BACKGROUND:Fluid overload is the main determinant of hypertension and left ventricular hypertrophy in hemodialysis patients. However, assessment of fluid overload can be difficult in clinical practice. We investigated whether objective measurement of fluid overload with bioimpedance spectroscopy is helpful in optimizing fluid status. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, and controlled study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: 156 hemodialysis patients from 2 centers were randomly assigned to 2 groups. INTERVENTION: Dry weight was assessed by routine clinical practice and fluid overload was assessed by bioimpedance spectroscopy in both groups. In the intervention group (n = 78), fluid overload information was provided to treating physicians and used to adjust fluid removal during dialysis. In the control group (n = 78), fluid overload information was not provided to treating physicians and fluid removal during dialysis was adjusted according to usual clinical practice. OUTCOMES: The primary outcome was regression of left ventricular mass index during a 1-year follow-up. Improvement in blood pressure and left atrial volume were the main secondary outcomes. Changes in arterial stiffness parameters were additional outcomes. MEASUREMENTS: Fluid overload was assessed twice monthly in the intervention group and every 3 months in the control group before the mid- or end-week hemodialysis session. Echocardiography, 48-hour ambulatory blood pressure measurement, and pulse wave analysis were performed at baseline and 12 months. RESULTS:Baseline fluid overload parameters in the intervention and control groups were 1.45 ± 1.11 (SD) and 1.44 ± 1.12 L, respectively (P = 0.7). Time-averaged fluid overload values significantly decreased in the intervention group (mean difference, -0.5 ± 0.8 L), but not in the control group (mean difference, 0.1 ± 1.2 L), and the mean difference between groups was -0.5 L (95% CI, -0.8 to -0.2; P = 0.001). Left ventricular mass index regressed from 131 ± 36 to 116 ± 29 g/m(2) (P < 0.001) in the intervention group, but not in the control group (121 ± 35 to 120 ± 30 g/m(2); P = 0.9); mean difference between groups was -10.2 g/m(2) (95% CI, -19.2 to -1.17 g/m(2); P = 0.04). In addition, values for left atrial volume index, blood pressure, and arterial stiffness parameters decreased in the intervention group, but not in the control group. LIMITATIONS: Ambulatory blood pressure data were not available for all patients. CONCLUSIONS: Assessment of fluid overload with bioimpedance spectroscopy provides better management of fluid status, leading to regression of left ventricular mass index, decrease in blood pressure, and improvement in arterial stiffness.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Fluid overload is the main determinant of hypertension and left ventricular hypertrophy in hemodialysis patients. However, assessment of fluid overload can be difficult in clinical practice. We investigated whether objective measurement of fluid overload with bioimpedance spectroscopy is helpful in optimizing fluid status. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, and controlled study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: 156 hemodialysis patients from 2 centers were randomly assigned to 2 groups. INTERVENTION: Dry weight was assessed by routine clinical practice and fluid overload was assessed by bioimpedance spectroscopy in both groups. In the intervention group (n = 78), fluid overload information was provided to treating physicians and used to adjust fluid removal during dialysis. In the control group (n = 78), fluid overload information was not provided to treating physicians and fluid removal during dialysis was adjusted according to usual clinical practice. OUTCOMES: The primary outcome was regression of left ventricular mass index during a 1-year follow-up. Improvement in blood pressure and left atrial volume were the main secondary outcomes. Changes in arterial stiffness parameters were additional outcomes. MEASUREMENTS: Fluid overload was assessed twice monthly in the intervention group and every 3 months in the control group before the mid- or end-week hemodialysis session. Echocardiography, 48-hour ambulatory blood pressure measurement, and pulse wave analysis were performed at baseline and 12 months. RESULTS: Baseline fluid overload parameters in the intervention and control groups were 1.45 ± 1.11 (SD) and 1.44 ± 1.12 L, respectively (P = 0.7). Time-averaged fluid overload values significantly decreased in the intervention group (mean difference, -0.5 ± 0.8 L), but not in the control group (mean difference, 0.1 ± 1.2 L), and the mean difference between groups was -0.5 L (95% CI, -0.8 to -0.2; P = 0.001). Left ventricular mass index regressed from 131 ± 36 to 116 ± 29 g/m(2) (P < 0.001) in the intervention group, but not in the control group (121 ± 35 to 120 ± 30 g/m(2); P = 0.9); mean difference between groups was -10.2 g/m(2) (95% CI, -19.2 to -1.17 g/m(2); P = 0.04). In addition, values for left atrial volume index, blood pressure, and arterial stiffness parameters decreased in the intervention group, but not in the control group. LIMITATIONS: Ambulatory blood pressure data were not available for all patients. CONCLUSIONS: Assessment of fluid overload with bioimpedance spectroscopy provides better management of fluid status, leading to regression of left ventricular mass index, decrease in blood pressure, and improvement in arterial stiffness.
Authors: Jeffrey Perl; Laura M Dember; Joanne M Bargman; Teri Browne; David M Charytan; Jennifer E Flythe; LaTonya J Hickson; Adriana M Hung; Michel Jadoul; Timmy Chang Lee; Klemens B Meyer; Hamid Moradi; Tariq Shafi; Isaac Teitelbaum; Leslie P Wong; Christopher T Chan Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2017-03-17 Impact factor: 8.237