+1 Recommend
1 collections
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Theoretical and Numerical Analysis of Different Adequacy Indices for Hemodialysis and Peritoneal Dialysis

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.


          Background: Apart from KT/V, equivalent urea clearance (EKR) and fractional solute removal (FSR) can also be used to assess the dialysis adequacy. Our objective was to analyze the relationships between these indices for different dialysis modalities and schedules, using urea kinetic modeling. Methods: EKR and FSR were calculated for HD (three or six times per week), automatic nightly PD (ANPD) and CAPD using the following reference values of urea concentration and mass in the body: peak, peak average, time average and treatment time average. Results: The standard KT/V approach is related to the treatment time average, whereas the standard EKR is related to the time average reference values. In spite of KT/V = 3.5 (K meaning dialyzer clearance or peritoneal diffusive mass transport coefficient), EKR and FSR were lower for ANPD and CAPD than for HD. The ratio of EKR to FSR was essentially the same for the different treatment modalities (range 3.48–4.07 ml/min). This could be explained by the theoretical analysis which predicts the value of EKR/FSR = V/Tc, independent of the treatment modality and schedules (V is a solute distribution volume, Tc is the time of the full dialysis cycle). Conclusion: Whereas the index KT/V in its standard form cannot be used to compare different dialysis regimens, EKR and FSR provide very similar evaluation of different dialysis modalities and schedules, and may be considered as equivalent measures for comparative studies of dialysis adequacy.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 10

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          The current place of urea kinetic modelling with respect to different dialysis modalities

           F Gotch (1998)
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Simple and accurate quantification of dialysis in acute renal failure patients during either urea non-steady state or treatment with irregular or continuous schedules.

            The quantification of dialysis in critically ill acute renal failure (ARF) patients requires a unifying expression that can establish kinetic equivalence amongst patients treated with irregular or frequent intermittent haemodialysis (IHD) schedules or with differing renal replacement therapies. EKRjc is a generalized form of the equivalent urea renal clearance (EKRc), and represents the equivalent continuous urea clearance that will result in the given time-averaged concentration of urea, for the given amount of urea removal. The suitability of EKRjc for the measurement of dialysis dose in this setting is examined.
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Compartment Effects in Hemodialysis


                Author and article information

                Blood Purif
                Blood Purification
                S. Karger AG
                August 2006
                14 August 2006
                : 24
                : 4
                : 355-366
                aInstitute of Biocybernetics and Biomedical Engineering, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland, and bDivisions of Baxter Novum and Renal Medicine, Department of Clinical Sciences, Intervention and Technology, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
                93199 Blood Purif 2006;24:355–366
                © 2006 S. Karger AG, Basel

                Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug. Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.

                Page count
                Figures: 3, Tables: 4, References: 18, Pages: 12
                Self URI (application/pdf): https://www.karger.com/Article/Pdf/93199
                Original Paper


                Comment on this article