Cited by 6Dialysis and Renal Disease ManagementBody Composition Measurement TechniquesHeart Failure Treatment and Management

Assessment of volume status with bioimpendance prior to hemodialysis and its importance for predicting survival in hemodialysis patients

Keber, Gašper, Hojs, Radovan, Dvoršak, Benjamin, Bevc, Sebastjan, Hojs, Nina Vodošek, Petreski, Tadej, Ekart, Robert·2021·Clinical Nephrology

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Optimal fluid management is a physician's everyday challenge in patients on maintenance hemodialysis (HD). Bioimpedance spectroscopy (BIS) is a non-invasive method to estimate body composition, including estimates of fluid overload (FO). Our study aimed to analyze the association between FO and the mortality rate in HD patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective single-center cohort study in 92 HD patients. The body composition was measured before HD using the portable whole-body BIS device Body Composition Monitor (BCM). We have analyzed the mortality rates of HD patients in two FO groups, a standard definition FO group (> 1.1 L), and a severe FO group (> 2.5 L) and compared them to mortality rates of patients without FO or without severe FO, respectively. RESULTS: The mean age of patients was 64.3 ± 13.0 years, mean dialysis vintage 64 months, 60.9% were men. 68 (73.9%) patients had FO of > 1.1 L and 30 (32.6%) had FO of > 2.5 L. During the follow-up period of 1,020 ± 417 days, 29 (31.5%) patients died. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed that patients with FO > 2.5 L had worse survival (p = 0.039). In a Cox regression model, which included FO > 2.5 L, age, dialysis vintage, hemoglobin, C-reactive protein, and albumin, only FO > 2.5 L and advanced age turned out to be predictors of death (p = 0.044 and p = 0.001, respectively). CONCLUSION: HD patients with FO > 2.5 L before HD have poorer survival than patients with normohydration or lower overhydration.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5414/cnp96s12

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Approximately 30%-37% of haemodialysis patients have water retention, and excessive fluid volume is closely related to difficulty correcting haemodialysis-related complications and is a major factor affecting patient death.

    “Approximately 30% ~ 37% of haemodialysis patients have water retention, and excessive fluid volume is closely related to difficulty correcting haemodialysis‐related complications and is a major factor affecting patient death (Fernandes et al., 2021; Keber et al., 2021).”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Keber, G., Hojs, R., Dvoršak, B., Bevc, S., Hojs, N. V., Petreski, T., & Ekart, R.
Venue
Clinical Nephrology
Published
2021-01-01
Volume
96
Issue
Suppl 1
Pages
68-73
ISSN
0301-0430 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3205759458
Cited by
6
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3
FWCI
0.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Clinical Nephrology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Nephrology › Dialysis and Renal Disease Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Body Composition Measurement Techniques
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Heart Failure Treatment and Management
Keywords
fluid overload, maintenance hemodialysis, bioimpedance spectroscopy, body composition, volume status assessment, mortality prediction, survival, fluid management, end-stage renal disease
MeSH terms
Aged, Body Composition, Renal Dialysis, Humans, Kidney Failure, Chronic, Male, Middle Aged, Retrospective Studies, Water-Electrolyte Imbalance, Cohort Studies

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review