SP647INTRADIALYTIC HYPERTENSION AND COGNITIVE FUNCTION IN INDONESIAN END STAGE RENAL DISEASE PATIENTS UNDERGOING HEMODIALYSIS- IS THERE A RELATION?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: Intradialytic Hypertension (IDH) is highly prevalent in Indonesian End Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) patients and is associated with adverse clinical outcomes. Patients with IDH exhibit imbalances in endothelial-derived vasoregulators, indirectly causing endothelial cell dysfunction and may cause structural abnormalities in the brain. One of the major consequences of this is cognitive impairment (CI). There have been numerous studies reporting about cognitive function in hemodialysis patients, however very little information is available about the relationship between IDH and cognitive function. The aim of this study is to find the relationship between IDH and CI in Indonesian ESRD patients undergoing routine hemodialysis. METHODS: A cross sectional study was carried out in three hemodialysis clinics in Jakarta, Indonesia. Patients which have undergone hemodialysis for > 3 months were included. IDH was defined as >10 mmHg increase in systolic BP in at least four of six prior consecutive hemodialysis sessions. Cognitive Function was assessed using Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA-Ina) containing 7 domains. CI was defined as MoCA score <24. Bivariate analysis was done using Chi-Square test. RESULTS: A total of 93 patients were included in this study, out of which 61 (65.6%) were male. The mean age of the patients was 51.5 (±12.7) years. The etiology of chronic kidney disease is mostly due to hypertension (59.1%) followed by diabetes (26.9%). There were 40 (43.0%) patients that had IDH. There were 65 (69.9%) patients that had CI. The median scores of visuospatial, naming, attention, language, abstraction, delayed recall and orientation domains were 3 (0-5), 3 (0-3), 4 (0-6), 2 (0-2), 1 (0-2), 0 (0-5) and 6 (0-6) respectively. Patients with IDH were significantly more likely to have CI (OR = 3.09; p = 0.021). CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that there was significant association between IDH and CI in Indonesian ESRD patients undergoing routine hemodialysis. As physicians, we should pay more attention to IDH in order to reduce the likelihood for cognitive dysfunction. However, larger longitudinal studies need to be carried out to confirm this result.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".