Concentrated sodium chloride catheter lock solution--a new effective alternative method for hemodialysis patients with high bleeding risk.

BACKGROUND: Locking catheter with heparin may increase bleeding risk of some hemodialysis (HD) patients. Hence, the security and effectivity of 10% concentrated sodium chloride (CSC) used as an alternative method for patients with high bleeding risk need to be investigated. METHODS: Seventy-two patients inserted temporary central venous catheters were divided into two groups randomly. A total of 3125 U/mL heparin saline (HS) was used in HS group and 10% CSC in CSC group to lock catheters. Heparin-free HD was used for the first time and plasma specimens were collected to test coagulation indicators before catheter-locking (at the end of HD) and at 30 min after it. Then, blood flow velocities (BFVs), incidences of catheter thrombosis, etc. were followed up at each time of HD. RESULTS: Activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT) of two groups had no difference at the end of heparin-free HD (27.100 [25.675-28.950] vs. 27.250 [25.150-29.575] second, p = 0.933), but at 30 minutes after using different catheter lock solutions, APTT of HS group was obviously longer than CSC group (50.100 [41.275-65.400] vs. 27.500 [25.525-29.875] second, p < 0.001). Catheters' retaining time of two groups were the same (p = 0.306), so did the average BFVs (p > 0.05). But catheters' thrombosis incidence and urokinase usage of HS group were less than CSC group (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Comparing with HS group, thrombosis incidences of CSC group increased, but catheters' retaining time and average BFVs remained the same and coagulation indicators of it were unaffected. Therefore, it can be an effective alternative lock method for HD patients with high bleeding risk.

Glycated albumin may be a choice, but not an alternative marker of glycated hemoglobin for glycemic control assessment in diabetic patients undergoing maintenance hemodialysis.

BACKGROUND: It has been suggested that glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) underestimate the actual glycemic control levels in maintenance hemodialysis (MHD) patients, because of anemia and the using of erythropoietin (EPO); it was recommended that glycated albumin (GA) should be an alternative marker. Therefore, the assessment performances of glycemic control were compared between GA and HbA1c in this research by referring to mean plasma glucose (MPG) in diabetes mellitus (DM) patients undergoing MHD or not. METHODS: MPG was calculated according to the data registered at enrollment and follow-up 2 months later and corresponding HbA1c, albumin (ALB), GA, etc. were measured in 280 cases. A case-control study for comparing GA and HbA1c was done among the groups of MHD patients with DM (n=88) and without DM (NDM; n=90), and non-MHD ones with DM (n=102) using MPG for an actual glycemic control standard. RESULTS: In these 3 groups, only for DM patients' (whether undergoing MHD or not), GA and HbA1c correlated with MPG significantly (P < 0.01). Through linear regression analysis, it could be found that the regression curves of GA almost coincided in MHD and non-MHD patients with DM, because the intercepts (2.418 vs. 2.329) and slopes (0.053 vs. 0.057) were very close to each other. On the contrary, regression curves of HbA1c did not coincide in the two groups, because variance of the slopes (0.036 vs. 0.052) were relatively large. Through comparing receiver operating characteristic (ROC) areas under the curve (AUC), it could be understood that the assessment performances of GA and HbA1c in MHD patients were lower than those in non-MHD ones, and assessment performance of HbA1c in MHD patients was better than GA (P < 0.05). In addition, the effects of Hb and EPO dose on HbA1c, or that of ALB on GA were unobvious in our study. CONCLUSIONS: Actual glycemic control level in MHD patients with DM may be underestimated by HbA1c, and it could be avoided by GA; however, glycemic evaluating performance of HbA1c may be still better than that of GA. Therefore, HbA1c should not be replaced completely although GA can be used as a choice to monitor glycemic level.