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


     


Perit Dial Int 22(3): 365-370 2002
© 2002 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 HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Pride, E.
Right arrow Articles by Burkart, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Pride, E.
Right arrow Articles by Burkart, J.
Peritoneal Dialysis International, Vol 22, Issue 3, 365-370
Copyright © 2002 by International Society for Peritoneal Dialysis


Clinical Trial

Comparison of a 2.5% and a 4.25% dextrose peritoneal equilibration test

ET Pride, J Gustafson, A Graham, L Spainhour, V Mauck, P Brown, and JM Burkart

Department of Internal Medicine, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, and Piedmont Dialysis Center, Inc, Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27157-1053, USA.

BACKGROUND: Ultrafiltration (UF) failure develops over time in some patients on peritoneal dialysis. The workup of UF failure can be difficult and the 4.25% peritoneal equilibration test (PET) has been suggested to be more useful than the 2.5% PET for the workup of UF failure. It is unknown how a 4.25% PET compares to a 2.5% PET in individual patients. OBJECTIVES: To assess the differences in drain volumes and sodium sieving using a 4.25% PET compared to a 2.5% PET, and to determine whether peritoneal transport rates, in terms of dialysate-to-plasma (D/P) ratios, are comparable between the two. DESIGN: Pilot study with each patient serving as his or her own control. SETTING: Outpatient dialysis facility of Wake Forest University Baptist Medical Center. PATIENTS: 47 patients, all of whom had a 2.5% PET and a 4.25% PET performed within 1 week of each other. OUTCOME MEASURES: Dialysate-to-plasma ratios of urea and creatinine, dialysate total protein, and dialysate glucose compared to time zero (D/D0) at 0, 2, and 4 hours. Four-hour drain volumes and sodium sieving at 2 hours were also measured. RESULTS: There was reproducibility between the 2.5% and 4.25% PET for D/P ratios of urea and creatinine and for dialysate total protein.There were expected differences in drain volume, sodium sieving, and D/D0 glucose between the two methods. CONCLUSIONS: The use of a 4.25% PET may be more useful for the workup of UF failure because of the accentuation of drain volume and sodium sieving, while remaining useful for prescription management.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
NDT PlusHome page
D. G. Struijk
Monitoring of the peritoneal membrane
NDT Plus, October 1, 2008; 1(suppl_4): iv29 - iv35.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Nephrol Dial TransplantHome page
S. H. Chung, O. Heimburger, B. Lindholm, and H. B. Lee
Peritoneal dialysis patient survival: a comparison between a Swedish and a Korean centre
Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., June 1, 2005; 20(6): 1207 - 1213.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Multimed Inc. logo
Copyright © 2002 by Multimed Inc.