Literature DB >> 23901838

Safety analysis of intermittent hemodialysis in patients with continuous flow left ventricular assist devices.

Mohammed A Quader1, Dhiren Kumar, Keyur B Shah, Yahya I Fatani, Gundars Katlaps, Vigneshwar Kasirajan.   

Abstract

Dialysis centers adopt a cautious approach when it comes to performing intermittent hemodialysis (HD) on patients with continuous flow (CF) left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) because of the potential for volume flux-related complications and absence of pulsatile blood pressure for monitoring. Many patients have to remain hospitalized because of the inability of the dialysis centers to accept them for outpatient dialysis. In this study, the effect of HD was observed in such patients. Between June 2009 and October 2012, 139 patients received LVADs, of which 10 patients (7%) required intermittent HD postoperatively. The mean age of the patients was 53 ± 14 years and 90% were men. A total of 281 dialysis sessions were administered amounting to 1025 hours of dialysis. The mean systolic blood pressure monitored with Doppler device was 97 ± 18 mmHg. Dialysis durations averaged 218 ± 18 minutes. Mean blood flow rate was 334 ± 38 cc/min, and 2.6 ± 1.1 L was ultrafiltrated during each session. Only 15 (5.3%) sessions were interrupted or terminated in six patients. The reasons for termination were symptomatic hypotension--6 (2.1%), asymptomatic hypotension--3 (1%), ventricular tachycardia--1 (0.36%), dialysis machine malfunction--2 (0.7%), low phosphorus--2 (0.7%), and abdominal cramps--1 (0.36%). Volume expansion was necessary on three occasions. Low-flow device alarms were registered during two (0.71%) sessions. The results showed no serious adverse effects or deaths.
© 2013 International Society for Hemodialysis.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Hemodialysis; LVAD; adverse events; dialysis termination

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23901838     DOI: 10.1111/hdi.12073

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hemodial Int        ISSN: 1492-7535            Impact factor:   1.812


  7 in total

Review 1.  Renal dysfunction and chronic mechanical circulatory support: from patient selection to long-term management and prognosis.

Authors:  Meredith A Brisco; Jeffrey M Testani; Jennifer L Cook
Journal:  Curr Opin Cardiol       Date:  2016-05       Impact factor: 2.161

Review 2.  Nephrology Considerations in the Management of Durable and Temporary Mechanical Circulatory Support.

Authors:  Carl P Walther; Andrew B Civitello; Kenneth K Liao; Sankar D Navaneethan
Journal:  Kidney360       Date:  2022-01-14

3.  Heart failure management in dialysis patients: Many treatment options with no clear evidence.

Authors:  Bethany Roehm; Gaurav Gulati; Daniel E Weiner
Journal:  Semin Dial       Date:  2020-04-13       Impact factor: 3.455

Review 4.  Left Ventricular Assist Devices and the Kidney.

Authors:  Daniel W Ross; Gerin R Stevens; Rimda Wanchoo; David T Majure; Sandeep Jauhar; Harold A Fernandez; Massini Merzkani; Kenar D Jhaveri
Journal:  Clin J Am Soc Nephrol       Date:  2017-10-25       Impact factor: 8.237

Review 5.  Left ventricular assist devices: a kidney's perspective.

Authors:  T R Tromp; N de Jonge; J A Joles
Journal:  Heart Fail Rev       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 4.214

6.  Implantable Ventricular Assist Device Use and Outcomes in People With End-Stage Renal Disease.

Authors:  Carl P Walther; Jingbo Niu; Wolfgang C Winkelmayer; Faisal H Cheema; Ajith P Nair; Jeffrey A Morgan; Savitri E Fedson; Anita Deswal; Sankar D Navaneethan
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2018-07-06       Impact factor: 5.501

7.  Peritoneal dialysis improves quality-of-life in a left ventricular assist device destination therapy patient-a case report.

Authors:  Claire J Koppel; Jacqueline T Jonker; Wieneke M Michels; Saskia L M A Beeres
Journal:  Eur Heart J Case Rep       Date:  2021-07-29
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.