4.6 Article

Asymptomatic Pulmonary Congestion and Physical Functioning in Hemodialysis Patients

期刊

出版社

AMER SOC NEPHROLOGY
DOI: 10.2215/CJN.11111012

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background and objectives Poor physical performance is common in patients with kidney failure on dialysis (CKD-5D). Whether lung congestion, a predictable consequence of cardiomyopathy and fluid overload, may contribute to the low physical performance of CKD-5D patients has not been investigated in hemodialysis patients.Design, setting, participants, & measurements This study investigated the relationship between the physical functioning scale of the Kidney Disease Quality of Life Short Form and a validated ultrasonographic measure of lung water in a multicenter survey of 270 hemodialysis patients studied between 2009 and 2010.Results Moderate to severe lung congestion by lung ultrasonography was observed in 156 (58%) patients; among these, 60 (38%) were asymptomatic (New York Heart Association [NYHA] class I). On univariate analysis, physical functioning was inversely associated with lung water in the whole group (r=-0.22; P<0.001) and in the subgroup of asymptomatic patients (r=-0.40; P=0.002). Age (r=-0.45; P<0.001) and past cardiovascular events (r=-0.22; P=0.002) were also inversely associated with physical functioning, whereas albumin (r=0.23; P<0.001) was directly associated with the same parameter. NYHA class correlated strongly with physical functioning (r=-0.52; P<0.001). In a multiple regression analysis, both NYHA class and lung water maintained an independent association with physical functioning, whereas albumin and background cardiovascular events failed to independently relate with the same outcome.Conclusions Symptomatic and asymptomatic lung congestion is associated with poor physical functioning in hemodialysis patients. This association is independent of NYHA, suggesting that this measurement and NYHA may have complementary value to explain the variability in physical performance in hemodialysis patients.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据