Assessment of body fluid status in hemodialysis patients using the body composition monitor measurement technique.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: The main objective of the study was to correlate the target dry weight in haemodialysis (HD) patients as assessed clinically by nephrologists to those measured by the Body Composition Monitor (BCM - Fresenius) machine. The second objective was to compare pre and postdialysis changes of extracellular fluid and clinical parameters. BACKGROUND: Clinical assessment of target dry weight in HD patients remains problematic. Inaccurate dry weight resulted in hypovolaemic or overhydration states. The BCM (Fresenius) utilises bioimpedance technology for body fluid monitoring and has been extensively validated. DESIGN: This was a prospective cross-sectional study on consecutive patients who underwent HD and gave informed consent. Methods. The target dry weights of these patients were first assessed by their attending nephrologists and appropriate ultrafiltration prescribed. Their body fluid statuses were then measured with the BCM before and after HD treatment. RESULTS: Eighty HD patients (37 men, 43 women) with a mean age of 55 ± 13 years and a mean duration on HD of 71 ± 56 months were studied. The dry weight measured by BCM significantly correlated with dry weight assessed by the nephrologists. The mean dry weight was higher when assessed by the nephrologists compared to that by BCM. Only systolic blood pressure and not other components of blood pressure reduced after HD treatments. CONCLUSION: The BCM is a rapid and easy-to-use tool that can help HD nursing staffs to adjust patients' dry weights between nephrologists' reviews thus optimising HD therapy and patient outcomes. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: We propose that experienced HD nursing staff be trained in the use of the BCM or other simple bioimpedance machines to help monitor patient overhydration and approximate dry weight in consultation with the nephrologists responsible for the care of these patients so as to obviate excessive residual overhydration between nephrology reviews.

Serum IL-6 and IL-1-ra with sequential organ failure assessment scores in septic patients receiving high-volume haemofiltration and continuous venovenous haemofiltration.

AIM: Sepsis is characterized by an uncontrolled release of pro-inflammatory and anti-inflammatory mediators leading to immunoparalysis, cellular and humoral dysfunction, multiorgan dysfunction and death. This study evaluated the efficacy of high-volume haemofiltration (HVHF) compared with continuous venovenous haemofiltration (CVVH) in removing these inflammatory mediators. Clinical responses were assessed with the sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score. METHODS: Septic patients with an end-organ dysfunction or septic shock were randomized to receive 6 h of CVVH (ultrafiltration dose of 2 L/h equivalent to about 35 mL/kg per hour or HVHF (ultrafiltration dose of 100 mL/kg per hour or 6 L/h, whichever was higher). The sequential organ failures were scored for the 24 hours preceding recruitment; at day 1, day 7, at discharge from the intensive care unit and at hospital discharge. RESULTS: Thirty-three patients were enrolled. Fifteen received HVHF and 18 received CVVH. The serum IL-6 levels (pg/mL) at baseline were similarly elevated in both groups (P = 0.745). The HVHF group showed a significant reduction after 6 h of treatment with a median interquartile range (IQR) of 20.62 (49.21) pg/mL (P = 0.025) with no similar result in the CVVH group. Non-survivors showed a higher baseline serum IL-6 compared with the survivors (median (IQR) 172.31 (261.34) vs 58.9 (104.21), P = 0.044). In the HVHF group there was a positive association between the IL-6 levels at 6 h with the SOFA scores at day 1 (r = 0.392, P = 0.001) but not at day 7. After 6 h of treatment in the HVHF group there was a direct correlation between the IL-6 levels and number of hospital days (r = 0.90, P = 0.040). The maximum SOFA scores were persistently recorded before treatment. The SOFA scores reduced in both groups from baseline to day 7 (HVHF P = 0.048; CVVH P = 0.006). The SOFA scores at day 1 is significantly higher in the non-survivors compared with the survivors (P = 0.038). CONCLUSIONS: High-volume haemofiltration at 6 L/h may seem to successfully remove some inflammatory cytokines in septic patients. The improvement in the SOFA scores at day 7 promises benefit of continuous renal replacement therapy in septic patients, but after 20 days this effect may be lost. In addition, the baseline serum IL-6 and IL-1-ra were independent predictors of a poor outcome as reflected by the higher SOFA scores at day 1.