prikaz prve stranice dokumenta Comparison of clinical assessment and multifrequency bioimpedance analysis as methods of estimating volume status in peritoneal dialysis patients - A single-center experience
No public access
Scientific paper - Original scientific paper
Comparison of clinical assessment and multifrequency bioimpedance analysis as methods of estimating volume status in peritoneal dialysis patients - A single-center experience
Clinical Nephrology, 91 (2019); 334-343. https://doi.org/10.5414/CN109158
Vujičić, Božidar; Dorčić, Gordan; Babić, Vesna; Rundić, Anamarija; Devčić, Bosiljka; Šimac, Davor Viktor; Zaputović, Luka; Rački, Sanjin

Cite this document

Vujičić, B., Dorčić, G., Babić, V., Rundić, A., Devčić, B., Šimac, D. V. ... Rački, S. (2019). Comparison of clinical assessment and multifrequency bioimpedance analysis as methods of estimating volume status in peritoneal dialysis patients - A single-center experience. Clinical Nephrology, 91., 334-343. doi: 10.5414/CN109158

Vujičić, Božidar, et al. "Comparison of clinical assessment and multifrequency bioimpedance analysis as methods of estimating volume status in peritoneal dialysis patients - A single-center experience." Clinical Nephrology, vol. 91, 2019, pp. 334-343. https://doi.org/10.5414/CN109158

Vujičić, Božidar, Gordan Dorčić, Vesna Babić, Anamarija Rundić, Bosiljka Devčić, Davor Viktor Šimac, Luka Zaputović and Sanjin Rački. "Comparison of clinical assessment and multifrequency bioimpedance analysis as methods of estimating volume status in peritoneal dialysis patients - A single-center experience." Clinical Nephrology 91 (2019): 334-343. https://doi.org/10.5414/CN109158

Vujičić, B., et al. (2019) 'Comparison of clinical assessment and multifrequency bioimpedance analysis as methods of estimating volume status in peritoneal dialysis patients - A single-center experience', Clinical Nephrology, 91, pp. 334-343. doi: 10.5414/CN109158

Vujičić B, Dorčić G, Babić V, Rundić A, Devčić B, Šimac DV, and sur.. Comparison of clinical assessment and multifrequency bioimpedance analysis as methods of estimating volume status in peritoneal dialysis patients - A single-center experience. Clinical Nephrology [Internet]. 2019 [cited 2024 November 15];91:334-343. doi: 10.5414/CN109158

B. Vujičić, et al., "Comparison of clinical assessment and multifrequency bioimpedance analysis as methods of estimating volume status in peritoneal dialysis patients - A single-center experience", Clinical Nephrology, vol. 91, pp. 334-343, 2019. [Online]. Available at: https://urn.nsk.hr/urn:nbn:hr:184:471130. [Accessed: 15 November 2024]

Please login to the repository to save this object to your list.
Metadata
Title (english)Comparison of clinical assessment and multifrequency bioimpedance analysis as methods of estimating volume status in peritoneal dialysis patients - A single-center experience
AuthorBožidar Vujičić
AuthorGordan Dorčić
AuthorVesna Babić
AuthorAnamarija Rundić
AuthorBosiljka Devčić
AuthorDavor Viktor Šimac
AuthorLuka Zaputović
AuthorSanjin Rački
Author's institutionUniversity of Rijeka
Faculty of Medicine
(Department of Internal Medicine)
Scientific / art field,
discipline and subdiscipline		BIOMEDICINE AND HEALTHCARE
Clinical Medical Sciences
Abstract (english)
INTRODUCTION. Clinical assessment (CA) is frequently used for the evaluation of volume status in peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients despite its subjectivity. Multiple-frequency bioelectrical impedance analysis (MF-BIA) is objective, accurate, and quick, proving to be a promising technique for measuring volume status. The aim of this study was to assess volume status in PD patients using CA and MF- BIA and to compare results. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Incident PD patients were prospectively analyzed between January 1, 2014, and January 1, 2016, at the Clinical Hospital Center of -Rijeka, Croatia. Volume status measurements were performed once a month for 6 consecutive months. The presence of symptoms and signs associated with hyper- or hypovolemia were detected by CA. Euvolemia was defined as a symptom-free state or up to 2 symptoms maximum. Patients lacking up to 1.2 L of volume or with up to 1.2 L in excess were considered euvolemic, as measured by MF-BIA. RESULTS. A total of 45 PD patients were analyzed ; 51% were men, 27% were diabetic, the mean age was 52±26 years, and PD duration was 11.5±6.5 months. In comparison to MF-BIA, CA showed a significant difference in detected hypervolemia between baseline and follow-up (p=0.708 vs. p=0.01, respectively) and among all measurements (p<0.01). Contrary to CA, volume status measured by MF-BIA correlated significantly with systolic and diastolic blood pressure (R=0.29 ; p≤0.01 and R=0.26 ; p≤0.01, respectively). CA showed low sensitivity (0.24) and high specificity (0.92) in detecting hypervolemia. CONCLUSION. MF-BIA is an effective, objective, and safe method for assessing volume status in PD patients. Longitudinal monitoring of body composition changes - including hydration state - leading to adequate therapeutic intervention is a promising and potential application of MF- BIA along with CA.
Keywords (english)
Languageenglish
Publication typeScientific paper - Original scientific paper
Publication statusPublished
Peer reviewPeer review - international
Publication versionPublished version
Journal titleClinical Nephrology
Numberingvol. 91, pp. 334-343
p-ISSN0301-0430
DOIhttps://doi.org/10.5414/CN109158
URN:NBNurn:nbn:hr:184:471130
Publication2019
Document URLhttp://bib.irb.hr/992913
Type of resourceText
Access conditionsClosed access
Terms of useLicence In copyright icon
Created on2022-02-14 09:15:07