Estudo randomizado comparando análise de bioimpedância elétrica e avaliação clínica para determinar peso seco em hemodiálise

• Ano de defesa: 2015
• Autor(a) principal: Breitsameter, Guilherme
• Orientador(a): Figueiredo, Ana Elizabeth
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Tipo de acesso: Acesso aberto
• Idioma: por
• Instituição de defesa: Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul
• Programa de Pós-Graduação: Programa de Pós-Graduação em Medicina e Ciências da Saúde
• Departamento: Faculdade de Medicina
• País: Brasil
• Palavras-chave em Português: MEDICINA; NEFROLOGIA; PESO CORPORAL; DIÁLISE RENAL; GANHO DE PESO; HIDRATAÇÃO
• Área do conhecimento CNPq: CIENCIAS DA SAUDE::MEDICINA
• Link de acesso: http://tede2.pucrs.br/tede2/handle/tede/6071

Background: Adequate control of extracellular volume is a major goal of hemodialysis (HD) in chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients. Fluid overload contributes significantly to the high morbidity and mortality rates of these patients. The body composition monitor by multifrequency bioimpedance (BCM) is equipment tool able to quantify objectively and accurately the hydration status of each patient. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy between bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) and clinical evaluation to adjust dry weight (DW) in HD patients. Methods: A randomized crossover study. Patients were randomized in two groups: A, in which patients were evaluated by the clinical evaluation and B, wherein the dry weight of the patients was assessed by BIA, for four weeks. Following a wash-out period a crossover between the groups was performed and patients observed for 1 month. The study was approved by the ethics committee of Pontificia Católica University of Rio Grande do Sul. Results: The study included 57 CKD in HD. Blood pressure, hydration parameters and DW were not significantly different between the groups indicating an equivalence between BIA and clinical evaluation treatments to determine DW in HD. Conclusion: The study shows that the BIA is similar than the clinical evaluation to guide ultrafiltration and determine DW in HD.