MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1964926328 · doi:10.1093/ndt/gfm064

Abdominal manifestations associated with use of a surface-treated AN69 membrane and ACEI during haemodialysis

2007· letter· en· W1964926328 sur OpenAlexaff
Véronique D. Roux, Martin Plaisance

Notice bibliographique

RevueNephrology Dialysis Transplantation · 2007
Typeletter
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueDialysis and Renal Disease Management
Établissements canadiensCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineHemodialysisKidney diseaseInternal medicineUrologyIntensive care medicine

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Sir, Dialyzer reactions are classified in two types: type A and type B. Type A, or ‘anaphylactoid’, reactions are mostly caused by leachable substances from the dialyzer (i.e. ethylene oxide) or by bacterial contamination. Type B reactions are mediated by complement activation and are becoming less frequent with the use of more biocompatible synthetic membranes. The anaphylactoid reaction seen when haemodialysed patients receive an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI), while using an AN69 dialyzer, is well described [ 1 , 2 ]. To our knowledge, however, there are only three cases of adverse events associated with ACEI and the surfaced-treated AN69 membrane. The first patient experienced an anaphylactoid reaction after a single dose of captopril [ 3 ]. The other two patients had a more subtle presentation, with abdominal pain and diarrhoea [ 4 ]. We report here on another patient who had intestinal manifestations and hypotension in the same context. An 81-year-old man with end-stage renal disease secondary to hypertensive nephrosclerosis has been on chronic haemodialysis since February 2006. He is dialysed for 4 h three times a week, with a synthetic polyarylethersulphone/polyamide membrane (Polyflux 17L, Gambro). He also suffers from atherosclerotic cardiac and vascular disease, congestive heart failure (left ventricular ejection fraction of 40%) and atrial fibrillation. His medication includes aspirin, warfarin, metoprolol, lisinopril, furosemide, erythropoietin, intravenous iron, allopurinol and clonazepam. The patient was taking a combination of hydralazine and nitrate, which was replaced by a small dose of lisinopril (2.5 mg once daily) shortly after he began haemodialysis. The patient underwent ophthalmic surgery in May 2006. His usual dialyzer was replaced by a surface-treated AN69 membrane (Nephral ST 400, Gambro) for the next dialysis treatments. On 15 May 2006, the patient presented with a hypotensive episode. His blood pressure was 114/64 just before the start of haemodialysis, and dropped to 82/39 about 1h 30 min later. Boluses of normal saline were given, but the dialysis had to be stopped because of persisting hypotension. The patient finally quit the dialysis unit with a blood pressure of 111/75. On the next session, two days later, he once again experienced a blood pressure drop from 116/69 to 86/48 in the first hour of dialysis. This time, however, he also complained of severe abdominal cramps and had massive diarrhoea. The session was stopped immediately, with symptoms resolving spontaneously. The dialyzer was changed back to Polyflux 17L at the next dialysis, with no recurrence of hypotension or intestinal symptoms. At the time, we did not link the ST-AN69 membrane to the patient's manifestations. On 23 and 25 October 2006, a Nephral ST 400 (from a different lot) was reintroduced because of a temporary contraindication to anticoagulation (fistulography with angioplasty). Less than 1 h after the beginning of the dialysis, abdominal pain and diarrhoea recurred. The patient had no hypotension this time. The surface-treated AN69 membrane was suspected to be responsible and the next haemodialysis was started with the patient's former dialyzer, with no other adverse event. Lisinopril was continued. The AN69 membrane has one of the highest electronegativity of all dialysis membranes, due to the methylsulphonate radicals. This electronegativity is known to enhance bradykinin production [ 5 , 6 ]. By preventing degradation of bradykinin, ACEI can raise bradykinin to potentially harmful levels (as much as 20–30-fold). Polyethyleneimine (PEI) is a polycationic saline solution used to coat the surface of AN69 membrane, making them less electronegative. This surface-treated membrane has been used safely in patients also receiving ACEI [ 7 ]. However, we found three cases of adverse events occurring in this setting that resolved after changing the dialyzer [ 3 , 4 ]. In our patient taking a small dose of ACEI, the recurrence of symptoms with rechallenge is also in favour of a dialyzer-related reaction. The proposed explanation was an imperfect covering of the negative charges on the membrane by PEI, which induces a conformational change in the Hageman factor. This facilitates the binding of Hageman factor and kininogen with prekallikrein, thus activating a reaction that leads to formation of bradykinins [ 3 , 5 ]. In conclusion, we suggest caution when using a surface-treated AN69 membrane in a patient who is also taking ACEI. A wide spectrum of hypersensitivity manifestations may occur, ranging from anaphylactoid reaction to mild abdominal pain or diarrhoea. The dialyzer should be replaced as soon as one suspects a hypersensitivity reaction associated to surface-treated AN69 membrane. Conflict of interest statement . None declared.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Étude de cas · Signal consensuel: Étude de cas
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,013
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,014

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,009
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,002
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0020,001
Communication savante0,0020,002
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0130,010
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0040,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,017
Tête enseignante GPT0,239
Écart entre enseignants0,222 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeÉtude de cas
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations6
Publié2007
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentnon

Explorer davantage

Même revueNephrology Dialysis TransplantationMême sujetDialysis and Renal Disease ManagementTravaux en français237 207