Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (16)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Imholz, A.
Right arrow Articles by Krediet, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Imholz, A.
Right arrow Articles by Krediet, R.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation, Vol 13, Issue 1 146-153, Copyright © 1998 by Oxford University Press


ORIGINAL ARTICLES

Day-to-day variability of fluid and solute transport in upright and recumbent positions during CAPD

A Imholz, G Koomen, W Voorn, D Struijk, L Arisz and R Krediet
Departments of Medicine F4-215, Clinical Chemistry, and Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Academic Medical Center, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Background: The effect of posture on peritoneal transport characteristics during CAPD is unpredictable because (1) although the capillary pressure is higher in the upright positions, the intraperitoneal pressure is also elevated, and (2) the contact of dialysate with the subdiaphragmatic lymphatics is probably more extensive during recumbency. Methods: In eight CAPD patients, six peritoneal permeability tests (4 h, glucose 2.27%, dextran 70 as volume marker) were performed within 2 weeks, while the body posture was either recumbent (3 tests) or upright (3 tests). In addition, intraperitoneal pressure measurements were done in the recumbent and upright positions. Results: The intraperitoneal pressure, not corrected for the contribution of the hydrostatic column, was higher in upright position (12.6±0.8 mmHg, mean±SEM) than during recumbency (7.7±0.8; P <0.0005). Net ultrafiltration rate was lower when upright; 0.96±0.09 ml/min/1.73m2, compared to 1.14±0.12 in the supine position (P <0.05). This was achieved because the effective lymphatic absorption rate was marginally higher and the transcapillary ultrafiltration rate was slightly lower in the upright position. The mass transfer area coefficient of creatinine, representing effective peritoneal surface area, decreased from 107±1.3 ml/min/1.73 m2 (recumbent) to 9.9±1.4 (upright; P=0.08). The clearances of five serum proteins decreased more the higher the molecular weight. As a consequence the restriction coefficient was 2.07±0.09 (recumbent) vs 2.23±0.08 (upright; P=0.06). Hence the intrinsic permeability to macromolecules was higher during recumbency. The intraperitoneal pressure was correlated with the net ultrafiltration rate (r=-0.71, P=0.05) only during recumbency. In upright position relations were found between the effective lymphatic absorption rate and the mass transfer area coefficients of low molecular solutes. The coefficients of variation of fluid and solute parameters were not different between both positions. Conclusions: It is concluded that the decrease in net ultrafiltration rate in the upright position is only small and probably caused by counteracting effects of a higher intra-abdominal pressure and the effect of gravity. The upright position also led to only small decreases in solute transport parameters. Key words: CAPD; transport kinetics; body position; variability
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Nephrol Dial TransplantHome page
A. Dejardin, A. Robert, and E. Goffin
Intraperitoneal pressure in PD patients: relationship to intraperitoneal volume, body size and PD-related complications
Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., May 1, 2007; 22(5): 1437 - 1444.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Physiol. Heart Circ. Physiol.Home page
J. Stachowska-Pietka, J. Waniewski, M. F. Flessner, and B. Lindholm
Distributed model of peritoneal fluid absorption
Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol, October 1, 2006; 291(4): H1862 - H1874.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Nephrol Dial TransplantHome page
R. Scanziani, B. Dozio, I. Baragetti, and S. Maroni
Intraperitoneal hydrostatic pressure and flow characteristics of peritoneal catheters in automated peritoneal dialysis
Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., November 1, 2003; 18(11): 2391 - 2398.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Am. Soc. Nephrol.Home page
A. Fu{beta}holler, S. zur Nieden, B. Grabensee, and J. Plum
Peritoneal Fluid and Solute Transport: Influence of Treatment Time, Peritoneal Dialysis Modality, and Peritonitis Incidence
J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., April 1, 2002; 13(4): 1055 - 1060.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Am. Soc. Nephrol.Home page
M. FISCHBACH and B. HARALDSSON
Dynamic Changes of the Total Pore Area Available for Peritoneal Exchange in Children
J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., July 1, 2001; 12(7): 1524 - 1529.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.