| Literature DB >> 35406082 |
Tanjina Rahman1,2, Ban-Hock Khor3, Sharmela Sahathevan4, Deepinder Kaur1, Eno Latifi1, Mousume Afroz5, Esrat Jahan Mitali5, Bayan Tashkandi1, Nura Afza Salma Begum5, Tasnuva Sarah Kashem5, Shakib Uz Zaman Arefin5, Zulfitri Azuan Mat Daud6, Tilakavati Karupaiah7, Harun Ur Rashid5, Pramod Khosla1.
Abstract
Malnutrition is associated with high rates of mortality among patients with end stage kidney disease (ESKD). There is a paucity of data from Bangladesh, where around 35,000-40,000 people reach ESKD annually. We assessed protein-energy wasting (PEW) amongst 133 patients at a single hemodialysis setting in Dhaka. Patients were 49% male, age 50 ± 13 years, 62% were on twice-weekly hemodialysis. Anthropometric, biochemical, and laboratory evaluations revealed: BMI 24.1 ± 5.2 kg/m2, mid-arm muscle circumference (MAMC) 21.6 ± 3.6 cm, and serum albumin 3.7 ± 0.6 g/dL. Based on published criteria, 18% patients had PEW and for these patients, BMI (19.8 ± 2.4 vs. 25.2 ± 5.2 kg/m2), MAMC (19.4 ± 2.4 vs. 22.2 ± 3.8 cm), serum albumin (3.5 ± 0.7 vs. 3.8 ± 0.5 g/dL), and total cholesterol (135 ± 34 vs. 159 ± 40 mg/dL), were significantly lower as compared to non-PEW patients, while hand grip strength was similar (19.5 ± 7.6 vs. 19.7 ± 7.3 kg). Inflammatory C-reactive protein levels tended to be higher in the PEW group (20.0 ± 34.8 vs. 10.0 ± 13.9 p = 0.065). Lipoprotein analyses revealed PEW patients had significantly lower low density lipoprotein cholesterol (71 ± 29 vs. 88 ± 31 mg/dL, p < 0.05) and plasma triglyceride (132 ± 51 vs. 189 ± 103 mg/dL, p < 0.05), while high density lipoprotein cholesterol was similar. Nutritional assessments using a single 24 h recall were possible from 115 of the patients, but only 66 of these were acceptable reporters. Amongst these, while no major differences were noted between PEW and non-PEW patients, the majority of patients did not meet dietary recommendations for energy, protein, fiber, and several micronutrients (in some cases intakes were 60-90% below recommendations). Malnutrition Inflammation Scores were significantly higher in PEW patients (7.6 ± 3.1 vs. 5.3 ± 2.7 p < 0.004). No discernible differences were apparent in measured parameters between patients on twice- vs. thrice-weekly dialysis. Data from a larger cohort are needed prior to establishing patient-management guidelines for PEW in this population.Entities:
Keywords: Bangladeshi hemodialysis patients; dyslipidemia; nutrition status; protein energy wasting
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35406082 PMCID: PMC9002623 DOI: 10.3390/nu14071469
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 5.717
Demographics, anthropometric and biochemical parameters: PEW versus Non-PEW.
| Parameters | All | PEW | Non-PEW | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 65/68 (133) | 13/7 (20) | 41/54 (95) | |
|
| 49.8 ± 13.0 (133) | 48.6 ± 17.5 (20) | 49.9 ± 11.5 (95) | 0.674 |
|
| 3.8 ± 0.4 (120) | 3.9 ± 0.3 (18) | 3.8 ± 0.4 (91) | 0.242 |
|
| 30.0 ± 24.3 (123) | 32.1 ± 32.8 (19) | 29.0 ± 22.2 (95) | 0.621 |
|
| ||||
|
| 49 (38%) | 7 (35%) | 34 (36%) | |
|
| 81 (62%) | 13 (65%) | 61 (64%) | |
|
| ||||
|
| 52 (39%) | 7 (35%) | 42 (44%) | |
|
| 35 (26%) | 4 (20%) | 27 (28%) | |
|
| 23 (17%) | 7 (35%) | 12 (13%) | |
|
| 13 (10%) | 1 (5%) | 12 (13%) | |
|
| 10 (8%) | 1 (5%) | 2 (2%) | |
|
| 158.5 ± 9.3 (116) | 159.7 ± 8.3 (20) | 158.3 ± 9.6 (95) | 0.539 |
|
| 60.6 ± 12.6 (116) | 50.7 ± 9.1 a (20) | 62.7 ± 12.3 a (95) | <0.001 |
|
| 24.2 ± 5.2 (116) | 19.8 ± 2.4 a (20) | 25.2 ± 5.2 a (95) | <0.001 |
|
| 20.1 ± 2.0 (55) | 19.9 ± 2.4(20) | 20.3 ± 1.7 (34) | |
|
| 27.9 ± 4.5 (61) | - | 27.9 ± 4.5 (61) | |
|
| 19.8 ± 7.4 (116) | 19.5 ± 7.6 (20) | 19.7 ± 7.3 (95) | 0.938 |
|
| 26.6 ± 5.2 (116) | 22.4 ± 2.4 a (20) | 27.5 ± 5.2 a (95) | <0.001 |
|
| 15.8 ± 8.2 (116) | 9.6 ± 3.7 a (20) | 17.2 ± 8.2 a (95) | <0.001 |
|
| 21.7 ± 3.7 (116) | 19.4 ± 2.4 a (20) | 22.2 ± 3.8 a (95) | <0.001 |
|
| 19.7 ± 2.9 (65) | 19.4 ± 2.4(20) | 19.9 ± 3.1 (44) | |
|
| 24.1 ± 3.1(51) | - | 24.1 ± 3.1 (51) | |
|
| 3.7 ± 0.6 (97) | 3.5 ± 0.6 a (19) | 3.8 ± 0.5 a (77) | 0.029 |
|
| 3.4 ± 0.4 (57) | 3.4 ± 0.6(18) | 3.5 ± 0.3 (38) | |
|
| 4.1 ± 0.5(40) | 4.7(1) | 4.1 ± 0.5 (39) | |
|
| 162 ± 51 (116) | 135 ± 34 a (20) | 159 ± 40 a (95) | 0.01 |
|
| 94 ± 4 (4) | 95 ± 4 (3) | 90 (1) | |
|
| 164 ± 50 (112) | 142 ± 32 (17) | 168 ± 52 (94) | 0.058 |
|
| 244.1 ± 61.5 (81) | 228.1 ± 55.4 (15) | 247.7 ± 62.6 (66) | 0.267 |
|
| 65.3 ± 8.8 (83) | 67.8 ± 8.8 (15) | 65.0 ± 8.6 (67) | 0.231 |
|
| 136.1 ± 3.8 (107) | 136.4 ± 2.5 (18) | 136.0 ± 4.1 (88) | 0.731 |
|
| 5.0 ± 0.7 (112) | 5.2 ± 0.7 (19) | 5.0 ± 0.7 (92) | 0.247 |
|
| 4.5 ± 2.2 (100) | 4.6 ± 2.7 (17) | 4.5 ± 2.1 (82) | 0.811 |
|
| 14.5 ± 25.8 (95) | 20.0 ± 34.8 (17) | 10.0 ± 13.9 (69) | 0.065 |
|
| 496.7 ± 442.8 (69) | 645.8 ± 543.4 (9) | 482.0 ± 423.1 (59) | 0.302 |
|
| 15 | 6 | 9 | |
|
| 1.3 ± 0.4 (55) | 1.4 ± 0.4 (11) | 1.3 ± 0.4 (44) | 0.435 |
Values are mean ± SD for the numbers in parentheses. From the pool of 133 patients, relevant data for PEW assessment (based on ISRNM guidelines) were available from 115 patients. (20 were PEW and 95 were Non-PEW patients). Biochemical data were obtained from patient’s medical records. HTN: Hypertension, DN: Diabetic nephropathy, CGN: Chronic glomerulonephritis, Other: adult polycystic kidney disease, kidney stone, unknown, postpartum complication; ESRD: End-stage renal disease. BMI: Body mass index, HGS: Hand grip strength, MAC: Mid-arm circumference, TSF: Triceps skin fold, MAMC: Mid-arm muscle circumference, TIBC: Total iron binding capacity. F: Ferritin. URR%: Urea reduction rate. Na: Sodium, K: Potassium, P: Phosphorous. a Mean values (between PEW and Non-PEW patients) sharing a common superscript were significantly different from each other using a one-way ANOVA (p < 0.05). ** One patient was dialyzed once a week and was not included in any analyses.
Dietary analysis for acceptable reporters between PEW and Non-PEW groups.
| Nutrients | All ( | PEW ( | Non-PEW ( | KDOQI Guidelines | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 1429 ± 497 | 1327 ± 278 | 1455 ± 537 | 0.412 | ** |
|
| 24.2 ± 7.6 | 26.2 ± 5.9 | 23.7 ± 7.9 | 0.289 | 30–35 Kcal/Kg BW/day |
|
| 19.1 ± 3.4 (38) | 19.0 ± 2.3 (5) | 19.2 ± 3.4 (33) | ||
|
| 31.4 ± 5.8 (27) | 30.2 ± 3.1 (8) | 32.3 ± 6.8 (19) | ||
|
| 53.6 ± 21.0 | 55.2 ± 19.5 | 53.7 ± 22.4 | 0.852 | ** |
|
| 0.9 ± 0.3 | 1.1 ± 0.3 a | 0.9 ± 0.3 a |
| 1.0–1.2 g/Kg BW/day |
|
| 0.7 ± 0.1 (38) | 0.7 ± 0.1 (6) | 0.6 ± 0.1 (32) | ||
|
| 1.2 ± 0.3 (27) | 1.2 ± 0.3 (7) | 1.2 ± 0.2 (20) | ||
|
| 14.7 ± 5.6 | 15.2 ± 3.2 | 14.5 ± 6.1 | 0.695 | 10–17 mg/Kg BW/day |
|
| 16.5 ± 3.9 | 14.9 ± 3.7 | 16.9 ± 3.9 | 0.088 | <12 mg/g of protein |
|
| 207 ± 71 | 192 ± 44 | 211 ± 76 | 0.401 | ** |
|
| 17 ± 7 | 15 ± 4 | 17 ± 7 | 0.298 | 20–25 g/day |
|
| 43 ± 21 | 37 ± 14 | 45 ± 22 | 0.280 | ** |
|
| 8.5 ± 4.5 | 7.2 ± 3.3 | 8.8 ± 4.7 | 0.253 | ** |
|
| 8.4 ± 4.6 | 6.9 ± 3.6 | 8.8 ± 4.8 | 0.178 | ** |
|
| 15.6 ± 9.6 | 13.5 ± 6.7 | 16.2 ± 10.2 | 0.378 | ** |
|
| 226 ± 153 | 177 ± 135 | 238 ± 156 | 0.196 | <200 mg/day |
|
| 10.4 ± 5.7 | 9.0 ± 5.3 | 10.7 ± 5.7 | 0.327 | 4:01 |
|
| 1446 ± 639 | 1577 ± 664 | 1413 ± 635 | 0.411 | 750–1500 mL/day |
|
| 1360 ± 2168 | 891 ± 1136 | 1478 ± 2530 | 0.386 | 700–900 IU |
|
| 46 ± 39 | 30 ± 37 | 50 ± 39 | 0.110 | 600 IU |
|
| 2.3 ± 1.6 | 1.9 ± 0.8 | 2.4 ± 1.7 | 0.398 | 15 mg |
|
| 22 ± 78 | 18 ± 34 | 23 ± 86 | 0.825 | 90–120 µg |
|
| 0.7 ± 0.3 | 0.7 ± 0.2 | 0.8 ± 0.4 | 0.220 | 1.1–1.2 mg |
|
| 1.0 ± 1.7 | 0.7 ± 0.2 | 1.1 ± 1.9 | 0.395 | 1.1–1.3 mg |
|
| 13.8 ± 5.4 | 15.1 ± 5.3 | 13.5 ± 5.4 | 0.325 | 14–16 mg |
|
| 10.8 ± 28.0 | 8.3 ± 15.7 | 11.4 ± 30.4 | 0.729 | 13–17 mg |
|
| 1.8 ± 2.1 | 1.5 ± 1.1 | 1.9 ± 2.3 | 0.572 | 2.4 µg |
|
| 10.0 ± 9.8 | 9.7 ± 9.3 | 10.1 ± 10.0 | 0.907 | 30 µg |
|
| 142 ± 189 | 96 ± 61 | 152 ± 209 | 0.399 | 1000 µg |
|
| 87 ± 73 | 64 ± 45 | 93 ± 78 | 0.209 | 75–90 mg/day |
|
| 431 ± 262 | 311 ± 149 | 461 ± 276 | 0.063 | <1000 mg |
|
| 15 ± 14 | 11.8 ± 7.8 | 15.6 ± 15.1 | 0.377 | ** |
|
| 872 ± 422 | 785 ± 212 | 894 ± 458 | 0.411 | 1000 mg |
|
| 1475 ± 582 | 1407 ± 389 | 1492 ± 623 | 0.641 | ** |
|
| 2099 ± 918 | 1993 ± 732 | 2125 ± 962 | 0.647 | <2400 mg |
|
| 8.0 ± 4.5 | 7.6 ± 3.1 | 8.1 ± 4.8 | 0.716 | 15 mg |
|
| 231 ± 91 | 214 ± 58 | 235 ± 98 | 0.466 | 200–300 mg |
The diet data are reported for the 65 acceptable reporters. Values are as Mean ± SD. DEI: Dietary energy intake, DPI: Dietary protein intake. SFA: Saturated fat, MUFA: Monounsaturated fat, PUFA: Poly unsaturated fat. IU: International Unit, Vit: vitamin, Vit E: Alpha tocopherol. BW: Body weight. Ca: Calcium, Na: Sodium, K: Potassium, P: Phosphorous. ** Individualized. a Mean values (between PEW and Non-PEW patients) sharing a common superscript were significantly different from each other using a one-way ANOVA (p < 0.05).
Health and Nutrition assessments between PEW versus Non-PEW groups.
| Assessments | PEW | Non-PEW | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 7.6 ± 3.1 (14) a | 5.3 ± 2.7 (65) a |
|
|
| 3.0 ± 0 (2) | 3.1 ± 0.9(27) | 0.911 |
|
| 8.4 ± 2.6(12) a | 7.0 ± 2.2 (38) a |
|
|
| 3.0 ± 1.1 (10) | 3.7 ± 1.6 (43) | 0.159 |
|
| |||
|
| 43.7 ± 12.5 (15) a | 37.3 ± 10.4 (64) a |
|
|
| 50.1 ± 7.5 (15) a | 43.9 ± 9.6 (64) a |
|
|
| 35.4 ± 23.5 (15) | 28.1 ± 26.9 (66) | 0.337 |
|
| 72.6 ± 19.1 (13) | 63.5 ± 16.2 (58) | 0.082 |
Data were collected from the number of patients indicated in parentheses. Values are mean ± SD. a Mean values (between PEW and Non-PEW patients) sharing a common superscript were significantly different from each other using a one-way ANOVA MIS [27]: Malnutrition inflammation score. A score > 5 indicates malnourishment [20]. MIS has 10 components, each with four levels of severity, from 0 (normal) to 3 (very severe). The sum of all 10 MIS components ranges from 0 (normal) to 30 (severely malnourished); higher score reflects a more severe degree of malnutrition and inflammation ADAT [24]: Appetite and diet analysis tool. Scale: 1 = very good, 2 = good, 3 = fair, 4 = poor and 5 = very poor. KD-QoL [25] Subscale scores range from 0 to 100, with lower scores indicating poor self-reported QOL.
Lipid profile and sub-fraction analyses: PEW versus Non-PEW patients.
| ALL (107) | PEW (20) | Non-PEW (87) | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 155 ± 40 | 135 ± 34 a | 160 ± 40 a |
|
| 35 ± 11 | 38 ± 16 | 34 ± 10 |
|
| 178 ± 98 | 132 ± 51 a | 188 ± 103 a |
|
| 85 ± 31 | 71 ± 29 a | 88 ± 31 a |
|
| 121 ± 40 | 97 ± 28 a | 126 ± 41 |
|
| 5.9 ± 4.0 | 4.2 ± 2.7 a | 6.4 ± 4.1 a |
|
| 12.4 ± 8.1 | 16.6 ± 10.4 a | 11.4 ± 7.3 a |
|
| 4.7 ± 2.4 | 3.4 ± 2.2 a | 5.0 ± 2.3 a |
|
| 267.9 ± 6.7 | 271.0 ± 3.4 a | 267 ± 7 a |
|
| |||
|
| 63 (59%) | 16 (80%) | 47 (54%) |
|
| 29 (27%) | 2 (10%) | 27 (31%) |
|
| 15 (14%) | 2 (10%) | 13 (15%) |
Data were analyzed for the number of patients indicated in parentheses. Values are Mean ± SD and n or %. TC: Total Cholesterol, HDL-C: High density lipoprotein, TG: Triacylglycerol/triglycerides, LDL-C: Low density lipoprotein, Type A: Athero-protective profile, Type B: Atherogenic profile, Intermediate: Has characteristics of both A and B. a Values sharing same superscripts between the groups were significantly different using one-way ANOVA (p < 0.05).