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

      Intraoperative versus Routine Hemodialysis in End-Stage Renal Disease Patients Undergoing Open-Heart Surgery

      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.


          Of 13 chronic hemodialysis end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients undergoing open-heart surgery, 7 received intraoperative hemodialysis (IHD) during cardiopulmonary bypass and 6 received hemodialysis on a routine basis (RHD). Within the groups, IHD patients had significantly lower post-operative mean serum potassium and mean plasma creatinine concentrations compared to mean preoperative values. Postoperative mean BUN tended to decrease and mean serum bicarbonate concentration was unchanged as compared to mean preoperative values. In the RHD group, however, post-operative mean serum potassium concentration tended to increase, mean serum bicarbonate concentration significantly declined and mean BUN was unchanged as compared to mean preoperative values. An average of 2.1 ± 0.5 liters of fluid was removed from the IHD patients during cardiopulmonary bypass. Post-operatively, 0 of 7 IHD patients versus 4 of 6 RHD patients required parenteral sodium bicarbonate therapy (eχ<sup>2</sup>, p < 0.01). On average, RHD patients required hemodialysis 1 day after surgery, whereas IHD patients were hemodialyzed 2 days after surgery (p = 0.009). We conclude that IHD lessened postoperative hyperkalemia and metabolic acidosis and delayed postoperative hemodialysis by an additional day. IHD should be considered as an adjunct to RHD therapy in the management of ESRD patients undergoing open-heart surgery.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          S. Karger AG
          11 December 2008
          : 61
          : 2
          : 170-175
          Presbyterian Medical Center of Philadelphia; Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa., USA
          186866 Nephron 1992;61:170–175
          © 1992 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
          Pages: 6
          Original Paper


          Comment on this article