We have located links that may give you full text access.
JOURNAL ARTICLE
META-ANALYSIS
REVIEW
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
Value of bioimpedance analysis estimated "dry weight" in maintenance dialysis patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
International Urology and Nephrology 2017 December
BACKGROUND: Volume overload is a common complication in patients with end-stage kidney disease who undergo maintenance dialysis therapy and associated with hypertension, left ventricular hypertrophy and mortality in this population. Although bioimpedance analysis (BIA), an objective method to assess overhydration, is associated with poor outcomes in observational studies, in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) the results were conflicting. We have examined the role of BIA for assessing the "dry weight" and fluid status in order to improve fluid overload in comparison with a control or clinical-based prescription in patients with ESKD receiving haemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis.
METHODS: All RCTs and quasi-RCTs in which BIA was used to improve fluid overload and assess the effect on all-cause mortality, cardiovascular morbidity, systolic blood pressure and volume control and arterial stiffness were included.
RESULTS: Seven RCTs with 1312 patients could be included in this review. In low-to-medium quality of the evidence, the use of BIA did not reduce all-cause mortality (relative risk 0.87, 95% CI 0.54-1.39) and had small to no effect on body change, but it improved systolic blood pressure control (mean difference (MD) -2.73 mmHg, 95% CI -5.00 to -0.46 mmHg) and reduce overhydration, as measured by BIA, with 0.43 L [(MD), 95% CI 0.71-0.15 L].
CONCLUSION: In ESKD patients, BIA-based interventions for correction of overhydration have little to no effect on all-cause mortality, whereas BIA improved systolic blood pressure control. Our results should be interpreted with caution as the size and power of the included studies are low. Further studies, larger or with a longer follow-up period, should be performed to better describe the effect of BIA-based strategies on survival.
METHODS: All RCTs and quasi-RCTs in which BIA was used to improve fluid overload and assess the effect on all-cause mortality, cardiovascular morbidity, systolic blood pressure and volume control and arterial stiffness were included.
RESULTS: Seven RCTs with 1312 patients could be included in this review. In low-to-medium quality of the evidence, the use of BIA did not reduce all-cause mortality (relative risk 0.87, 95% CI 0.54-1.39) and had small to no effect on body change, but it improved systolic blood pressure control (mean difference (MD) -2.73 mmHg, 95% CI -5.00 to -0.46 mmHg) and reduce overhydration, as measured by BIA, with 0.43 L [(MD), 95% CI 0.71-0.15 L].
CONCLUSION: In ESKD patients, BIA-based interventions for correction of overhydration have little to no effect on all-cause mortality, whereas BIA improved systolic blood pressure control. Our results should be interpreted with caution as the size and power of the included studies are low. Further studies, larger or with a longer follow-up period, should be performed to better describe the effect of BIA-based strategies on survival.
Full text links
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app