The aim of the present study was to evaluate the alteration in plasma immunoreactive insulin (IRI) and glucose concentrations due to hemodialysis (HD) treatment by using a dialysate with or without glucose in HD patients. We divided the patients into three groups: non-diabetic patients (n-DM group), well-controlled diabetic patients (HbA(1c) <7.0% [w-DM group]), and poorly-controlled diabetic patients (HbA(1c) > or = 7.0% [p-DM group]). Using a dialysate with a glucose concentration of 100 mg/dL (glu(+)-dialysate) and a glucose-free dialysate (glu(-)-dialysate), we studied the daily profiles of plasma glucose in the three groups. We measured the levels of plasma glucose and IRI at three time points (predialysis and 2 h and 4 h after the initiation of dialysis) at pre(A) and postdialyzer (V) sites in HD patients. There was a significant increase in the daily profiles of the plasma glucose level from the time before dinner until bedtime in both the w-DM and p-DM groups, when comparing the values on an HD day with those on a non-HD day. In the p-DM group, the use of the glu(-)-dialysate resulted in a significant hyperglycemia in the evening hours when compared with the use of the glu(+)-dialysate. In the DM group, the use of the glu(+)-dialysate resulted in a significant decrease in the plasma glucose and IRI levels during HD. However, in the n-DM group, there was no difference in the plasma glucose levels during HD. On the other hand, the use of a glucose-free dialysate led to a significant decrease in the plasma glucose and IRI levels during HD in all groups. The plasma IRI levels decreased significantly between the A and V sites at each point in all groups irrespective of the glucose concentration of the dialysate. The present study confirmed that the concentration of not only glucose but also IRI had decreased during the passage of the plasma through the dialyzer. In HD patients with diabetes, the glucose content of the hemodialysis solution plays an important role in preventing acute hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia on HD days.
Despite improvements in medical care, the mortality of critically ill patients with acute kidney injury (AKI) who require renal replacement therapy (RRT) remains high. We describe a new approach, sustained hemodiafiltration, to treat patients who suffered from acute kidney injury and were admitted to intensive care units (ICUs). In our study, 60 critically ill patients with AKI who required RRT were treated with either continuous venovenous hemodiafiltration (CVVHDF) or sustained hemodiafiltration (S-HDF). The former was performed by administering a postfilter replacement fluid at an effluent rate of 35 mL/kg/h, and the latter was performed by administering a postfilter replacement fluid at a dialysate-flow rate of 300-500 mL/min. The S-HDF was delivered on a daily basis. The baseline characteristics of the patients in the two treatment groups were similar. The primary study outcome--survival until discharge from the ICU or survival for 30 days, whichever was earlier--did not significantly differ between the two groups: 70% after CVVHDF and 87% after S-HDF. The hospital-survival rate after CVVHDF was 63% and that after S-HDF was 83% (P < 0.05). The number of patients who showed renal recovery at the time of discharge from the ICU and the hospital and the duration of the ICU stay significantly differed between the two treatments (P < 0.05). Although there was no significant difference between the mean number of treatments performed per patient, the mean duration of daily treatment in the S-HDF group was 6.5 +/- 1.0 h, which was significantly shorter. Although the total convective volumes--the sum of the replacement-fluid and fluid-removal volumes--did not differ significantly, the dialysate-flow rate was higher in the S-HDF group. Our results suggest that in comparison with conventional continuous RRT, including high-dose CVVHDF, more intensive renal support in the form of postdilution S-HDF will decrease the mortality and accelerate renal recovery in critically ill patients with AKI.
Often, well-controlled plasma glucose levels but high hemoglobin A(1c) levels have been observed at prehemodialysis in diabetic patients. The present study aimed to evaluate this difference between fasting glucose and hemoglobin A(1c) levels. We investigated hemodialysis-induced alterations in the plasma glucose and insulin levels. Based on their glycemic control level at inclusion, subjects were divided into poor control (hemoglobin A(1c)> or =7.0%; n = 8) and good control groups (hemoglobin A(1c) <7.0%; n = 8). We measured their plasma glucose and immunoreactive insulin levels at arterial and venous sites at three time points (predialysis, 2 h and 4 h after starting dialysis); we also studied their daily plasma glucose profiles. In both the groups, the V-site plasma glucose and immunoreactive insulin levels were significantly decreased compared to the A-site levels at each time point. The A-site plasma immunoreactive insulin levels 4 h after dialysis were significantly decreased compared to the levels 2 h after dialysis. Comparison between hemodialysis and non-hemodialysis days revealed that the plasma glucose levels decreased significantly during hemodialysis and significantly increased between predinner and bedtime in the poor control group. The present study confirmed that hemodialysis decreased the plasma glucose and immunoreactive insulin levels. In the poor control group, hyperglycemia appeared posthemodialysis; this was attributed partly to the hemodialysis-induced decrease in the plasma immunoreactive insulin levels. These results suggest that although diet therapy has been effective in diabetic hemodialysis patients, hemodialysis caused hyperglycemia by absolute or relative plasma immunoreactive insulin deficiency.
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.