Inter- and intradialytic fluid volume changes and vascular stiffness parameters in patients on hemodialysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Whether fluid overload is associated with vascular stiffness parameters in hemodialysis (HD) patients has not been fully elucidated. We hypothesized that interdialytic fluid accumulation increases vascular stiffness parameters, which improves with intradialytic ultrafiltration. METHODS: Fluid overload and vascular stiffness parameters were assessed in 39 HD patients (20 with and 19 without fluid overload) and compared to 26 healthy controls. Fluid status was assessed 15 minutes before the mid-week HD session by bio-impedance spectroscopy. Following this, ambulatory pulse wave velocity (PWV) and augmentation index (AIx) were measured for 24 hours before another mid-week HD session and then for 5 hours starting 30 minutes before and ending 30 minutes after the session. RESULTS: HD patients had significant fluid overload compared to healthy controls (2.0±2.4 vs. -0.2±0.6 L; P<0.001) and baseline PWV was higher (10.3±1.7 vs. 8.8±1.4 m/s; P<0.001). There was no significant difference between PWV and AIx in fluid overloaded and non-fluid overloaded HD patients prior to, or during the HD session. AIx of non-fluid overloaded HD patients improved after the HD session (P = 0.04). Average 24-hour AIx was higher in fluid overloaded HD patients (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Inter- and intradialytic changes in fluid volume were only weakly related to vascular stiffness parameters in HD patients. Although there was a modest reduction in AIx in non-fluid overloaded HD patients after the dialysis session, fluid removal did not improve vascular stiffness parameters during the HD session. We speculate that the effect of fluid overload correction on vascular stiffness parameters requires long-term adjustments in the vasculature.
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".