MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Nocturnal but not Short Hours Quotidian Hemodialysis Requires an Elevated Dialysate Calcium Concentration

2003· article· en· W2160519477 on OpenAlexaff
Fayez Alhejaili, Claude Kortas, Rosemary Leitch, A.Paul Heidenheim, Laurie Clement, Gihad Nesrallah, Robert M. Lindsay

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Society of Nephrology · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDialysis and Renal Disease Management
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHemodialysisMedicineNocturnalDialysisCohortInternal medicineCalciumComorbidityUrologyGastroenterology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Interest in quotidian (daily) hemodialysis (HD) is growing. Some advocate short-hours high-efficiency daily HD (SDH) and others long-hours slow-flow nocturnal HD (NH) while the patient is asleep, both being used 5 to 7 d/week. The London Daily/Nocturnal Hemodialysis Study was the first attempt to obtain data of SDH and NH that may be compared with conventional thrice weekly HD (CH). This was a 4-yr observational study designed to enter and follow 40 patients: 10 receiving SDH, 10 receiving NH, and 20 receiving CH. The CH patients were cohort control subjects matched for each SDH and NH patient by age, gender, comorbidity, and original dialysis modality (in-center, home, self-care, or satellite HD). All SDH and NH treatments were at home. Data collection to December 2001 was analyzed. Then enrollment had been completed and all patients had been followed for 15 mo, eight SDH plus six NH for 18 mo, seven SDH plus six NH for 21 mo, and seven SDH and five NH for 24 mo. This report gives data on calcium and phosphorus metabolism in these patients. All patients were initially dialyzed against a 1.25-mmol/L calcium bath. Predialysis serum calcium levels became lower in NH versus SDH patients by the first month and at 9 mo were 2.67 +/- 0.25 mmol/L (M +/- SD) in SDH, 2.40 +/- 0.16 mmol/L in NH, and 2.52 +/- 0.21 mmol/L in CH (SDH versus NH, P = 0.038; SDH versus CH versus NH, NS). Predialysis phosphorus levels were better controlled by NH than by SDH or CH, and with NH, all phosphate binders were discontinued. By 12 mo, a rise in bone alkaline phosphatase was seen in NH patients (but not in SDH or CH patients), which peaked at 15 to 18 mo (NH 191 IU/L +/- 70; SDH 82 +/- 34; CH 80 +/- 36; P < 0.002) and similarly with intact parathyroid hormone (iPTH) levels (NH 159 pmol/L +/- 75; SDH 13.1 +/- 10; CH 18 +/- 18; P < 0.00001). Because of these changes, the dialysate calcium concentration was increased to 1.75 mmol/L for the NH patients. Postdialysis calcium then rose to 2.57 +/- 0.21, and alkaline phosphatase and iPTH normalized completely by 21 mo. These observations prompted mass balance studies that showed that a 1.25-mmol/L calcium dialysate was associated with a mean net calcium loss of 2.1 mmol/h of dialysis time, whereas 1.75-mmol/L calcium dialysate provides a net gain of 3.7 mmol/h. In addition, the mass balance studies showed that phosphate removal by NH (43.5 +/- 20.7 mmol) was significantly (P < 0.05) higher than by SHD (24.2 +/- 13.9 mmol) but not by CH (34.0 +/- 8.7 mmol) on a per-treatment basis. With the increased frequency of treatments provided by quotidian dialysis, the weekly phosphorus removal (261.2 +/- 124.2 mmol) by NH was significantly higher than by SDH (P = 0.014) and CH (P = 0.03). This allowed the discontinuation of P binders in the NH group, which in turn eliminated approximately 8 g elemental Ca/wk oral intake. This, together with a 4 g elemental Ca/wk dialysate loss induced by a 1.25-mmol/L Ca bath, explains the changes in Ca, alkaline phosphatase, and iPTH seen in the NH patients. The SDH patients have weekly dialysis times similar to CH and still require P binders and do not become Ca deficient using 1.25-mmol/L Ca dialysate. With NH but not SDH, an elevated dialysate Ca concentration is required.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.843
Threshold uncertainty score0.485

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.269 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations104
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Society of NephrologySame topicDialysis and Renal Disease ManagementFrench-language works237,207