have not been elucidated in very short-time, high K/V dialysis treatments, in which postdialysis urea rebound is maximized. In theory, blood cooling could increase urea compartmentalization during treatment and decrease dialysis efficacy. Measurements of cardiovascular hemodynamics and urea kinetics were performed in 15 patients (56 studies) during dialysis, using a blood temperature monitor with control of dialysate temperature. Dialysate temperature was adjusted to either lower the core temperature or raise the core temperature by, respectively, producing negative heat-energy exchange (cooled dialysis) or keeping heat-energy exchange in the extracorporeal circuit neutral (thermoneutral dialysis) so that energy was not transferred to or from the patient. Each subject was studied on both protocols, thereby allowing each individual to act as his own control. In cooled dialysis, heat-energy exchange in the extracorporeal circuit was -266+/-15 kJ per treatment, and dialysate temperature averaged 35.7+/-0.02 degrees C. In thermoneutral dialysis, heat-energy exchange in the extracorporeal circuit averaged 5+/-31 kJ per treatment, and dialysate temperature averaged 37.1+/-0.02 degrees C. Dialysate cooling resulted in a reduction in mean body temperature compared with thermoneutral therapy (-0.22+/-0.04 versus +0.31+/-0.05 degrees C). Cooling resulted in a greater increase in peripheral vascular resistance index (+515+/-160 versus + 114+/-92 dyn.sec/cm5 per m2), an increase in mean arterial pressure (+4+/-3 versus -4+/-4 mmHg), a reduction in the maximum intradialytic fall in mean arterial pressure (-10+/-2 versus -18+/-3, mmHg), and a reduction in staff interventions for hypotension or dialytic symptoms (6 of 28 versus 12 of 28 studies). These differences occurred without differences in the change in blood volume (-14.3+/-1.8% versus -13.9+/-2.2%) or cardiac index (-0.4+/-0.1 versus -0.4+/-0.2, L/min per m2). Urea rebound (37+/-4% versus 38+/-3%) and effective Kt/V (1.29+/-0.05 versus 1.32+/-0.06) were not different between groups. Thus, body temperature cooling can be used to stabilize BP and reduce intradialytic events requiring staff intervention without compromising the efficacy of treatment in high-efficiency dialysis.
尽管血液透析期间使用低温透析液与透析中血压的稳定有关,但血液冷却对高效血液透析中血流动力学和尿素动力学的影响尚未得到充分研究。特别是,在极短时间、高K/V透析治疗中,血液冷却的影响尚未阐明,而在这种治疗中透析后尿素反跳最大。理论上,血液冷却可能会增加治疗期间尿素的分隔并降低透析效果。在15名患者(共56项研究)透析期间,使用可控制透析液温度的血液温度监测仪进行心血管血流动力学和尿素动力学测量。将透析液温度分别调整为降低核心温度或升高核心温度,即分别产生负能量交换(低温透析)或使体外循环中的能量交换保持中性(热中性透析),这样能量就不会在患者与外界之间传递。每位受试者都按照两种方案进行研究,从而使每个人都能作为自己的对照。在低温透析中,每次治疗体外循环中的能量交换为-266±15 kJ,透析液温度平均为35.7±0.02℃。在热中性透析中,每次治疗体外循环中的能量交换平均为5±31 kJ,透析液温度平均为37.1±0.02℃。与热中性治疗相比,透析液冷却导致平均体温降低(-0.22±0.04℃对+0.31±0.05℃)。冷却导致外周血管阻力指数增加幅度更大(+515±160对+114±92 dyn·sec/cm5每m2),平均动脉压升高(+4±3对-4±4 mmHg),透析中平均动脉压的最大降幅减小(-10±2对-18±3 mmHg),以及因低血压或透析症状而进行的医护干预减少(28项研究中的6项对28项研究中的12项)。这些差异在血容量变化(-14.3±1.8%对-13.9±2.2%)或心脏指数(-0.4±0.1对-0.4±0.2,L/min每m2)方面并无差异。两组之间尿素反跳(37±4%对38±3%)和有效Kt/V(1.29±0.05对1.32±0.06)并无不同。因此,在高效透析中,降低体温可用于稳定血压并减少需要医护干预的透析中事件,而不会损害治疗效果。