author_facet Leung, Kelvin C.W.
Quinn, Robert R.
Ravani, Pietro
Duff, Henry
MacRae, Jennifer M.
Leung, Kelvin C.W.
Quinn, Robert R.
Ravani, Pietro
Duff, Henry
MacRae, Jennifer M.
author Leung, Kelvin C.W.
Quinn, Robert R.
Ravani, Pietro
Duff, Henry
MacRae, Jennifer M.
spellingShingle Leung, Kelvin C.W.
Quinn, Robert R.
Ravani, Pietro
Duff, Henry
MacRae, Jennifer M.
Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology
Randomized Crossover Trial of Blood Volume Monitoring–Guided Ultrafiltration Biofeedback to Reduce Intradialytic Hypotensive Episodes with Hemodialysis
Transplantation
Nephrology
Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine
Epidemiology
author_sort leung, kelvin c.w.
spelling Leung, Kelvin C.W. Quinn, Robert R. Ravani, Pietro Duff, Henry MacRae, Jennifer M. 1555-9041 1555-905X Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health) Transplantation Nephrology Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine Epidemiology http://dx.doi.org/10.2215/cjn.01030117 <jats:sec> <jats:title>Background and objectives</jats:title> <jats:p>Intradialytic hypotension (IDH) is associated with morbidity. The effect of blood volume–guided ultrafiltration biofeedback, which automatically adjusts fluid removal rate on the basis of blood volume parameters, on the reduction of IDH was tested in a randomized crossover trial.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Design, setting, participants, &amp; measurements</jats:title> <jats:p>We performed a 22-week, single blind, randomized crossover trial in patients receiving maintenance hemodialysis who had &gt;30% of sessions complicated by symptomatic IDH in five centers in Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Participants underwent a 4-week run-in period to standardize dialysis prescription and dry weight on the basis of clinical examination. Those meeting inclusion criteria were randomized to best clinical practice hemodialysis (control) or best clinical practice plus blood volume–guided ultrafiltration biofeedback (intervention) for 8 weeks, followed by a 2-week washout and subsequent crossover for a second 8-week phase. The primary outcome was rate of symptomatic IDH.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Results</jats:title> <jats:p>Thirty-five participants entered, 32 were randomized, and 26 completed the study. The rate of symptomatic IDH with biofeedback was 0.10/h (95% confidence interval, 0.06 to 0.14) and 0.07/h (95% confidence interval, 0.05 to 0.10) during control (<jats:italic toggle="yes">P</jats:italic>=0.29). There were no differences in the rate or proportion of sessions with asymptomatic IDH or symptoms alone. Results remained consistent when adjusted for randomization order and study week. There were no differences between intervention and control in the last study week in interdialytic weight gain (difference [SD], −0.02 [0.8] kg), brain natriuretic peptide (1460 [19,052] ng/L), cardiac troponins (3 [86] ng/L), extracellular water–to–intracellular water ratio (0.05 [0.33]), ultrafiltration rate (1.1 [7.0] ml/kg per hour), and dialysis recovery time (0.43 [19.25] hours).</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Conclusion</jats:title> <jats:p>The use of blood volume monitoring–guided ultrafiltration biofeedback in patients prone to IDH did not reduce the rate of symptomatic IDH events.</jats:p> </jats:sec> Randomized Crossover Trial of Blood Volume Monitoring–Guided Ultrafiltration Biofeedback to Reduce Intradialytic Hypotensive Episodes with Hemodialysis Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology
doi_str_mv 10.2215/cjn.01030117
facet_avail Online
Free
finc_class_facet Medizin
format ElectronicArticle
fullrecord blob:ai-49-aHR0cDovL2R4LmRvaS5vcmcvMTAuMjIxNS9jam4uMDEwMzAxMTc
id ai-49-aHR0cDovL2R4LmRvaS5vcmcvMTAuMjIxNS9jam4uMDEwMzAxMTc
institution DE-Gla1
DE-Zi4
DE-15
DE-Pl11
DE-Rs1
DE-105
DE-14
DE-Ch1
DE-L229
DE-D275
DE-Bn3
DE-Brt1
DE-Zwi2
DE-D161
imprint Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health), 2017
imprint_str_mv Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health), 2017
issn 1555-9041
1555-905X
issn_str_mv 1555-9041
1555-905X
language English
mega_collection Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health) (CrossRef)
match_str leung2017randomizedcrossovertrialofbloodvolumemonitoringguidedultrafiltrationbiofeedbacktoreduceintradialytichypotensiveepisodeswithhemodialysis
publishDateSort 2017
publisher Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
recordtype ai
record_format ai
series Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology
source_id 49
title Randomized Crossover Trial of Blood Volume Monitoring–Guided Ultrafiltration Biofeedback to Reduce Intradialytic Hypotensive Episodes with Hemodialysis
title_unstemmed Randomized Crossover Trial of Blood Volume Monitoring–Guided Ultrafiltration Biofeedback to Reduce Intradialytic Hypotensive Episodes with Hemodialysis
title_full Randomized Crossover Trial of Blood Volume Monitoring–Guided Ultrafiltration Biofeedback to Reduce Intradialytic Hypotensive Episodes with Hemodialysis
title_fullStr Randomized Crossover Trial of Blood Volume Monitoring–Guided Ultrafiltration Biofeedback to Reduce Intradialytic Hypotensive Episodes with Hemodialysis
title_full_unstemmed Randomized Crossover Trial of Blood Volume Monitoring–Guided Ultrafiltration Biofeedback to Reduce Intradialytic Hypotensive Episodes with Hemodialysis
title_short Randomized Crossover Trial of Blood Volume Monitoring–Guided Ultrafiltration Biofeedback to Reduce Intradialytic Hypotensive Episodes with Hemodialysis
title_sort randomized crossover trial of blood volume monitoring–guided ultrafiltration biofeedback to reduce intradialytic hypotensive episodes with hemodialysis
topic Transplantation
Nephrology
Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine
Epidemiology
url http://dx.doi.org/10.2215/cjn.01030117
publishDate 2017
physical 1831-1840
description <jats:sec> <jats:title>Background and objectives</jats:title> <jats:p>Intradialytic hypotension (IDH) is associated with morbidity. The effect of blood volume–guided ultrafiltration biofeedback, which automatically adjusts fluid removal rate on the basis of blood volume parameters, on the reduction of IDH was tested in a randomized crossover trial.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Design, setting, participants, &amp; measurements</jats:title> <jats:p>We performed a 22-week, single blind, randomized crossover trial in patients receiving maintenance hemodialysis who had &gt;30% of sessions complicated by symptomatic IDH in five centers in Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Participants underwent a 4-week run-in period to standardize dialysis prescription and dry weight on the basis of clinical examination. Those meeting inclusion criteria were randomized to best clinical practice hemodialysis (control) or best clinical practice plus blood volume–guided ultrafiltration biofeedback (intervention) for 8 weeks, followed by a 2-week washout and subsequent crossover for a second 8-week phase. The primary outcome was rate of symptomatic IDH.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Results</jats:title> <jats:p>Thirty-five participants entered, 32 were randomized, and 26 completed the study. The rate of symptomatic IDH with biofeedback was 0.10/h (95% confidence interval, 0.06 to 0.14) and 0.07/h (95% confidence interval, 0.05 to 0.10) during control (<jats:italic toggle="yes">P</jats:italic>=0.29). There were no differences in the rate or proportion of sessions with asymptomatic IDH or symptoms alone. Results remained consistent when adjusted for randomization order and study week. There were no differences between intervention and control in the last study week in interdialytic weight gain (difference [SD], −0.02 [0.8] kg), brain natriuretic peptide (1460 [19,052] ng/L), cardiac troponins (3 [86] ng/L), extracellular water–to–intracellular water ratio (0.05 [0.33]), ultrafiltration rate (1.1 [7.0] ml/kg per hour), and dialysis recovery time (0.43 [19.25] hours).</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Conclusion</jats:title> <jats:p>The use of blood volume monitoring–guided ultrafiltration biofeedback in patients prone to IDH did not reduce the rate of symptomatic IDH events.</jats:p> </jats:sec>
container_issue 11
container_start_page 1831
container_title Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology
container_volume 12
format_de105 Article, E-Article
format_de14 Article, E-Article
format_de15 Article, E-Article
format_de520 Article, E-Article
format_de540 Article, E-Article
format_dech1 Article, E-Article
format_ded117 Article, E-Article
format_degla1 E-Article
format_del152 Buch
format_del189 Article, E-Article
format_dezi4 Article
format_dezwi2 Article, E-Article
format_finc Article, E-Article
format_nrw Article, E-Article
_version_ 1792344891598045189
geogr_code not assigned
last_indexed 2024-03-01T17:14:04.795Z
geogr_code_person not assigned
openURL url_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fvufind.svn.sourceforge.net%3Agenerator&rft.title=Randomized+Crossover+Trial+of+Blood+Volume+Monitoring%E2%80%93Guided+Ultrafiltration+Biofeedback+to+Reduce+Intradialytic+Hypotensive+Episodes+with+Hemodialysis&rft.date=2017-11-01&genre=article&issn=1555-905X&volume=12&issue=11&spage=1831&epage=1840&pages=1831-1840&jtitle=Clinical+Journal+of+the+American+Society+of+Nephrology&atitle=Randomized+Crossover+Trial+of+Blood+Volume+Monitoring%E2%80%93Guided+Ultrafiltration+Biofeedback+to+Reduce+Intradialytic+Hypotensive+Episodes+with+Hemodialysis&aulast=MacRae&aufirst=Jennifer+M.&rft_id=info%3Adoi%2F10.2215%2Fcjn.01030117&rft.language%5B0%5D=eng
SOLR
_version_ 1792344891598045189
author Leung, Kelvin C.W., Quinn, Robert R., Ravani, Pietro, Duff, Henry, MacRae, Jennifer M.
author_facet Leung, Kelvin C.W., Quinn, Robert R., Ravani, Pietro, Duff, Henry, MacRae, Jennifer M., Leung, Kelvin C.W., Quinn, Robert R., Ravani, Pietro, Duff, Henry, MacRae, Jennifer M.
author_sort leung, kelvin c.w.
container_issue 11
container_start_page 1831
container_title Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology
container_volume 12
description <jats:sec> <jats:title>Background and objectives</jats:title> <jats:p>Intradialytic hypotension (IDH) is associated with morbidity. The effect of blood volume–guided ultrafiltration biofeedback, which automatically adjusts fluid removal rate on the basis of blood volume parameters, on the reduction of IDH was tested in a randomized crossover trial.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Design, setting, participants, &amp; measurements</jats:title> <jats:p>We performed a 22-week, single blind, randomized crossover trial in patients receiving maintenance hemodialysis who had &gt;30% of sessions complicated by symptomatic IDH in five centers in Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Participants underwent a 4-week run-in period to standardize dialysis prescription and dry weight on the basis of clinical examination. Those meeting inclusion criteria were randomized to best clinical practice hemodialysis (control) or best clinical practice plus blood volume–guided ultrafiltration biofeedback (intervention) for 8 weeks, followed by a 2-week washout and subsequent crossover for a second 8-week phase. The primary outcome was rate of symptomatic IDH.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Results</jats:title> <jats:p>Thirty-five participants entered, 32 were randomized, and 26 completed the study. The rate of symptomatic IDH with biofeedback was 0.10/h (95% confidence interval, 0.06 to 0.14) and 0.07/h (95% confidence interval, 0.05 to 0.10) during control (<jats:italic toggle="yes">P</jats:italic>=0.29). There were no differences in the rate or proportion of sessions with asymptomatic IDH or symptoms alone. Results remained consistent when adjusted for randomization order and study week. There were no differences between intervention and control in the last study week in interdialytic weight gain (difference [SD], −0.02 [0.8] kg), brain natriuretic peptide (1460 [19,052] ng/L), cardiac troponins (3 [86] ng/L), extracellular water–to–intracellular water ratio (0.05 [0.33]), ultrafiltration rate (1.1 [7.0] ml/kg per hour), and dialysis recovery time (0.43 [19.25] hours).</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Conclusion</jats:title> <jats:p>The use of blood volume monitoring–guided ultrafiltration biofeedback in patients prone to IDH did not reduce the rate of symptomatic IDH events.</jats:p> </jats:sec>
doi_str_mv 10.2215/cjn.01030117
facet_avail Online, Free
finc_class_facet Medizin
format ElectronicArticle
format_de105 Article, E-Article
format_de14 Article, E-Article
format_de15 Article, E-Article
format_de520 Article, E-Article
format_de540 Article, E-Article
format_dech1 Article, E-Article
format_ded117 Article, E-Article
format_degla1 E-Article
format_del152 Buch
format_del189 Article, E-Article
format_dezi4 Article
format_dezwi2 Article, E-Article
format_finc Article, E-Article
format_nrw Article, E-Article
geogr_code not assigned
geogr_code_person not assigned
id ai-49-aHR0cDovL2R4LmRvaS5vcmcvMTAuMjIxNS9jam4uMDEwMzAxMTc
imprint Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health), 2017
imprint_str_mv Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health), 2017
institution DE-Gla1, DE-Zi4, DE-15, DE-Pl11, DE-Rs1, DE-105, DE-14, DE-Ch1, DE-L229, DE-D275, DE-Bn3, DE-Brt1, DE-Zwi2, DE-D161
issn 1555-9041, 1555-905X
issn_str_mv 1555-9041, 1555-905X
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-01T17:14:04.795Z
match_str leung2017randomizedcrossovertrialofbloodvolumemonitoringguidedultrafiltrationbiofeedbacktoreduceintradialytichypotensiveepisodeswithhemodialysis
mega_collection Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health) (CrossRef)
physical 1831-1840
publishDate 2017
publishDateSort 2017
publisher Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
record_format ai
recordtype ai
series Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology
source_id 49
spelling Leung, Kelvin C.W. Quinn, Robert R. Ravani, Pietro Duff, Henry MacRae, Jennifer M. 1555-9041 1555-905X Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health) Transplantation Nephrology Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine Epidemiology http://dx.doi.org/10.2215/cjn.01030117 <jats:sec> <jats:title>Background and objectives</jats:title> <jats:p>Intradialytic hypotension (IDH) is associated with morbidity. The effect of blood volume–guided ultrafiltration biofeedback, which automatically adjusts fluid removal rate on the basis of blood volume parameters, on the reduction of IDH was tested in a randomized crossover trial.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Design, setting, participants, &amp; measurements</jats:title> <jats:p>We performed a 22-week, single blind, randomized crossover trial in patients receiving maintenance hemodialysis who had &gt;30% of sessions complicated by symptomatic IDH in five centers in Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Participants underwent a 4-week run-in period to standardize dialysis prescription and dry weight on the basis of clinical examination. Those meeting inclusion criteria were randomized to best clinical practice hemodialysis (control) or best clinical practice plus blood volume–guided ultrafiltration biofeedback (intervention) for 8 weeks, followed by a 2-week washout and subsequent crossover for a second 8-week phase. The primary outcome was rate of symptomatic IDH.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Results</jats:title> <jats:p>Thirty-five participants entered, 32 were randomized, and 26 completed the study. The rate of symptomatic IDH with biofeedback was 0.10/h (95% confidence interval, 0.06 to 0.14) and 0.07/h (95% confidence interval, 0.05 to 0.10) during control (<jats:italic toggle="yes">P</jats:italic>=0.29). There were no differences in the rate or proportion of sessions with asymptomatic IDH or symptoms alone. Results remained consistent when adjusted for randomization order and study week. There were no differences between intervention and control in the last study week in interdialytic weight gain (difference [SD], −0.02 [0.8] kg), brain natriuretic peptide (1460 [19,052] ng/L), cardiac troponins (3 [86] ng/L), extracellular water–to–intracellular water ratio (0.05 [0.33]), ultrafiltration rate (1.1 [7.0] ml/kg per hour), and dialysis recovery time (0.43 [19.25] hours).</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Conclusion</jats:title> <jats:p>The use of blood volume monitoring–guided ultrafiltration biofeedback in patients prone to IDH did not reduce the rate of symptomatic IDH events.</jats:p> </jats:sec> Randomized Crossover Trial of Blood Volume Monitoring–Guided Ultrafiltration Biofeedback to Reduce Intradialytic Hypotensive Episodes with Hemodialysis Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology
spellingShingle Leung, Kelvin C.W., Quinn, Robert R., Ravani, Pietro, Duff, Henry, MacRae, Jennifer M., Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology, Randomized Crossover Trial of Blood Volume Monitoring–Guided Ultrafiltration Biofeedback to Reduce Intradialytic Hypotensive Episodes with Hemodialysis, Transplantation, Nephrology, Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine, Epidemiology
title Randomized Crossover Trial of Blood Volume Monitoring–Guided Ultrafiltration Biofeedback to Reduce Intradialytic Hypotensive Episodes with Hemodialysis
title_full Randomized Crossover Trial of Blood Volume Monitoring–Guided Ultrafiltration Biofeedback to Reduce Intradialytic Hypotensive Episodes with Hemodialysis
title_fullStr Randomized Crossover Trial of Blood Volume Monitoring–Guided Ultrafiltration Biofeedback to Reduce Intradialytic Hypotensive Episodes with Hemodialysis
title_full_unstemmed Randomized Crossover Trial of Blood Volume Monitoring–Guided Ultrafiltration Biofeedback to Reduce Intradialytic Hypotensive Episodes with Hemodialysis
title_short Randomized Crossover Trial of Blood Volume Monitoring–Guided Ultrafiltration Biofeedback to Reduce Intradialytic Hypotensive Episodes with Hemodialysis
title_sort randomized crossover trial of blood volume monitoring–guided ultrafiltration biofeedback to reduce intradialytic hypotensive episodes with hemodialysis
title_unstemmed Randomized Crossover Trial of Blood Volume Monitoring–Guided Ultrafiltration Biofeedback to Reduce Intradialytic Hypotensive Episodes with Hemodialysis
topic Transplantation, Nephrology, Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine, Epidemiology
url http://dx.doi.org/10.2215/cjn.01030117