Effect of high bicarbonate hemodialysis solution on biochemical parameters and anthropometric indices
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Protein energy wasting is an adverse consequence of renal failure, which is correlated with increased mortality and morbidity. Metabolic acidosis has a major role in the development of protein energy wasting in hemodialysis patients. Every effort that could ameliorate this catabolic state would be beneficial to stabilize body composition. The aim of this study was to investigate the possible beneficial effects of high bicarbonate dialysis on anthropometric indices and biochemical parameters of nutrition. METHODS: Fifty-six hemodialysis patients were randomly enrolled in two groups: an intervention group that underwent hemodialysis for 6 months with high bicarbonate dialysate concentration (36 mmol/L, N = 26) and a control group that underwent hemodialysis using a bicarbonate dialysate concentration of 30 mmol/L (N = 30). Biochemical parameters of nutrition and weight, body mass index (BMI), total body water, percent body fat, and other anthropometric indices were measured at the beginning and the end of the trial. FINDINGS: At the end of the 6 month evaluation period, plasma levels of albumin, phosphorus, K, calcium, and bicarbonate showed no significant changes. Body weight and BMI increased significantly in high bicarbonate arm but did not change significantly in the control group. Percent body fat in the arms and legs did not change in intervention arm, but decreased significantly in the controls. DISCUSSION: The results suggest that higher bicarbonate dialysis can have beneficial effects on nutritional status and might protect against loss of fat mass.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".