Methods: We performed a longitudinal study in 30 children with CKD5-5D and 13 age-matched healthy controls (71 measurements) to determine a correlation between optimal weight by bioimpedance spectroscopy (Wt-BIS) and clinical assessment (Wt-CA). The accuracy of Wt-BIS [relative overhydration (Rel-OH)] was compared against indicators of fluid status and cardiovascular measures.
Results: There was poor agreement between Wt-CA and Wt-BIS in children on dialysis (P = 0.01), but not in CKD5 or control subjects. We developed a modified chart to plot Rel-OH against systolic blood pressure (SBP) z-score for the appropriate representation of volume status and blood pressure (BP) in children. In total, 25% of measurements showed SBP >90th percentile but not with concurrent overhydration. Rel-OH correlated with peripheral pulse pressure (P = 0.03; R = 0.3), higher N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (P = 0.02; R = 0.33) and left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (P = 0.05; R = 0.38). Central aortic mean and pulse pressure significantly associated with the left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (P = 0.03; R = 0.47 and P = 0.01; R = 0.50, respectively), but not with Rel-OH. SBP was positively associated with pulse wave velocity z-score (P = 0.04). In total, 40% of children on haemodialysis and 30% on peritoneal dialysis had increased left ventricular mass index.
Conclusions: BIS provides an objective method for the assessment of hydration status in children on dialysis. We noted a marked discrepancy between BP and hydration status in children on dialysis that warrants further investigation.
Aims and Objective: To identify an ideal systolic blood pressure range based on optimal survival among ESRD patients on dialysis.
Method: A systematic search for clinical trials assessing the impact of different systolic blood pressure range on mortality among ESRD patients on hemodialysis was conducted through PubMed, EBSCOhost, Science Direct, Google Scholar, and Scopus. All randomized control trials (RCTs) involving ESRD patients on hemodialysis with primary or secondary outcome of assessing the impact different systolic blood pressure range (140 mm Hg) on all-cause mortality were included. The quality of reporting of the included studies was evaluated using the Jadad scale. Two researchers independently conducted eligibility assessment. Discrepancies were resolved by discussion and consultation with a third researcher when needed. Pooled relative risks (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated.
Results: A total of 1,787 research articles were identified during the initial search, after which six RCTs met our inclusion criteria. According to the Jadad scale, all six RCTs scored 3 points each for quality of reporting. Four RCTs employed pharmacological intervention while two RCTs assessed non-pharmacological intervention. Of the six RCTs, two studies were able to achieve a systolic blood pressure of <140 mm Hg at the end of trial with a RR for reduction in mortality of 0.56 (95% CI, 0.3-1.07; P = 0.08). Four RCTs were able to achieve a systolic blood pressure of >140 mm Hg at the end of trial, with the RR for reduction of mortality of 0.72 (95% CI, 0.54-0.96; P = 0.003). Overall, pooled estimates of the six RCTs suggested the reduction in systolic blood pressure statistically reduce all cause of mortality (RR, 0.69%; 95% CI, 0.53-0.90; P = 0.006) among ESRD patients on hemodialysis.
Conclusion: Though not statically significant, the current study identifies <140 mm Hg as a promising blood pressure range for optimum survival among ESRD patients on hemodialysis. However, further studies are required to establish an ideal blood pressure range among hemodialysis patients.
Systematic Review Registration: The study protocol was registered under PROSPERO (CRD42019121102).
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the prevalence of symptom burden and severity of ESRD patients and correlate the findings with their psychological status.
METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study of dialyzed (N = 87) and nondialyzed (N = 100) patients. The symptom burden and severity were determined using the Dialysis Symptom Index (DSI) and the psychological assessment using Depression Anxiety Stress Scale 21 (DASS-21).
RESULTS: Symptom severity evaluated using the DSI was comparable in both groups with fatigue as the most common symptom (n = 141, 75.4%), followed by sleep-related, sexual dysfunction, and dry skin problems. The symptom burden for worrying, dry skin and mouth, decreased appetite, numbness, and leg swelling were significant in not dialyzed group (p