| Literature DB >> 25793464 |
Manuela Ferrario1, Ulrich Moissl2, Francesco Garzotto3, Dinna N Cruz3, Ciro Tetta2, Maria G Signorini1, Claudio Ronco3, Aileen Grassmann2, Sergio Cerutti1, Stefano Guzzetti4.
Abstract
The hypothesis that central volume plays a key role in the source of low frequency (LF) oscillations of heart rate variability (HRV) was tested in a population of end stage renal disease patients undergoing conventional hemodialysis (HD) treatment, and thus subject to large fluid shifts and sympathetic activation. Fluid overload (FO) in 58 chronic HD patients was assessed by whole body bioimpedance measurements before the midweek HD session. Heart Rate Variability (HRV) was measured using 24-hour Holter electrocardiogram recordings starting before the same HD treatment. Time domain and frequency domain analyses were performed on HRV signals. Patients were retrospectively classified in three groups according to tertiles of FO normalized to the extracellular water (FO/ECW%). These groups were also compared after stratification by diabetes mellitus. Patients with the low to medium hydration status before the treatment (i.e. 1st and 2nd FO/ECW% tertiles) showed a significant increase in LF power during last 30 min of HD compared to dialysis begin, while no significant change in LF power was seen in the third group (i.e. those with high pre-treatment hydration values). In conclusion, several mechanisms can generate LF oscillations in the cardiovascular system, including baroreflex feedback loops and central oscillators. However, the current results emphasize the role played by the central volume in determining the power of LF oscillations.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25793464 PMCID: PMC4368684 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0120167
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Data of analyzed patients.
| 1st tertile | 2nd tertile | 3rd tertile | |
|---|---|---|---|
| # | 19 | 20 | 19 |
| FO/ECW% | 5.3 (1.6, 7.3) | 13.2 (11.5, 15.8) | 24.0 (19.0, 28.9) |
| Age [years] | 62 (47, 75) | 67 (60, 73) | 70 (57, 77) |
| Gender [M/F] | 11/8 | 15/5 | 10/9 |
| Dyalisis Vintage [years] | 4 (2, 6) | 4 (2, 9) | 9 (6, 11) |
| Treatment time [min] | 236 8234, 244) | 236 (233, 239) | 237 (233, 243) |
| UFR[L/hr] | 0.67 (0.47, 0.84) | 0.71 (0.32, 0.90) | 0.81 (0.54, 0.89) |
| SBP [mmHg] at HD beginning | 127 (120, 145) | 148 (140, 159) | 142 (131, 151) |
| DBP [mmHg] at HD beginning | 69 (65, 75) | 75 (62, 84) | 66 (61, 72) |
| SBP [mmHg] after 3hr HD | 132 (123, 146) | 153 (133, 163) | 134 (130, 163) |
| DBP [mmHg] after 3hr HD | 78 (68, 89) | 75 (70, 86) | 70 (64, 77) |
| Diabetes | 6 | 5 | 3 |
| PVD | 9 | 8 | 8 |
| CHF | 2 | 3 | 5 |
| LVH | 14 | 13 | 14 |
| Hypertension | 19 | 19 | 18 |
| beta-blockers | 8 | 5 | 8 |
| ACE inhibitors | 7 | 6 | 6 |
| Calcium antagonist | 7 | 12 | 7 |
Values are expressed as median (25°,75° percentile) and the occurence of comorbidities and drug prescription are reported
* one-way ANOVA p<0.05, post hoc comparison p-value <0.05 vs 1st tertile and 2nd tertile
§ kruskall wallis ANOVA p<0.05, post hoc comparison p-value <0.05 vs 2nd tertile.
SBP = systolic blood pressure; DBP = diastolic blood pressure.
Values of time and frequency domain indices estimated during the first 15 min (baseline) and last 30 min of the HD session.
| 1st FO/ECW% tertile | 2nd FO/ECW% tertile | 3rd FO/ECW% tertile | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BL | last 30'HD | Δ = BL-last30'HD | BL | last 30'HD | Δ = BL-last30'HD | BL | last 30'HD | Δ = BL-last30'HD | |
|
| 66.2 (60.7, 74.7) | 72.3 (60.4, 79.7) | 2.1(−2.0,8.6) | 69.0 (58.6, 78.9) | 68.0 (61.3, 77.8) | 2.1(−3.4,6.9) | 67.6 (61.4, 73.4) | 67.1 (61.1, 79.2) | 0.5(−2.2,5.1) |
|
| 40.6 (30.6, 53.0) | 43.5 (37.2, 71.7) | 9.4(−3.3,21.4) | 31.1 (25.9, 54.4) | 58.6 (31.8, 80.6) | 18.6(0.8,34.8) | 25.9 (20.8, 46.4) | 39.8 (24.1, 62.2) | 5.0(−5.3,21.8) |
|
| 21.5 (6.1, 34.6) |
| −2.3(−9.5,10.6) | 12.6 (5.0, 21.2) |
| 4.2(−2.3,17.8) | 8.6 (6.1, 11.7) |
| 1.6(−3.0,3.6) |
|
| 895 (516, 1216) | 871 (572, 1684) | 90.0(−43.9,447.7) | 1033 (505, 1567) | 922 (561, 1513) | 78.0(−388.0,380.7) | 1143 (577, 1585) | 759 (486, 1344) | 50.4(−633.5,365.8) |
|
| 1.02 (0.22, 3.64) | 0.76 (0.33, 9.44) | 0.04(−1.14,0.55) | 0.90 (0.23, 6.36) | 3.37 (0.63, 16.50) | 0.41(−1.29,5.31) | 1.02 (0.21, 4.45) | 0.82 (0.09, 15.08) | 0.02(−0.85,1.36) |
|
|
| 560 (362, 2157) |
|
| 653 (269, 2042) |
|
| 320 (87, 721) | 45 (−235, 317) |
|
| 72.7 (44.7, 348.8) | 109.1 (43.8, 498.1) |
| 69.8 (30.1, 131.1) | 205.5 (94.5, 653.5) |
| 45.2 (18.1, 118.0) | 42.6 (19.1, 303.9) | 4.5 (−11.7, 101.9) |
|
| 46.6 (30.6, 169.1) | 36.0 (9.0, 121.0) | −6.2 (−81.3,5.6) | 39.3 (16.6, 55.1) | 65.0 (31.6, 139.3) |
| 44.9 (21.4, 102.4) | 45.8 (12.6, 126.3) | −2.8 (−36.0, 14.8) |
|
| 32.9 (23.3, 41.0) | 39.0 (26.6, 50.7) | 6.8 (−0.7,14.7) | 33.3 (16.3, 42.8) | 41.6 (24.4, 51.1) | 6.8 (−7.9, 16.1) | 30.3 (18.8, 40.5) | 25.6 (11.0, 47.2) | 3.2 (−13.1,14.4) |
|
| 19.0 (7.3, 27.5) | 11.0 (5.4, 16.1) |
| 14.9 (8.7, 29.6) | 17.3 (6.4, 23.9) | 3.4 (−6.0, 8.0) | 35.2 (13.4, 45.3) | 23.6 (6.4, 31.0) | −6.4 (−20.7,1.1) |
|
| 1.67 (1.01, 3.03) |
|
| 1.77 (0.76, 3.20) | 2.81 (1.35, 6.05) | 0.17 (−0.57, 3.28) | 0.95 (0.57, 1.99) |
| 0.26 (−0.23,1.31) |
Patients are grouped in tertiles of pre-dialysis FO/ECW%.
Comparisons between baseline (BL) and last 30 min of hemodialysis (HD)
# Wilcoxon signed rank test p-value< 0.05, or
§ p-value<0.01 (italics)
*Kruskal–Wallis one-way analysis of variance p<0.05, post hoc comparison p-value <0.05 vs 1st tertile
°Kruskal–Wallis one-way analysis of variance p<0.05, post hoc comparison p-value <0.05 vs 2nd tertile
The bold values mark the indices, which significantly differ among groups.
Values of time and frequency domain indices estimated during the first 15 min (baseline) and the last 30 min of the HD session.
| 1st FO/ECW% tertile | 2nd FO/ECW% tertile | 3rd FO/ECW% tertile | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BL | last 30'HD | Δ = BL-last30'HD | BL | last 30'HD | Δ = BL-last30'HD | BL | last 30'HD | Δ = BL-last30'HD | |
|
| 68.5 (60.1, 74.2) | 72.3 (59.1, 80.2) | −1.1(−2.2,8.1) | 66.6 (58.0, 79.2) | 69.0 (61.3, 79.1) | 2.2(−3.6,6.8) | 68.2 (60.9, 74.1) | 65.9 (61.2, 81.0) | −0.4(−1.9,4.9) |
|
| 41.2 (37.0, 54.8) | 43.5 (37.7, 76.5) | 2.9(−3.3,26.3) | 35.0 (27.5, 51.6) | 67.0 (38.5, 83.7) |
| 27.1 (20.5, 50.7) | 41.3 (26.5, 71.2) | 3.1(−4.8,25.5) |
|
| 21.5 (13.9, 29.8) | 19.7 (11.1, 36.7) | −4.1(−9.3,16.3) | 12.3 (4.9, 17.6) | 14.5 (12.5, 52.2) | 6.3(−0.6,23.2) | 9.5 (6.4, 12.9) | 9.8 (7.1, 14.3) | −0.5(−3.0,3.2) |
|
| 790 (477, 1228) | 772 (523, 1628) | 89.0(−45.3,347.5) | 990 (483, 1598) | 906 (561, 1501) | 119.4(−388.0,380.7) | 1171 (546, 1527) | 724 (491, 1893) | 53.1(−211.0,314.3) |
|
| 1.13 (0.28, 3.13) | 0.79 (0.22, 4.65) | 0.00(−0.95,3.16) | 0.77 (0.20, 6.36) | 3.81 (0.61, 18.43) | 0.55(−0.61,4.98) | 0.72 (0.12, 5.18) | 0.60 (0.11, 14.74) | 0.00(−0.78,0.39) |
|
| 640 (318, 833) | 710 (355, 2177) | 301 (92, 1374) | 302 (64, 695) | 795 (466, 2231) |
| 262 (95, 485) | 342 (135, 657) | 72 (−531, 280) |
|
| 122.9 (44.0, 391.8) | 151.5 (53.1, 657.9) |
| 52.3 (29.7, 189.3) | 236.1 (73.6, 780.0) | 56.4(−2.9,373) | 45.8 (18.7, 142.7) | 39.0 (19.3, 326.8) | 2.4(−17.7,84.0) |
|
| 46.6 (23.0, 187.7) | 43.8 (14.0, 118.2) | −4.1 (−89.2, 3.8) | 37.3 (15.6, 71.8) | 65.0 (32.7, 139.3) | 9.9 (−29.8,41.7) | 39.9 (18.9, 152.4) | 30.7 (9.3, 121.6) | −4.5(−34.0,8.9) |
|
| 26.5 (19.7, 44.7) | 40.6 (32.6, 54.5) |
| 26.2 (14.8, 41.5) | 42.8 (21.2, 54.6) | 3.7(−7.9,16.1) | 30.9 (18.4, 41.6) | 28.4 (11.6, 47.0) | 5.1(−12.3,13.5) |
|
| 14.1 (6.3, 25.0) | 9.7 (3.8, 14.5) |
| 14.5 (8.1, 30.2) | 11.8 (5.3, 26.9) | −2.1(−6.0,8.1) | 33.0 (10.8, 42.6) | 20.4 (4.8, 34.6) | −4.4(−16.1,1.3) |
|
| 1.79 (1.17, 3.25) | 4.04 (2.32, 8.63) |
| 1.86 (0.37, 3.51) | 3.55 (1.23, 6.14) | 0.2(−0.6,3.7) | 1.04 (0.58, 2.36) | 1.88 (0.98, 3.05) | 0.38(−1.12,1.80) |
Patients are grouped in tertiles of pre-dialysis FO/ECW%. Diabetic patients are excluded.
Comparisons between baseline (BL) and last 30 min of hemodialysis (HD)
# Wilcoxon signed rank test p-value< 0.05, or
§ p-value<0.01 (italics)
Fig 1Values of the LF differences between baseline and last 30 minutes of hemodialysis.
Values of the LF differences between baseline and last 30 minutes of hemodialysis in the three groups by excluding diabetes (see Table 3). The circles represent the singular patients. The errorbar represents the median and the 25th and 75th percentile (patients are grouped by the tertiles of FOpre/ECW% values). Note the increase in LF in the first tertile. The outliers are inserted in the picture at a different scale in order to focus the attention to the errorbars.
Fig 2Hematocrit values.
Boxplot of patient hematocrit values at the start and end of hemodialysis grouped by pre-dialysis FO/ECW% tertiles. HD: hemodialysis. BVM: Blood Volume Monitor device.