生物电阻抗矢量法评估血液透析合并高血压患者的容量负荷

目的应用生物电阻抗矢量法评估血液透析合并高血压患者的容量负荷,探讨高容量负荷状态对高血压患者预后的影响。方法研究对象来自南京医科大学附属明基医院透析前收缩压(6次透析治疗前平均收缩压值)>160 mmHg的血液透析患者。用生物电阻抗矢量法评估患者容量状态,并根据患者容量状态分为容量增加组和非容量增加组(包括容量正常和容量下降的患者)。比较两组患者临床资料、实验室指标、细胞内液比例(ICW)、细胞外液比例(ECW)、体细胞质量、瘦体重、干瘦体重及其占总体重的百分比、脂肪含量占总体重的百分比、阻抗/身高、容抗/身高、相位角、疾病指数的差异。采用Kaplan?Meier生存曲线比较两组患者生存率的差异。结果共51例血液透析合并高血压患者入选本研究,容量增加组19例,非容量增加组32例(容量正常27例,容量下降5例)。容量增加组患者的血白蛋白、前白蛋白、血红蛋白、血细胞比容、血磷较非容量增加组显著下降,淋巴细胞比例明显升高,组间比较差异均有统计学意义(均P<0.05)。容量增加组的细胞外液比例、疾病指数显著高于非容量增加组(均P<0.01);相位角、阻抗/身高、容抗/身高显著低于非容量增加组(均P<0.01)。临床追踪20个月,容量增加组患者血压达标率(透析前收缩压<160 mmHg)低于非容量增加组(26.3%比43.8%),但差异无统计学意义。容量增加组患者全因死亡率高于非容量增加组(26.3%比15.6%),Kaplan?Meier生存曲线分析提示两组生存率的差异尚无统计学意义。结论容量负荷增加的血液透析合并高血压患者细胞外液增加明显,营养状态评估指标较非容量增加的高血压患者明显下降,而淋巴细胞比例升高,可能与患者微炎症状态有关。容量负荷增加的高血压患者血压更加难以控制,临床预后可能不及非容量增加的患者。

Application of bioelectrical impedance vector analysis to evaluate volume status of hemodialysis patients with hypertension

Objective To evaluate the volume status of hemodialysis patients with hypertension by bioelectrical impedance vector analysis, and investigate the effect of high volume status on the prognosis of patients with hypertension. Methods The study subjects came from the patients with pre-dialysis systolic blood pressure＞160 mmHg (mean systolic blood pressure of 6 times of treatment) in the Affiliated BenQ Hospital of Nanjing Medical University. According to the volume status assessed by bioelectrical impedance vector analysis, patients were divided into two groups: fluid overload group and non-overload group (including normal fluid status and fluid decline). The clinical data, laboratory test results, ratio of intracellular and extracellular water (ICW and ECW), body cell mass, lean body mass and the percentage of total body weight, fat percentage of body weight, resistance/ height, reactance/height, phase angle and illmarker were compared between two groups. Kaplan-Meier survival curve was used to compare the difference of survival rate between the two groups. Results A total of 51 hemodialysis patients with hypertension were enrolled in this study, including 19 patients in fluid overload group and 32 patients in non-overload group (27 patients with normal volume status and 5 patients with decreased volume). The levels of albumin, prealbumin, hemoglobin, hematocrit and serum phosphorus in patients with fluid overload decreased significantly compared with non-overload patients (all P＜0.05), and the proportion of lymphocytes increased in fluid - overload patients (P＜ 0.05). The ratio of extracellular water and illmarker index in fluid overload group were significantly higher than those in the other group (both P＜0.01). However, phase angle, resistance/height, reactance/ height were lower than those in patients with non-overload (all P＜0.01). After 20 months of clinical observation, the control rate of blood pressure (pre - dialysis systolic blood pressure＜160 mmHg) in fluid overload group was lower than that in the non - overload group (26.3% vs 43.8% ), but not statistically significant (P=0.218). The all-cause mortality rate of patients in the fluid overload group was higher than non-overload group (26.3% vs 15.6%). Kaplan-Meier survival curve analysis suggested that the difference in survival rate between the two groups was not statistically significant. Conclusions The extracellular fluid of hemodialysis patients with hypertension and fluid overload increases significantly, and the nutritional status evaluation index decreases compared with that of patients without increased volume. Increased proportion of lymphocytes may be related to the micro- inflammatory status. Blood pressure is more difficult to control in hypertensive patients with fluid overload and the clinical prognosis can be worse in patients without increased volume.