These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: A comparative study of ambulatory central hemodynamics and arterial stiffness parameters in peritoneal dialysis and hemodialysis patients.
    Author: Alexandrou ME, Loutradis C, Balafa O, Theodorakopoulou M, Tzanis G, Bakaloudi D, Dimitriadis C, Pateinakis P, Gkaliagkousi E, Papagianni A, Sarafidis P.
    Journal: J Hypertens; 2020 Dec; 38(12):2393-2403. PubMed ID: 32694339.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: Ambulatory pulse-wave velocity (PWV), augmentation pressure, and augmentation index (AIx) are associated with increased cardiovascular events and death in hemodialysis. The intermittent nature of hemodialysis generates a distinct ambulatory pattern, with a progressive increase of augmentation pressure and AIx during the interdialytic interval. No study so far has compared the ambulatory course of central hemodynamics and PWV between peritoneal dialysis and hemodialysis patients. METHODS: Thirty-eight patients under peritoneal dialysis and 76 patients under hemodialysis matched in a 1 : 2 ratio for age, sex and dialysis vintage underwent 48-h ambulatory blood pressure (BP) monitoring with the oscillometric Mobil-O-Graph device. Parameters of central hemodynamics [central SBP, DBP and pulse pressure (PP)], wave reflection [AIx, heart rate-adjusted AIx; AIx(75) and augmentation pressure] and PWV were estimated from the 48-h recordings. RESULTS: Over the total 48-h period, no significant differences were observed between peritoneal dialysis and hemodialysis patients in mean levels of central SBP, DBP, PP, augmentation pressure, AIx, AIx(75) and PWV. However, patients under peritoneal dialysis and hemodialysis displayed different trajectories in all the above parameters over the course of the recording: in peritoneal dialysis patients no differences were noted in central SBP (125.0 ± 19.2 vs. 126.0 ± 17.8 mmHg, P = 0.25), DBP, PP, augmentation pressure (13.0 ± 6.8 vs. 13.7 ± 7. mmHg, P = 0.15), AIx(75) (25.9 ± 6.9 vs. 26.3 ± 7.8%, P = 0.54) and PWV (9.5 ± 2.1 vs. 9.6 ± 2.1 m/s, P = 0.27) from the first to the second 24-h period of the recording. In contrast, hemodialysis patients showed significant increases in all these parameters from the first to second 24 h (SBP: 119.5 ± 14.4 vs. 124.6 ± 15.0 mmHg, P < 0.001; augmentation pressure: 10.9 ± 5.3 vs. 13.1 ± 6.3 mmHg, P < 0.001; AIx(75): 24.7 ± 7.6 vs. 27.4 ± 7.9%, P < 0.001; PWV: 9.1 ± 1.8 vs. 9.3 ± 1.8 m/s, P < 0.001). Peritoneal dialysis patients had numerically higher levels than hemodialysis patients in all the above parameters during all periods studied and especially during the first 24-h. CONCLUSION: Central BP, wave reflection indices and PWV during a 48-h recording are steady in peritoneal dialysis but gradually increase in hemodialysis patients. During all studied periods, peritoneal dialysis patients have numerically higher levels of all studied parameters, a fact that could relate to higher cardiovascular risk.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]