PDI 2009 ISDP LAC
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Perit Dial Int 18(3): 317-321 1998
© 1998 International Society for Peritoneal Dialysis
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Amici, G
Right arrow Articles by Bonadonna, A
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Amici, G
Right arrow Articles by Bonadonna, A
Peritoneal Dialysis International, Vol 18, Issue 3, 317-321
Copyright © 1998 by International Society for Peritoneal Dialysis


Articles

Clinical validation of PD Adequest software: modeling error assessment

G Amici, S Mastrosimone, G Da Rin, C Bocci, and A Bonadonna

Nephrology and Dialysis Division, Regional Hospital St. Maria dei Battuti, Treviso, Italy.

OBJECTIVE: PD ADEQUEST software (Baxter Healthcare, Deerfield, IL, U.S.A.) is used in peritoneal dialysis for calculating the indices of dialysis efficiency and for the mathematical simulation of the results of various dialysis regimens. The aim of our study was to quantify the modeling errors and find the methods which give best results. DESIGN: Nonrandomized, repeated measurement, clinical validation study. PATIENTS: The study included 78 patients on continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (PD), daytime ambulatory PD, and automated PD. MEASUREMENTS: We used 207 collections of dialysate and urine associated with peritoneal equilibration tests (PETs) performed with different glucose concentrations (1.36%, 2.27%, 3.86%). The measured urea Kt/V, creatinine clearance (CRCL) and ultrafiltration (UF) were compared with the same data simulated mathematically using the PD ADEQUEST software version 1.4. RESULTS: The Kt/V, CRCL, and UF measured values were significantly correlated and in agreement with modeled data [concordance correlation (rc) was 0.849, 0.839, 0.625 respectively]. The errors (modeled - measured) were: Kt/V = -0.04 +/- 0.27 (p = ns), CRCL = 2.1 +/- 7.7 L (p < 0.001), UF = -121 +/- 711 mL (p = 0.016). Applying ANOVA to both the peritoneal transport data calculated by PD ADEQUEST (mass transfer area coefficient of the solutes, fluid reabsorption, and hydraulic permeability) and the modeling errors, significant differences were found in relation to the PET glucose concentrations. CONCLUSION: PD ADEQUEST proves to be a useful instrument in peritoneal dialysis, although there is undoubtedly still room for improvement in its prediction efficacy, which is influenced by the glucose concentration used in the PET.







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Multimed Inc. logo
Copyright © 1998 by Multimed Inc.