Premium
Ultrafiltration Capacity and Peritoneal Fluid Kinetics in Continuous Ambulatory Peritoneal Dialysis Patients
Author(s) -
Zhe Xingwei,
Tian Xinkui,
Cheng Lei,
Wang Tao
Publication year - 2008
Publication title -
artificial organs
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.684
H-Index - 76
eISSN - 1525-1594
pISSN - 0160-564X
DOI - 10.1111/j.1525-1594.2007.00453.x
Subject(s) - peritoneal dialysis , continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis , medicine , ultrafiltration (renal) , peritoneal equilibration test , urology , creatinine , peritoneal fluid , ambulatory , surgery , chromatography , chemistry
Abstract: Volume control is critical for peritoneal dialysis. Although peritoneal equilibration test (PET) has been used to clarify the peritoneal membrane characteristics, it is not able to adequately predict peritoneal fluid removal and optimize appropriately the dwell time. In the present study, we applied computer simulation and performed a more detailed evaluation of the fluid kinetics in patients with different ultrafiltration (UF) capacity. Patients who used three to four exchanges of 2.27% glucose dialysate per day (poor UF capacity group), and patients who used three to four exchanges of 1.36% glucose dialysate per day (good UF capacity group) to achieve adequate amount of peritoneal fluid removal were included in the present analysis. All included patients were asked to record appropriately their dialysis exchanges for the assessment of their peritoneal fluid transport characteristics. Seventeen continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis patients were selected in the present study, nine in poor UF capacity group and eight in good UF capacity group. Patients in poor UF capacity group had significantly higher daily glucose exposure, higher dialysate‐to‐plasma ratio of creatinine (D/P creatinine) values, and higher peritoneal fluid absorption rate, K e , as compared to patients with good UF capacity. Our results suggest that patients with poor UF capacity have significant higher peritoneal small solute transport rate, and more importantly, higher peritoneal fluid absorption rate as compared to patients with good UF capacity.