PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 9876090

Is ionic dialysance a valid parameter for quantification of dialysis efficiency?

L Mercadal·T Petitclerc·M C Jaudon·B Béné·N Goux·C Jacobs
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The on-line measurement during hemodialysis of ionic dialysance provides an estimation of urea clearance with a good and already proven correlation. Some discrepancies remain controversial, and the influence of the dialyzer membrane is still being debated. Eighty-eight measurements of ionic dialysance (ID) were performed with a Diascan module (Hospal R&D, Int., Lyon, France), 51 with cellulosic membranes, and 37 with synthetic membranes, chosen according to their surface charges. The ID was compared to the urea clearance (UK) measured from the blood (n=16) and dialysate (n=88) sides. The ID is closely correlated (r=0.91) but significantly (p < 0.01) lower than the UK by 5% (ID/UK=0.95+/-0.06). The correlation is improved by a semilogarithmic regression analysis (r=0.93). Regarding the influence of the membrane charge, a slight difference is only evidenced for UK < 180 ml/min whereby ID is closer to the urea clearance for the charged membranes (ID/UK=0.98+/-0.05 for charged membranes versus 0.95+/-0.05 for noncharged membranes, p < 0.05). The discrepancy between ID and UK could be related with the difference in the blood distribution volume of urea and that of electrolytes. The good correlation provides the major argument for ID being used as a monitoring parameter of the delivered dialysis dose. Having integrated the discrepancy between ID and UK, prescription can be guided by ID for delivering the adequate normalized dialysis dose as defined by Kt/V.

Explore related subjects

Hemodialysis SolutionsHumansIonsMembranes, ArtificialRenal DialysisUreaJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

L Mercadal, T Petitclerc, M C Jaudon, B Béné, N Goux, C Jacobs. 1998. Is ionic dialysance a valid parameter for quantification of dialysis efficiency?. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1525-1594.1998.06062.x

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2006

What is uremia? Retention versus oxidation.

The uremic syndrome is characterized by the retention of a host of compounds which in healthy subjects are secreted into the urine by the healthy kidneys. These compounds disturb many physiologic functions, resulting in toxicity. However, many of the retained compounds as well as many of the pathophysiologic actions of the known retention solutes remain unknown. In this publication, we review recent information on uremic toxicity. Especially the difficulty to remove compounds, such as protein-bound compounds and larger molecules, seems to play a crucial role. New strategies enhancing their removal might be highly useful. Part of the retained compounds are the result of oxidative processes due to the inflammatory status of uremic patients; however, other compounds are not, and even the concentration of oxidative compounds will be further increased by disturbances of urinary clearance.

Hemodialysis Solutions↗
PubMed2006

[Determination of the dose of dialysis with integrated modules in the same monitor].

The "gold standard" method to measure the mass balance achieved during dialysis for a given solute is based on the total dialysate collection. This procedure is unfeasible and too cumbersome. For this reason, alternative methods have been proposed including the urea kinetic modelling (Kt/V), the measurement of effective ionic dialysance (Diascan), and the continuous spent sampling of dialysate (Quantiscan). The aim of this study was to compare the reliability and agreement of these two methods with the formulas proposed by the urea kinetic modelling for measuring the dialysis dose and others haemodialysis parameters. We studied 20 stable patients (16 men/4 women) dialyzed with a monitor equipped with the modules Diascan (DC) and Quantiscan (QC) (Integra. Hospal). The urea distribution volume (VD) was determined using anthropometric data (Watson equation) and QC data. Kt/V value was calculated according to Daurgidas 2nd generation formula corrected for the rebound (eKt/V), and using DC (Kt/VDC) and QC (Kt/VQC) data. The total mass of urea removed was calculated as 37,93 +/- 16 g/session. The VD calculated using Watson equation was 35.7 +/- 6.6 and the VDQC was 35.06 +/- 9.9. And they showed an significative correlation (r:0,82 p < 0.001). The (VDQC-VDWatson) difference was -0.64 +/- 5.8L (ns). Kt/VDC was equivalent to those of eKt/V (1.64 +/- 0.33 and 1.61 +/- 0.26, mean difference -0.02 +/- 0.29). However, Kt/VQC value was higher than eKt/V (1.67 +/- 0.22 and 1.61 +/- 0.26 mean difference 0.06 +/- 0.07 p < 0.01). Both values correlated highly (R2: 0.92 p < 0.001). Urea generation (C) calculated using UCM was 8.75 +/- 3.4 g/24 h and those calculated using QC was 8.64 +/- 3.21 g/24 h. Mean difference 0.10 +/- 1.14 (ns). G calculated by UCM correlated highly with that derived from QC (R2: 0.88 p < 0.001). In conclusion, Kt/VDC and Kt/VQC should be considered as valid measures for dialysis efficiency. However, the limits of agreement between Kt/VQC and eKt/V were closer than Kt/VDC.

Hemodialysis Solutions↗