Search engine for discovering works of Art, research articles, and books related to Art and Culture
ShareThis
Javascript must be enabled to continue!

Daily use of the physio dialysis system: Long‐term experience

View through CrossRef
SummaryBackground: Hypovolaemia has been implicated as a major causal factor of morbidity during haemodialysis (HD). In order to avoid the appearance of destabilising hypovolaemia a biofeedback control system for intra‐HD blood volume (BV) change modelling has been developed (Hemocontrol™, Hospal Italy). It is based on an adaptive controller incorporated into a HD machine (Integra™, Hospal Italy). The Hemocontrol™ biofeedback system (HBS) monitors BV contraction during HD with an optical device; furthermore, HBS modulates BV contraction rates (by adjusting the ultrafiltration rate — UFR) and the refilling rate (by adjusting dialysate conductivity — DC) in order to obtain the desired pre‐determined BV trajectories.Methods: Nineteen patients prone to hypotension (7 males, 12 females, mean age 64.5 ± 3.0 SEM years, on maintenance HD for 80.5 ± 13.2 months) volunteered for the prospective study which aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of bicarbonate HD treatment equipped with HBS, as a whole (HBS), with the gold standard, bicarbonate treatment, equipped with a constant UFR and DC (BD). The study included one period of 6 months of BD always preceding a follow‐up period of HBS treatment ranging from 14 to 30 months (mean 24.0 ± 1.6).Results: The overall occurrence of symptomatic hypotension and muscle cramps was significantly less in HBS treatment. Self‐evaluation of intra‐ and inter‐HD symptoms (the worst score was 0 and the best one 10) did reveal a statistically significant difference, as far as post‐HD fatigue is concerned (6.2 ± 0.2 in HBS vs. 4.3 ± 0.1 in BD treatment, p < 0.0001). No difference between the two treatments was observed when comparing pre‐ and post‐HD lying blood pressure, heart rate, body weights and body weight changes.Conclusions: HBS is an effective treatment. Hypovolaemia‐associated morbidity occurs less in BD treatment than HBS. Furthermore, HBS is a safe treatment in the medium‐term because these results are achieved without potentially harmful changes in blood pressure, body weight and serum sodium concentration.
Title: Daily use of the physio dialysis system: Long‐term experience
Description:
SummaryBackground: Hypovolaemia has been implicated as a major causal factor of morbidity during haemodialysis (HD).
In order to avoid the appearance of destabilising hypovolaemia a biofeedback control system for intra‐HD blood volume (BV) change modelling has been developed (Hemocontrol™, Hospal Italy).
It is based on an adaptive controller incorporated into a HD machine (Integra™, Hospal Italy).
The Hemocontrol™ biofeedback system (HBS) monitors BV contraction during HD with an optical device; furthermore, HBS modulates BV contraction rates (by adjusting the ultrafiltration rate — UFR) and the refilling rate (by adjusting dialysate conductivity — DC) in order to obtain the desired pre‐determined BV trajectories.
Methods: Nineteen patients prone to hypotension (7 males, 12 females, mean age 64.
5 ± 3.
0 SEM years, on maintenance HD for 80.
5 ± 13.
2 months) volunteered for the prospective study which aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of bicarbonate HD treatment equipped with HBS, as a whole (HBS), with the gold standard, bicarbonate treatment, equipped with a constant UFR and DC (BD).
The study included one period of 6 months of BD always preceding a follow‐up period of HBS treatment ranging from 14 to 30 months (mean 24.
0 ± 1.
6).
Results: The overall occurrence of symptomatic hypotension and muscle cramps was significantly less in HBS treatment.
Self‐evaluation of intra‐ and inter‐HD symptoms (the worst score was 0 and the best one 10) did reveal a statistically significant difference, as far as post‐HD fatigue is concerned (6.
2 ± 0.
2 in HBS vs.
4.
3 ± 0.
1 in BD treatment, p < 0.
0001).
No difference between the two treatments was observed when comparing pre‐ and post‐HD lying blood pressure, heart rate, body weights and body weight changes.
Conclusions: HBS is an effective treatment.
Hypovolaemia‐associated morbidity occurs less in BD treatment than HBS.
Furthermore, HBS is a safe treatment in the medium‐term because these results are achieved without potentially harmful changes in blood pressure, body weight and serum sodium concentration.

Related Results

Assessment of implementation of the Pradhan Mantri national dialysis Programme in Hospitals in Delhi
Assessment of implementation of the Pradhan Mantri national dialysis Programme in Hospitals in Delhi
Background: Annual-demand for haemodialysis-sessions in India is 3.4 Crores. To make Renal-care-services affordable to APL and free to BPL, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare la...
Factors Associated With Dialysis Withdrawal In Dialysis Patients
Factors Associated With Dialysis Withdrawal In Dialysis Patients
Abstract Background: Research on the factors associated with dialysis withdrawal in dialysis patients has been limited. Authors have used different definitions for dialysis...
Water Use and Water Saving Strategies in Dialysis, Room for Improvement?
Water Use and Water Saving Strategies in Dialysis, Room for Improvement?
Dialysis treatment consumes a significant amount of water and energy, which entails an important waste management effort. Those variables play a relevant role on the total cost of ...
An Overview of Regular Dialysis Treatment in Japan as of 31 December 2003
An Overview of Regular Dialysis Treatment in Japan as of 31 December 2003
Abstract: A statistical survey of 3750 nationwide dialysis facilities was carried out by the Japanese Society for Dialysis Therapy (JSDT) at the end of 2003, with answers to the qu...

Back to Top