Aerobic exercise increases phosphate removal during hemodialysis: A controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous studies have suggested that exercise during hemodialysis (HD) could increase the efficacy of solute removal, although this hypothesis has not been conclusively evaluated. The goal of this study was to compare the removal of low-molecular weight solutes between HD sessions, with and without aerobic exercise. It was a controlled clinical trial, including HD patients in a randomly cross-over design, such that each patient received a HD session with exercise (intervention) and the next one without exercise (control), three times each. In the exercise sessions, patients pedaled on a cycle ergometer for 60 minutes. The total mass of removed urea, potassium, creatinine, and phosphate were calculated from the solutes concentration in dialysate (continuous spent sampling of dialysate). This was evaluated in a total of 132 HD sessions of patients with a mean age of 54 ± 15 years, 75% male and HD vintage of 3 (2-13) years. Phosphate removal in dialysate during intervention sessions was significantly higher (5.6 [2.5-18.9] vs. 5.1 [1.5-11.2] mg/min) than during control sessions, P = 0.04. The median mass of phosphate removed during control HD session was 1226 (367.8-2697.2) vs. 1348.6 (613.0-4536.2) mg/session during intervention sessions. The exercise did not modify the removal of urea (control 122.6 [61.3-286.0] vs. exercise 112.4 [51.1-250.3] mg/min, P = 0.44), creatinine (control 5.6 [2.5-13.8] vs. exercise 5.6 [2.5-12.8] mg/min, P = 0.49), or potassium (control 13.3 [11.2-15.8] vs. exercise 13.8 [6.6-15.8] mEq/min, P = 0.49). Aerobic exercise during HD increases the efficacy of phosphate removal, without changing urea, creatinine and potassium removal. The implications of this finding in mineral and bone disease and cardiovascular disease need to be evaluated on future clinical trials.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".