FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2017651323> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2017651323 endingPage "1181" @default.
• W2017651323 startingPage "1175" @default.
• W2017651323 abstract "Intradialytic hypotension (IH) is a common adverse event. Currently, there are several commonly utilized therapies of IH, but they have not been compared directly in the same group of patients. We performed the present study in order to learn which of these techniques is most effective so that a rational approach to treating IH could then be formulated.A single-blinded, crossover study design of five different protocols was undertaken in 10 hemodialysis patients with a prior history of IH. Each patient first underwent one week (three dialyses) of standard dialysis (dialysate sodium 138 mEq/L). Then each patient was subjected to one week each (three dialyses) of the four test protocols, performed in random order in a blinded fashion. The specific protocols were as follows: high sodium dialysate, in which the patient was dialyzed using a dialysate sodium of 144 mEq/L; sodium modeling, during which the dialysate sodium declined from 152 to 140 mEq/L in the last half hour of dialysis; one hour of isolated ultrafiltration followed by three hours of isovolemic dialysis; and cool temperature dialysis in which the dialysate was cooled to 35 degrees C.Weight loss in each of the five protocols was essentially identical, varying between 2.9 and 3 kg. There were significantly fewer hypotensive episodes per treatment in the sodium modeling, high sodium, and cool temperature protocols as compared with the standard protocol (P < 0.05). Ultrafiltration followed by dialysis was associated with a significantly greater number of hypotensive episodes per treatment than any of the three test protocols (P < 0.05). Similarly, the number of nursing interventions required for IH per treatment was significantly greater in the standard dialysis and in the isolated ultrafiltration protocols compared with sodium modeling and cool temperature protocols (P < 0.05). The number of hypotensive signs and symptoms per treatment was also significantly reduced during the sodium modeling and cool temperature protocols compared with the standard protocol (P < 0.004 and P < 0.02, respectively). Again, the isolated ultrafiltration protocol resulted in significantly more hypotensive symptoms and signs than the three test protocols (P < 0.005). Finally, the nadir mean arterial pressures were significantly lower in the standard and isolated ultrafiltration protocols when compared with the three test protocols (P < 0.05). The upright postdialysis blood pressure was best preserved in the sodium modeling and cool temperature protocols compared with the standard and isolated ultrafiltration protocols (P < 0.05).This study supports the use of sodium modeling as a first step in combating IH. Also effective were the use of cool-temperature dialysate and a high-sodium dialysate. All three test protocols were well tolerated. As applied in this study, isolated ultrafiltration followed by isovolemic dialysis was notably less effective in reducing IH." @default.
• W2017651323 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2017651323 creator A5042267976 @default.
• W2017651323 creator A5074355676 @default.
• W2017651323 date "2001-03-01" @default.
• W2017651323 modified "2023-10-17" @default.
• W2017651323 title "Preventing dialysis hypotension: A comparison of usual protective maneuvers" @default.
• W2017651323 cites W1963603947 @default.
• W2017651323 cites W1965312906 @default.
• W2017651323 cites W1974291470 @default.
• W2017651323 cites W1978261885 @default.
• W2017651323 cites W1985843204 @default.
• W2017651323 cites W1994413539 @default.
• W2017651323 cites W2001184165 @default.
• W2017651323 cites W2003378092 @default.
• W2017651323 cites W2004797974 @default.
• W2017651323 cites W2013220681 @default.
• W2017651323 cites W2016937539 @default.
• W2017651323 cites W2020534916 @default.
• W2017651323 cites W2034387743 @default.
• W2017651323 cites W2053358362 @default.
• W2017651323 cites W2058302689 @default.
• W2017651323 cites W2065848421 @default.
• W2017651323 cites W2078519852 @default.
• W2017651323 cites W2084710218 @default.
• W2017651323 cites W2117323582 @default.
• W2017651323 cites W2135150827 @default.
• W2017651323 cites W2169330550 @default.
• W2017651323 cites W2169434764 @default.
• W2017651323 cites W2171076611 @default.
• W2017651323 cites W2329679831 @default.
• W2017651323 cites W4299704522 @default.
• W2017651323 doi "https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1755.2001.0590031175.x" @default.
• W2017651323 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11473670" @default.
• W2017651323 hasPublicationYear "2001" @default.
• W2017651323 type Work @default.
• W2017651323 sameAs 2017651323 @default.
• W2017651323 citedByCount "110" @default.
• W2017651323 countsByYear W20176513232012 @default.
• W2017651323 countsByYear W20176513232013 @default.
• W2017651323 countsByYear W20176513232014 @default.
• W2017651323 countsByYear W20176513232015 @default.
• W2017651323 countsByYear W20176513232016 @default.
• W2017651323 countsByYear W20176513232017 @default.
• W2017651323 countsByYear W20176513232018 @default.
• W2017651323 countsByYear W20176513232019 @default.
• W2017651323 countsByYear W20176513232021 @default.
• W2017651323 countsByYear W20176513232022 @default.
• W2017651323 countsByYear W20176513232023 @default.
• W2017651323 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2017651323 hasAuthorship W2017651323A5042267976 @default.
• W2017651323 hasAuthorship W2017651323A5074355676 @default.
• W2017651323 hasBestOaLocation W20176513231 @default.
• W2017651323 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W2017651323 hasConcept C126894567 @default.
• W2017651323 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W2017651323 hasConcept C142724271 @default.
• W2017651323 hasConcept C178790620 @default.
• W2017651323 hasConcept C185592680 @default.
• W2017651323 hasConcept C197934379 @default.
• W2017651323 hasConcept C204787440 @default.
• W2017651323 hasConcept C27081682 @default.
• W2017651323 hasConcept C2778063415 @default.
• W2017651323 hasConcept C2779978075 @default.
• W2017651323 hasConcept C42219234 @default.
• W2017651323 hasConcept C43617362 @default.
• W2017651323 hasConcept C50817676 @default.
• W2017651323 hasConcept C537181965 @default.
• W2017651323 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2017651323 hasConcept C87813604 @default.
• W2017651323 hasConceptScore W2017651323C126322002 @default.
• W2017651323 hasConceptScore W2017651323C126894567 @default.
• W2017651323 hasConceptScore W2017651323C141071460 @default.
• W2017651323 hasConceptScore W2017651323C142724271 @default.
• W2017651323 hasConceptScore W2017651323C178790620 @default.
• W2017651323 hasConceptScore W2017651323C185592680 @default.
• W2017651323 hasConceptScore W2017651323C197934379 @default.
• W2017651323 hasConceptScore W2017651323C204787440 @default.
• W2017651323 hasConceptScore W2017651323C27081682 @default.
• W2017651323 hasConceptScore W2017651323C2778063415 @default.
• W2017651323 hasConceptScore W2017651323C2779978075 @default.
• W2017651323 hasConceptScore W2017651323C42219234 @default.
• W2017651323 hasConceptScore W2017651323C43617362 @default.
• W2017651323 hasConceptScore W2017651323C50817676 @default.
• W2017651323 hasConceptScore W2017651323C537181965 @default.
• W2017651323 hasConceptScore W2017651323C71924100 @default.
• W2017651323 hasConceptScore W2017651323C87813604 @default.
• W2017651323 hasIssue "3" @default.
• W2017651323 hasLocation W20176513231 @default.
• W2017651323 hasLocation W20176513232 @default.
• W2017651323 hasOpenAccess W2017651323 @default.
• W2017651323 hasPrimaryLocation W20176513231 @default.
• W2017651323 hasRelatedWork W2090707356 @default.
• W2017651323 hasRelatedWork W2347899062 @default.
• W2017651323 hasRelatedWork W2349636421 @default.
• W2017651323 hasRelatedWork W2353267380 @default.
• W2017651323 hasRelatedWork W2353558323 @default.
• W2017651323 hasRelatedWork W2367319647 @default.

• next