Associations of endothelial dysfunction and arterial stiffness with intradialytic hypotension and hypertension
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Intradialytic hypotension and hypertension are both independently associated with mortality among persons with end-stage renal disease on hemodialysis. Endothelial dysfunction and arterial stiffness are two possible mechanisms underlying these phenomena, but their association with hemodynamic instability during dialysis has not been evaluated. Thirty patients were recruited from chronic dialysis units at San Francisco General Hospital and San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center. Endothelial dysfunction was assessed with flow-mediated dilation of the brachial artery after upper arm occlusion. Arterial stiffness was assessed using carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity measured by tonometry. Intradialytic hypotension and hypertension were defined as the average decrease in systolic blood pressure (SBP) over 1 week, as well as the frequency over 1 month of hypotension or hypertension. Every 5% decrease in flow-mediated dilation was associated with a 7.5 mmHg decrease in SBP after adjustment for phosphorus, body mass index, atherosclerosis, and ultrafiltration (P=0.02). Every 5 m/s increase in pulse wave velocity was associated with an 8 mmHg increase in SBP after adjustment for predialysis SBP and ultrafiltration (P=0.03). Over 1 month, every 5% lower flow-mediated dilation was associated with a 10% higher frequency of hypotension (P=0.09), and every 5 m/s increase in pulse wave velocity was associated with an 15% higher frequency of hypertension (P=0.02). In a cross-sectional analysis of 30 dialysis patients, endothelial dysfunction and arterial stiffness were independently associated with intradialytic hypotension and intradialytic hypertension, respectively. Elucidating these potential mechanisms of hemodynamic instability during dialysis may facilitate development of treatment strategies specific to this pathophysiology.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".