IntroductionMore than 90% of patients diagnosed with childhood acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL) today will survive. However, half of the survivors are expected to experience therapy-related chronic or late occurring adverse effects, reducing quality of life. Insight into underlying risk trajectories is warranted. The aim of this study is to establish a Nordic, national childhood ALL survivor cohort, to be investigated for the total somatic and psychosocial treatment-related burden as well as associated risk factors, allowing subsequent linkage to nation-wide public health registers.Methods and analysisThis population-based observational cohort study includes clinical follow-up of a retrospective childhood ALL survivor cohort (n=475), treated according to a common Nordic ALL protocol during 2008–2018 in Denmark. The study includes matched controls. Primary endpoints are the cumulative incidence and cumulative burden of 197 health conditions, assessed through self-report and proxy-report questionnaires, medical chart validation, and clinical examinations. Secondary endpoints include organ-specific outcome, including cardiovascular and pulmonary function, physical performance, neuropathy, metabolic disturbances, hepatic and pancreatic function, bone health, oral and dental health, kidney function, puberty and fertility, fatigue, and psychosocial outcome. Therapy exposure, acute toxicities, and host genome variants are explored as risk factors.Ethics and disseminationThe study is approved by the Regional Ethics Committee for the Capital Region in Denmark (H-18035090/H-20006359) and by the Danish Data Protection Agency (VD-2018–519). Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and are expected to guide interventions that will ameliorate the burden of therapy without compromising the chance of cure.
Rationale & Objective
Left ventricular (LV) mass (LVM) is a predictor of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality and commonly calculated using 1-dimensional (1D) echocardiographic methods. These methods are vulnerable to small measurement errors and LVM may wrongly change according to changes in LV volume (LVV). Less commonly used 2-dimensional (2D) methods can accommodate to the changes in LVV and may be a better alternative among patients receiving hemodialysis (HD) with large fluid fluctuations.
Study Design
Observational study.
Setting & Participants
Patients with end-stage kidney disease receiving HD.
Exposure
One HD session.
Analytical Approach
Transthoracic echocardiography was performed right before and after HD. LVM was calculated using 1D (Devereux, Penn, and Teichholz) and 2D methods (truncated ellipsoid and area-length).
Outcomes
Significant differences in LVM after HD.
Results
We compared dimensions, LVV and LVM, in 53 patients (mean age, 63 ± 15 years; 66% men). For each 1-L increase in ultrafiltration volume (UFV), LV internal diameter decreased 1.1 mm (95% CI, 0.5-1.7 mm;
P
= 0.001). Patients were divided into 2 groups by the median UFV of 1.6 L. Patients with UFV > 1.6 L had significant smaller LVV and LV internal diameter after HD. LVM calculated using 1D methods decreased according to changes in LVV. Conversely, LVM calculated using 2D methods was not significantly different after HD. No significant change in differences between diastolic − systolic myocardial thickness or LVM as assessed using 1D and 2D methods was observed before and after HD, indicating that LVM remained constant despite HD.
Limitations
We did not use contrast enhancement, 3-dimensional methods, or cardiac magnetic resonance.
Conclusions
LVM calculated using 2D methods, truncated ellipsoid and area-length, is less affected by fluctuations in fluid and LVV, in contrast to 1D methods. Complementary LVM calculation using 2D methods is encouraged, especially in patients with large fluid fluctuations in which increased LVM using a 1D method has been detected.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.