BACKGROUND: Malnutrition, inflammation, and atherosclerosis (MIA syndrome) are common in end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients. Each component of MIA syndrome is the predictor of outcomes in ESRD patients. In this cross-sectional study, we aimed to compare both dialysis modalities for MIA syndrome components. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Thirty hemodialysis (HD) (mean age 44 +/- 11 years, 14 male and 16 female, mean time on dialysis: 31.0 +/- 19.0 months) and 30 continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) patients (41 +/- 9 years, 12 male and 18 female, mean time on dialysis: 25.5 +/- 21.5 months) were included. In order to determine malnutrition in ESRD patients, serum albumin level and anthropometric measurements were used. For inflammation, serum C-reactive protein level, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, and fibrinogen levels were measured. Mean-carotid artery intima media thickness (m-CIMT), presence of carotid plaque and serum homocysteine level were used to determine atherosclerosis. RESULTS: Five CAPD patients (16%) and one HD patient (3%) was hypoalbuminemic. HD and CAPD groups were similar for inflammation. Mean-CIMT and serum homocysteine level were higher in HD patients than CAPD patients. There was a positive correlation between homocysteine and m-CIMT. CONCLUSION: Before choosing renal replacement therapy, malnutrition, inflammation, and atherosclerosis parameters must be investigated in ESRD patients. Hemodialysis seems to be more advantageous for malnutrition components than CAPD. Both dialysis modalities seem to be similar for inflammation, and CAPD modality has superiority for atherosclerosis. Before choosing the type of renal replacement therapy, assessment of MIA syndrome components could be useful for individualization of the decision on which dialytic modality is appropriate in ESRD patients.
BACKGROUND:Malnutrition, inflammation, and atherosclerosis (MIA syndrome) are common in end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients. Each component of MIA syndrome is the predictor of outcomes in ESRDpatients. In this cross-sectional study, we aimed to compare both dialysis modalities for MIA syndrome components. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Thirty hemodialysis (HD) (mean age 44 +/- 11 years, 14 male and 16 female, mean time on dialysis: 31.0 +/- 19.0 months) and 30 continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) patients (41 +/- 9 years, 12 male and 18 female, mean time on dialysis: 25.5 +/- 21.5 months) were included. In order to determine malnutrition in ESRDpatients, serum albumin level and anthropometric measurements were used. For inflammation, serum C-reactive protein level, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, and fibrinogen levels were measured. Mean-carotid artery intima media thickness (m-CIMT), presence of carotid plaque and serum homocysteine level were used to determine atherosclerosis. RESULTS: Five CAPD patients (16%) and one HDpatient (3%) was hypoalbuminemic. HD and CAPD groups were similar for inflammation. Mean-CIMT and serum homocysteine level were higher in HDpatients than CAPD patients. There was a positive correlation between homocysteine and m-CIMT. CONCLUSION: Before choosing renal replacement therapy, malnutrition, inflammation, and atherosclerosis parameters must be investigated in ESRDpatients. Hemodialysis seems to be more advantageous for malnutrition components than CAPD. Both dialysis modalities seem to be similar for inflammation, and CAPD modality has superiority for atherosclerosis. Before choosing the type of renal replacement therapy, assessment of MIA syndrome components could be useful for individualization of the decision on which dialytic modality is appropriate in ESRDpatients.
Authors: Julio A Lamprea-Montealegre; Brad C Astor; Robin L McClelland; Ian H de Boer; Gregory L Burke; Christopher T Sibley; Daniel O'Leary; A Richey Sharrett; Moyses Szklo Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2012-08-09 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Sean Cai; Ron Wald; Djeven P Deva; Mercedeh Kiaii; Ming-Yen Ng; Gauri R Karur; Oblugbenga Bello; Zhuo Jun Li; Jonathon Leipsic; Laura Jimenez-Juan; Anish Kirpalani; Kim A Connelly; Andrew T Yan Journal: J Nephrol Date: 2019-11-14 Impact factor: 3.902
Authors: K Turkmen; H Z Tonbul; F M Erdur; I Guney; H Kayikcioglu; L Altintepe; O Ozbek; M I Yilmaz; A Gaipov; S Turk; A Covic; M Kanbay Journal: Int Urol Nephrol Date: 2012-09-23 Impact factor: 2.370
Authors: Marta Opalinska; Tomasz Stompor; Dorota Pach; Renata Mikolajczak; Danuta Fedak; Marcin Krzanowski; Tomasz Rakowski; Anna Sowa-Staszczak; Boguslaw Glowa; Piotr Garnuszek; Michał Maurin; Urszula Karczmarczyk; Władysław Sulowicz; Alicja Hubalewska-Dydejczyk Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2012-01-12 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Hye Sung Won; Su Jin Choi; Yu Seon Yun; Ok-Ran Shin; Yoon Ho Ko; Young Soo Kim; Sun Ae Yoon; Young Ok Kim Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2014-03-17 Impact factor: 3.411