Almost a decade ago, a single chronic hemodialysis patient in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, who was experiencing recurrent acute reactions during hemodialysis was found to have become allergic to ethylene oxide gas (EO). This observation recently provided a stimulus to examine the possibility that others exhibiting acute allergic-type reactions during hemodialysis might be similarly sensitized. Serum was obtained from 27 reacting patients and tested in a radioallergosorbent test (RAST) for antibodies to EO. The test was positive for 22 of these sera. EO-related specificity of the antibodies was confirmed. However, EO sensitization was not found in other hemodialysis patients with isolated eosinophilia. In a survey of the current Hamilton chronic hemodialysis population for EO-related antibodies, 9% had a positive allergy skin test and 12% had a positive RAST. The sensitized individuals had no distinctive symptoms. The lesser sensitivity of the skin test contrasts with usual findings in allergic individuals; however, the use of histamine and codeine in chronic hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis patients might well explain a reduced sensitivity of the EO-related allergy skin test. Chronic peritoneal dialysis could not be invoked as a source of sensitization. None of these patients had a positive skin test or RAST for EO-related antibodies that could be attributed to peritoneal dialysis.
Thirty-seven male dialysis patients, from three university hospital centers known to have adequate iron B12, and folate stores, were entered into a controlled trial to study the effects of nandrolone decanoate (200 mg i.m. weekly) on their anemia. An initial six-month stabilization period was followed by a randomized 12-month study, with crossover between treatment and control groups occurring at six months. Patients received parenteral iron therapy plus oral folate throughout the trial. All serious illnesses or major blood losses excluded the patients from analysis. The 24 patients with remnant kidneys showed an increase in hemoglobin and hematocrit of 24% by the end of six months of treatment (P less than 0.005), with a corresponding decrement during the six months of control, but the five anephric patients showed no statistically significant change compared to those patients whose kidneys were in place during the study. Complications of treatment were minimal, with injection site hematoma the only significant local effect and a rise in triglyceride the only significant systemic disturbance. Despite the improvement in anemia, the disadvantages, including the high cost of treatment, the apparent plateauing of benefits by five months, the minimal subjective improvement in life style, the risk of i.m. injection, plus the long term effects of increased lipids, should limit this therapy to patients with remnant kidneys who have severe symptomatic anemia or frequent transfusion requirements.
A multiple crossover research study was used to evaluate the effect of dialyzer re-use on fever, blood leaks, serum urea and creatinine values and symptoms. Each of 6 crossover periods consisted of 4 weeks on either single-use or re-use, 1 week washout, 4 weeks on the alternative treatment and 1 week washout. The re-use consisted of 6 uses of each dialyzer and the washout weeks consisted of 3 single-use sessions. Analysis of paired observations within rather than between patients showed no effects of time (i.e. among crossover periods 1 through 6) or number of re-uses (i.e. among uses 1 through 6). There was no significant difference for temperature change during dialysis, blood leak rate, or the serum urea and creatinine values before the first dialysis of each washout period. There were no differences for symptoms of pruritis, cramps, nausea, headache, chest pain, backache or fatigue. There were no clinical advantages or disadvantages associated with dialyzer re-use.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.