Next Article in Journal
Kidney Biopsy in a Patient with Cardiorenal Metabolic Syndrome—How to Interpret Histopathology
Previous Article in Journal
Pregnancy in Chronic Kidney Disease
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Kidney and Dialysis
Volume 3
Issue 2
10.3390/kidneydial3020014
kidneydial-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Brief Report

Comparison of Left Ventricular Diastolic Function Parameters between Patients with Unplanned and Planned Hemodialysis Initiation: A Cross-Sectional Study

by
Takayuki Yoshioka
1,*,
Seiya Inoue
1,
Hitoshi Kohriyama
1,
Yoshisuke Haruna
2,
Minoru Satoh
2 and
Nobutaka Inoue
3
1
Department of General Internal Medicine, Kobe Rousai Hospital, 4-1-23 Kagoike Touri, Chuo-Ku, Kobe 651-0053, Japan
2
Department of Nephrology, Kobe Rosai Hospital, 4-1-23 Kagoike Touri, Chuo-Ku, Kobe 651-0053, Japan
3
Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Kobe Rosai Hospital, 4-1-23 Kagoike Touri, Chuo-Ku, Kobe 651-0053, Japan
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Kidney Dial. 2023, 3(2), 163-170; https://doi.org/10.3390/kidneydial3020014
Submission received: 10 January 2023 / Revised: 17 March 2023 / Accepted: 24 March 2023 / Published: 27 March 2023
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Despite the increasing number of dialysis patients, there is still no clear consensus regarding when a permanent access device should be prepared and renal replacement treatment should be undertaken. The purpose of this study was to evaluate left ventricular diastolic function at the start of dialysis between patients in a planned or unplanned manner according to the 2016 recommendations of the American Society of Echocardiography/European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging (ASE/EACVI). We designed a single-center, cross-sectional study to use echocardiography to evaluate and compare left ventricular diastolic function at the onset of dialysis between patients in planned and unplanned groups. A total of 21 patients were included in our analysis (11 initiated dialysis in a planned manner and 10 did so in an unplanned manner). E/A and E/E′ were significantly high in the unplanned dialysis initiation group (p = 0.048 and p = 0.003, respectively). Furthermore, the number of patients with an E/E′ ratio of >14 and tricuspid regurgitation velocity of >2.8 was also significantly high in the unplanned dialysis initiation group (80% vs. 18%; p = 0.009, 40% vs. 0%; p = 0.035, respectively). According to the American Society of Echocardiography and the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging Recommendation in 2016, the number of patients with left ventricular diastolic dysfunction was significantly high in the unplanned dialysis initiation group (80% vs. 18%; p = 0.009). The current study demonstrated that left ventricular diastolic dysfunction is more apparent in incident dialysis patients in an unplanned manner. Our findings suggest that the assessment of left ventricular diastolic function by echocardiography may be an indication of when to create a permanent access device and initiate dialysis.

1. Introduction

In Japan at the end of 2021, the number of dialysis patients exceeded 340,000, and more than 40,000 individuals with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) initiated maintenance dialysis in 2021. Clinical guidelines recommend the planned use of arteriovenous access (arteriovenous fistula or graft) rather than the unplanned use of a central venous catheter (CVC) in incident dialysis patients because unplanned dialysis initiation is associated with increased patient morbidity, mortality, and health care costs [1,2,3,4,5,6]. However, many patients with ESKD begin dialysis in an unplanned manner. It is estimated that approximately 40–70% of patients initiate dialysis in this manner, despite nephrologists’ care [7,8,9,10]. The common risk factors associated with unplanned dialysis initiation are increased age, lower estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) at dialysis initiation, and the presence of cardiovascular disease, congestive heart failure, and diabetes mellitus [9,11,12]. These factors are common in patients with ESKD and are not specific for predicting or preventing unplanned dialysis initiation.
Left ventricular diastolic dysfunction (LVDD) is associated with heart failure, cardiovascular events, and high mortality in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and ESKD [13,14,15,16,17,18]. Furthermore, a recent study showed that LVDD is predictive of cardiovascular events in ‘incident dialysis patients’ [19]. However, the potential association between LVDD and dialysis initiation has not been investigated.
The purpose of this study was to evaluate left ventricular (LV) diastolic function at the start of dialysis between patients in a planned or unplanned manner according to the 2016 recommendations of the American Society of Echocardiography/European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging (ASE/EACVI) [20].

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Design and Population

This was a cross-sectional, single-center study. From April 2020 to March 2022, 21 patients were assessed using echocardiography (10 patients in unplanned dialysis initiation and 11 patients who began dialysis in a planned manner). The exclusion criteria were as follows: (i) atrial fibrillation, (ii) mitral stenosis, (iii) mitral annular calcification, and (iv) left bundle branch block. 3 patients with atrial fibrillation and 2 patients with mitral annular calcification were excluded. 3 patients did not consent to participate in this study. An unplanned dialysis initiation is defined as dialysis initiation with a CVC when vascular access is not ready for use or requires hospitalization. We referred to the methods of Mendelssohn et al., 2009 and Christopher et al., 2019 [3,21]. All patients were initiated on hemodialysis.

2.2. Data Collection

Demographic data and clinical characteristics, including age, sex, body mass index (BMI), blood pressure, referral to nephrologists, co-morbidities, medications, and reasons for dialysis initiation were recorded at dialysis initiation. The following laboratory data were measured using blood samples collected immediately before hemodialysis initiation: levels of urea nitrogen, creatinine, eGFR, sodium, potassium, calcium, phosphorus, hemoglobin, hematocrit, ferritin, albumin, fasting glucose, fasting low-density lipoprotein, and fasting triglyceride. The clinical indications of dialysis initiation were shown as uremic symptoms (increasing fatigue, appetite loss, and nausea/vomiting), volume overload, and others (hyperkalemia, increased creatinine).

2.3. Echocardiography

Echocardiography was performed within the 24 h preceding the start of dialysis. Echocardiographic measurements were performed using a standard cardiac ultrasound device (Aplio a400 or Aplio i700, Canon Medical Systems Corporation, Tochigi, Japan). Patient information was blinded. All images were obtained by M-mode, two-dimensional, and Doppler measurements according to the 2016 ASE/EACVI recommendations [20]. LV systolic function was measured by the LV ejection fraction (LVEF), which was obtained using the biplane modified Simpson method of discs from apical four- and two-chamber views. The early filling velocity (E wave), atrial contraction velocity (A wave), and E/A ratio were measured using mitral transvalvular flow in a four-chamber apical view. Tissue Doppler velocities were measured in a four-chamber apical view. The early diastolic mitral annular velocities (E′ wave) were measured by the junction of the LV lateral and septal walls, and the E/E′ ratio was calculated. Left atrial (LA) volume was measured using Simpson’s biplane method by the apical two- and four-chamber views. The left atrial volume index (LAVI) was calculated by the body surface area. The 2016 recommendations of the ASE/EACVI defined LV diastolic function by four variables. The four recommended variables and their abnormal cutoff values are annular E′ velocity (septal E′ < 7 cm/s, lateral E′ < 10 cm/s), average E/E′ ratio > 14, LAVI > 34 mL/m2, and peak TR velocity > 2.8 m/s. LV diastolic function is normal if more than half of the available variables do not meet the cutoff values for identifying abnormal function. LVDD is present if more than half of the available parameters meet these cutoff values [20].

2.4. Statistical Analysis

The Shapiro–Wilk test of normality was used for the data distribution analysis. No continuous variables were normally distributed; they are presented as the median (interquartile range) and compared using the Mann–Whitney U test between the planned and unplanned dialysis initiation groups. Categorical variables are presented as absolute numbers (percentages) and were compared using Fisher’s exact test. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. All statistical analyses were performed using EZR (Saitama Medical Center, Jichi Medical University, Saitama, Japan) [22].

3. Results

3.1. Patient Characteristics

Table 1 lists the clinical characteristics of the study participants. The groups did not differ in terms of the participants’ age, sex, BMI, blood pressure, referral to nephrologists, or the prevalence of hypertension, dyslipidemia, diabetes, hyperuricemia, and cardiovascular disease. Compared with patients in the planned dialysis initiation group (planned group), patients in the unplanned dialysis initiation group (unplanned group) were more likely to use a renin–angiotensin system inhibitor (80% vs. 18%; p = 0.009) and less likely to use an erythropoiesis-stimulating agent (30% vs. 91%; p = 0.008). No significant difference was observed in the number of patients with uremic symptoms or volume overload between the two groups in terms of the reasons for dialysis initiation. Table 2 lists the hematological and biochemical results. The serum albumin level of the unplanned group was significantly lower than that of the planned group (2.7 (2.3–3.4) g/dL vs. 3.3 (3.1–3.7) g/dL; p = 0.006). No differences were observed between the two groups for the other data.

3.2. Echocardiography

The echocardiographic parameters are listed in Table 3. The two groups did not significantly differ in terms of LA diameter, LAVI, LV size, LVEF, A wave velocity, deceleration time, and TRV. The E and E′ wave velocities were higher and lower in the unplanned and planned groups, respectively, although the difference was not significant. The E/A and E/E′ ratios were significantly higher in the unplanned group than in the planned group (p = 0.048 and p = 0.003, respectively). In both groups, most patients had preserved LVEF. Table 4 lists the echocardiographic parameters used to evaluate the LV diastolic function. The number of patients with an E/E′ ratio of >14 and TRV of >2.8 was significantly higher in the unplanned group (80% vs. 18%; p = 0.009, 40% vs. 0%; p = 0.035, respectively) than in the planned group. According to the 2016 ASE/EACVI algorithm, the number of patients with LVDD was significantly higher in the unplanned group than in the planned group (80% vs. 18%; p = 0.009).

4. Discussion

To the best of our knowledge, this cross-sectional study is the first to conduct a comparative evaluation of LV diastolic function just before dialysis initiation between patients who begin dialysis in a planned or unplanned manner according to the 2016 ASE/EACVI recommendations. The present study demonstrated that LVDD and elevated estimated LV diastolic filling pressure are more apparent in incident dialysis patients who begin treatment in an unplanned manner.
LVDD results from impaired LV relaxation and increased LV chamber stiffness, which increases cardiac filling pressures. The 2016 ASE/EACVI recommendations first used this method to detect LVDD, and then evaluate the degree of LV filling pressure elevation to assess the severity of LVDD. LVDD is always present in patients with a reduced LVEF [20]. LVDD is a cardiovascular abnormality frequently detected in patients with CKD, and advanced CKD is independently predictive of progressive LVDD [14,16,23]. Furthermore, several studies have found that the prevalence of LVDD increases with age and with the presence of cardiovascular co-morbidities [24,25]. In the present study, there was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of eGFR, age, or cardiovascular co-morbidities. However, the number of patients with LVDD was significantly higher in the unplanned group than in the planned group, although there were few patients with reduced LVEF in either group.
In the 2016 ASE/EACVI recommendations, the left ventricular filling pressure was estimated using the E/A ratio, the E′ wave velocity, the E/E′ ratio, LAVI, and TRV. In the current study, the E/A and E/E′ ratios were significantly higher in the unplanned group than in the planned group. The E′ wave velocity and LAVI were not significantly different between the two groups. However, most patients across both groups had LAVI > 34 mL/m2, which is an index of elevated left ventricular filling pressure. LA volume is an accurate measure of LA size [26]. With increased stiffness of the left ventricle, LA pressure rises to maintain adequate LV filling, and chronic increased atrial wall tension leads to chamber dilatation and atrial remodeling [27]. Increased LAVI often reflects the cumulative effect of filling pressure over time, while the Pulse Doppler parameters only provide information about LV filling at the time of measurement [28,29]. In our study, the atrial remodeling from chronic pressure overload progressed in both groups, although LV filling pressure was significantly elevated in the unplanned group. This resulted in a significantly higher number of patients with LVDD in the unplanned group, according to the 2016 ASE/EACVI guidelines [20]. These results in the unplanned group may be more significantly affected by sudden volume overload, such as flash pulmonary edema. However, there was no significant difference between the two groups of patients in terms of volume overload being the reason for dialysis initiation. Furthermore, in the present study, both the E/E′ ratio and the number of patients with E/E′ > 14, an index of elevated LV filling pressure, were significantly higher in the unplanned group than in the planned group. Previous studies have suggested that E′ is relatively unaffected by the patient’s volume status; the E/E′ ratio is a practicable and reproducible index to assess the LV filling pressure, and an elevated E/E′ ratio is a parameter that reflects LV relaxation and stiffness [30,31,32]. Therefore, in our study, the number of patients with LVDD was significantly higher in the unplanned group than in the planned group.
Despite the increasing number of patients with CKD and on dialysis, there is still no clear consensus on when a permanent access device should be prepared and renal replacement treatment should be undertaken [1,21,33,34,35,36,37,38]. Previous studies have found that unplanned dialysis initiation is associated with increased patient morbidity, mortality, and health care costs [1,2,3,4,5,6]. The common risk factors for unplanned dialysis initiation are increased age, lower estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) at dialysis initiation, and the presence of cardiovascular disease, congestive heart failure, and diabetes mellitus [9,11,12]. However, these factors are common in patients with ESKD and the lack clinical specificity that can help to predict and prevent unplanned dialysis initiation. Unfortunately, we could not perform a multivariate analysis because the sample size was not sufficiently large. Our study had other limitations. First, this was a single-center study. Second, the study design was observational in nature. Third, we could not perform multivariate analysis owing to the small sample size of this study. Fourth, the patients in this study were only ethnic Japanese. Finally, we did not assess quantitative body fluid status. However, our results suggest that the assessment of LV diastolic function by echocardiography may indicate when to create a permanent access device and initiate dialysis. We believe that our results will contribute to preventing unplanned dialysis initiation. Larger prospective multicenter studies are required to fully understand this association.

5. Conclusions

We evaluated LV diastolic function just before dialysis initiation between patients who commenced treatment in a planned and unplanned manner, according to the 2016 ASE/EACVI recommendations. This study demonstrated that LVDD and elevated estimated LV diastolic filling pressure are more apparent in incident dialysis patients who commence dialysis in an unplanned manner. Although the current study has some limitations, our results indicate that the assessment of LV diastolic function by echocardiography may indicate when to create a permanent access device and initiate dialysis. We believe that echocardiographic information should be used more effectively in patients with ESKD before the dialysis initiation.

Author Contributions

T.Y. designed the study. T.Y., M.S. and N.I. collected, entered, and analyzed the data. S.I., H.K. and Y.H. performed the data collection. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

This study was performed in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Kobe Rosai Hospital Research Ethics Committee (Reference no. 1–14, 2020).

Informed Consent Statement

Written informed consent was obtained from each patient prior to their participation in the study.

Data Availability Statement

The data are available and will be shared upon reasonable request by the corresponding author. However, they are not public due to ethical and regulatory issues.

Acknowledgments

The authors appreciate the support of the Japan Organization of Occupational Health and Safety.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Lok, C.E.; Huber, T.S.; Lee, T.; Shenoy, S.; Yevzlin, A.S.; Abreo, K.; Allon, M.; Asif, A.; Astor, B.C.; Glickman, M.H.; et al. KDOQI Clinical Practice Guideline for Vascular Access: 2019 Update. Am. J. Kidney Dis. 2020, 75, S1–S164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  2. Lorenzo, V.; Martn, M.; Rufino, M.; Hernandez, D.; Torres, A.; Ayus, J.C. Predialysis nephrologic care and a functioning arteriovenous fistula at entry are associated with better survival in incident hemodialysis patients: An observational cohort study. Am. J. Kidney Dis. 2004, 43, 999–1007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Mendelssohn, D.C.; Malmberg, C.; Hamandi, B. An integrated review of “unplanned” dialysis initiation: Reframing the terminology to “suboptimal” initiation. BMC Nephrol. 2009, 10, 22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  4. Ng, L.J.; Chen, F.; Pisoni, R.L.; Krishnan, M.; Mapes, D.; Keen, M.; Bradbury, B.D. Hospitalization risks related to vascular access type among incident US hemodialysis patients. Nephrol. Dial. Transplant. 2011, 26, 3659–3666. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  5. Ravani, P.; Palmer, S.C.; Oliver, M.J.; Quinn, R.R.; MacRae, J.M.; Tai, D.J.; Pannu, N.I.; Thomas, C.; Hemmelgarn, B.R.; Craig, J.C.; et al. Associations between Hemodialysis Access Type and Clinical Outcomes: A Systematic Review. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 2013, 24, 465–473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  6. Lok, C.E.; Foley, R. Vascular access morbidity and mortality: Trends of the last decade. Clin. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 2013, 8, 1213–1219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  7. Mendelssohn, D.C.; Curtis, B.; Yeates, K.; Langlois, S.; MacRae, J.M.; Semeniuk, L.M.; Camacho, F.; McFarlane, P.; STARRT Study investigators. Suboptimal initiation of dialysis with and without early referral to a nephrologist. Nephrol. Dial. Transplant. 2011, 26, 2959–2965. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  8. Hughes, S.A.; Mendelssohn, J.G.; Tobe, S.W.; McFarlane, P.A.; Mendelssohn, D.C. Factors associated with suboptimal initiation of dialysis despite early nephrologist referral. Nephrol. Dial. Transplant. 2013, 28, 392–397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  9. Brown, P.A.; Akbari, A.; Molnar, A.O.; Taran, S.; Bissonnette, J.; Sood, M.; Hiremath, S. Factors associated with unplanned dialysis starts in patients followed by nephrologists: A retrospective cohort study. PLoS ONE 2015, 10, e0130080. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Johansen, K.L.; Chertow, G.M.; Foley, R.N.; Gilbertson, D.T.; Herzog, C.A.; Ishani, A.; Israni, A.K.; Ku, E.; Kurella Tamura, M.; Peng, Y.; et al. United States Renal Data System 2020 Annual Data Report. Am. J. Kidney Dis. 2021, 2, S249–S265. [Google Scholar]
  11. Arulkumaran, N.; Navaratnarajah, A.; Pillay, C.; Brown, W.; Duncan, N.; McLean, A.; Taube, D.; Brown, E.A. Causes and risk factors for acute dialysis initiation among patients with end-stage kidney disease-a large retrospective observational cohort study. Clin. Kidney J. 2018, 12, 550–558. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  12. Hassan, R.; Akbari, A.; Brown, P.A.; Hiremath, S.; Brimble, K.S.; Molnar, A.O. Risk Factors for Unplanned Dialysis Initiation: A Systematic Review of the Literature. Can. J. Kidney Health Dis. 2019, 6, 2054358119831684. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Tripepi, G.; Benedetto, F.A.; Mallamaci, F.; Tripepi, R.; Malatino, L.; Zoccali, C. Left atrial volume monitoring and cardiovascular risk in patients with end-stage renal disease: A prospective cohort study. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 2007, 18, 1316–1322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  14. Otsuka, T.; Suzuki, M.; Yoshikawa, H.; Sugi, K. Left ventricular diastolic dysfunction in the early stage of chronic kidney disease. J. Cardiol. 2009, 54, 199–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  15. Baber, U.; Gutierrez, O.M.; Levitan, E.B.; Warnock, D.G.; Farkouh, M.E.; Tonelli, M.; Safford, M.M.; Muntner, P. Risk for recurrent coronary heart disease and all-cause mortality among individuals with chronic kidney disease compared with diabetes mellitus, metabolic syndrome, and cigarette smokers. Am. Heart J. 2013, 166, 373–380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  16. Cai, Q.Z.; Lu, X.Z.; Lu, Y.; Wang, A.Y. Longitudinal changes of cardiac structure and function in CKD (CASCADE study). J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 2014, 25, 1599–1608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  17. Ogawa, T.; Nitta, K. Clinical impact of left ventricular diastolic dysfunction in chronic kidney Disease. Contrib. Nephrol. 2018, 195, 81–91. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  18. Toida, T.; Toida, R.; Yamashita, R.; Komiya, N.; Uezono, S.; Komatsu, H.; Ishikawa, T.; Kitamura, K.; Sato, Y.; Fujimoto, S. Grading of Left Ventricular Diastolic Dysfunction with Preserved Systolic Function by the 2016 American Society of Echocardiography/European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging Recommendations Contributes to Predicting Cardiovascular Events in Hemodialysis Patients. Cardiorenal Med. 2019, 9, 190–200. [Google Scholar]
  19. Han, J.H.; Han, J.S.; Kim, E.J.; Doh, F.M.; Koo, H.M.; Kim, C.H.; Lee, M.J.; Oh, H.J.; Park, J.T.; Han, S.H.; et al. Diastolic dysfunction is an independent predictor of cardiovascular events in incident dialysis patients with preserved systolic function. PLoS ONE 2015, 13, e0118694. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  20. Nagueh, S.F.; Smiseth, O.A.; Appleton, C.P.; Gillebert, T.C.; Marino, P.N.; Oh, J.K.; Smiseth, O.A.; Waggoner, A.D.; Flachskampf, F.A.; Pellikka, P.A.; et al. Recommendations for the Evaluation of Left Ventricular Diastolic Function by Echocardiography: An Update from the American Society of Echocardiography and the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging. J. Am. Soc. Echocardiogr. 2016, 29, 277–314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. Chan, C.T.; Blankestijn, P.J.; Dember, L.M.; Gallieni, M.; Harris, D.C.; Lok, C.E.; Mehrotra, R.; Stevens, P.E.; Wang, A.Y.M.; Cheung, M.; et al. Dialysis initiation, modality choice, access, and prescription: Conclusions from a Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Controversies Conference. Kidney Int. 2019, 96, 37–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  22. Kanda, Y. Investigation of the freely available easy-to-use software‘EZR’ for medical statistics. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2013, 48, 452–458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  23. Wan, S.H.; Vogel, M.W.; Chen, H.H. Pre-Clinical Diastolic Dysfunction. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2014, 63, 407–416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  24. Redfield, M.M.; Jacobsen, S.J.; Burnett, J.C., Jr.; Mahoney, D.W.; Bailey, K.R.; Rodeheffer, R.J. Burden of systolic and diastolic ventricular dysfunction in the community: Appreciating the scope of the heart failure epidemic. JAMA 2003, 289, 194–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Abhayaratna, W.P.; Marwick, T.H.; Smith, W.T.; Becker, N.G. Characteristics of left ventricular diastolic dysfunction in the community: An echocardiographic survey. Heart 2006, 92, 1259–1264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  26. Lester, S.J.; Ryan, E.W.; Schiller, N.B.; Foster, E. Best method in clinical practice and in research studies to determine left atrial size. Am. J. Cardiol. 1999, 84, 829–832. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Tsang, T.S.; Abhayaratna, W.P.; Barnes, M.E.; Miyasaka, Y.; Gersh, B.J.; Bailey, K.R.; Cha, S.S.; Seward, J.B. Prediction of cardiovascular outcomes with left atrial size: Is volume superior to area or diameter? J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2006, 47, 1018–1023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Moller, J.E.; Hillis, G.S.; Oh, J.K.; Seward, J.B.; Reeder, G.S.; Wright, R.S.; Park, S.W.; Bailey, K.R.; Pellikka, P.A. Left atrial volume: A powerful predictor of survival after acute myocardial infarction. Circulation 2003, 107, 2207–2212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  29. Simek, C.L.; Feldman, M.D.; Haber, H.L.; Wu, C.C.; Jayaweera, A.R.; Kaul, S. Relationship between left ventricular wall thickness and left atrial size: Comparison with other measures of diastolic function. J. Am. Soc. Echocardiogr. 1995, 8, 37–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Ommen, S.R.; Nishimura, R.A.; Appleton, C.P.; Miller, F.A.; Oh, J.K.; Redfield, M.M.; Tajik, A.J. Clinical utility of Doppler echocardiography and tissue Doppler imaging in the estimation of left ventricular filling pressures: A comparative simultaneous Doppler-catheterization study. Circulation 2000, 102, 1788–1794. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  31. Little, W.C.; Oh, J.K. Echocardiographic evaluation of diastolic function can be used to guide clinical care. Circulation 2009, 120, 802–809. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  32. Sohn, D.W.; Chai, I.H.; Lee, D.J.; Kim, H.C.; Kim, H.S.; Oh, B.H.; Lee, M.M.; Park, Y.B.; Choi, Y.S.; Seo, J.D.; et al. Assessment of mitral annulus velocity by Doppler tissue imaging in the evaluation of left ventricular diastolic function. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 1997, 30, 474–480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  33. Hiremath, S.; Knoll, G.; Weinstein, M.C. Should the Arteriovenous Fistula Be Created before Starting Dialysis?: A Decision Analytic Approach. PLoS ONE 2011, 6, e28453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Cooper, B.A.; Branley, P.; Bulfone, L.; Collins, J.F.; Craig, J.C.; Fraenkel, M.B.; Harris, A.; Johnson, D.W.; Kesselhut, J.; Li, J.J.; et al. A Randomized, Controlled Trial of Early versus Late Initiation of Dialysis. N. Engl. J. Med. 2010, 363, 609–619. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  35. Susantitaphong, P.; Altamimi, S.; Ashkar, M.; Balk, E.M.; Stel, V.S.; Wright, S.; Jaber, B.L. GFR at initiation of dialysis and mortality in CKD: A meta-analysis. Am. J. Kidney Dis. 2012, 59, 829–840. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  36. Fu, E.L.; Evans, M.; Carrero, J.J.; Putter, H.; Clase, C.M.; Caskey, F.J.; Szymczak, M.; Torino, C.; Chesnaye, N.C.; Jager, K.J.; et al. Timing of dialysis initiation to reduce mortality and cardiovascular events in advanced chronic kidney disease: Nationwide cohort study. BMJ 2021, 375, e066306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Crews, D.C.; Scialla, J.J.; Boulware, L.E.; Navaneethan, S.D.; Nally, J.V., Jr.; Liu, X.; Arrigain, S.; Schold, J.D.; Ephraim, P.L.; Tangri, N.; et al. Comparative effectiveness of early versus conventional timing of dialysis initiation in advanced CKD. Am. J. Kidney Dis. 2014, 63, 806–815. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  38. Park, J.Y.; Yoo, K.D.; Kim, Y.C.; Kim, D.K.; Joo, K.W.; Kang, S.W.; Yang, C.W.; Kim, N.H.; Kim, Y.L.; Lim, C.S.; et al. Early dialysis initiation does not improve clinical outcomes in elderly end-stage renal disease patients: A multicenter prospective cohort study. PLoS ONE 2017, 12, e0175830. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Table
Table 1. Clinical characteristics.
Table 1. Clinical characteristics.
VariablesPlanned (n = 11)Unplanned (n = 10)p-Value
Age, years74 (72–79)75 (66–77)0.75
Male sex (%)9 (82)6 (60)0.36
BMI, kg/m221.5 (20.7–22.5)24.1 (21.6–26.4)0.15
SBP, mmHg150 (143–158)145 (131–165)0.78
DBP mmHg81 (70–92)70 (60–80)0.16
Referral to nephrologists (%)7 (64)7 (70)1.0
Comorbidities
Hypertension (%)10 (91)10 (100)1.0
Dyslipidemia (%)9 (82)5 (50)0.18
Diabetes (%)7 (64)5 (50)0.67
Hyperuricemia (%)10 (91)7 (70)0.31
CVD (%)2 (18)5 (50)0.18
Medications
ACEI/ARB (%)2 (18)8 (80)0.009
β-blocker (%)3 (27)7 (70)0.086
CCB (%)10 (91)9 (90)1.0
Diuretics (%)4 (36)7 (70)0.2
Statin (%)9 (82)4 (40)0.081
ESA (%)10 (91)3 (30)0.008
Reasons for commencing dialysis
Uremic symptom (%)5 (45)4 (40)1.0
Volume overload (%)3 (27)4 (40)0.66
Other (%)3 (27)2 (20)1.0
SBP, systolic blood pressure; DBP, diastolic blood pressure; BMI, body mass index; CVD, Cardiovascular diseases; ACEI, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor; ARB, angiotensin II receptor blocker; CCB, calcium channel blocker; ESA, erythropoiesis-stimulating agent.
Table
Table 2. Hematological and biochemical characteristics.
Table 2. Hematological and biochemical characteristics.
VariablesPlanned (n = 11)Unplanned (n = 10)p-Value
Serum urea nitrogen, mg/dL77.7 (55.2–94.6)73.4 (64.5–78.3)0.92
Serum creatinine, mg/dL7.0 (5.9–8.0)6.7 (5.8–9.2)0.97
eGFR, mL/min per 1.73 m26.5 (5.6–7.6)7.3 (4.0–8.3)1.0
Serum sodium, mEq/L140 (139–142)139 (137–141)0.30
Serum potassium, mEq/L4.4 (4.2–5.0)4.1 (3.9–4.5)0.23
Serum calcium, mg/dL8.9 (8.7–9.6)9.1 (8.9–9.9)0.48
Serum phosphate, mg/dL4.9 (4.7–5.7)5.4 (4.9–6.3)0.42
Hemoglobin, g/L9.3 (8.8–10.5)9.0 (7.6–10.1)0.60
Hematocrit, %28.9 (26.9–32.4)27.7 (23.3–30.6)0.48
Serum Ferritin, ng/mL94.7 (72.5–122.2)127.3 (41.9–194.8)0.89
Serum albumin, g/dL3.3 (3.1–3.7)2.7 (2.3–3.4)0.006
Fasting glucose, mg/dL102 (96–121)108 (103–135)0.26
Fasting LDL cholesterol, mg/dL73 (58–78)79 (70–133)0.26
Fasting triglyceride, mg/dL141 (108–153)103 (66–154)0.53
eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate; LDL, low density lipoprotein.
Table
Table 3. Echocardiographic parameters.
Table 3. Echocardiographic parameters.
VariablesPlanned (n = 11)Unplanned (n = 10)p-Value
LAD (mm)37.0 (34.1–40.8)40.3 (38.5–45.6)0.34
LAVI (mL/m2)44.7 (38.2–53.1)51.1 (46.8–59.8)0.25
LVEDD (mm)50.0 (49.2–52.5)49.6 (45.6–54.5)0.67
LVESD (mm)32.0 (30.2–35.8)35.2 (29.7–37.2)0.60
LVEF (%)65.0 (62.0–68.4)60.1 (56.3–64.6)0.18
LVEF ≥ 50 (%)10 (91)8 (80)0.59
E (cm/s)78.7 (63.5–94.5)110.5 (84.0–121.7)0.051
A (cm/s)110.6 (93.6–120.3)94.4 (73.9–109.8)0.25
E/A0.86 (0.71–0.90)1.20 (0.81–1.80)0.048
DT (msec)200 (177–223)192 (176–227)0.94
E′ (cm/s)7.5 (6.1–9.0)6.3 (5.5–6.4)0.07
E/E′10.4 (9.5–12.8)17.6 (15.0–18.5)0.003
TRV (m/s)2.41 (2.23–2.49)2.65 (2.23–3.08)0.16
LAD, left atrial diameter; LAVI, left atrial volume index; LVEDD, left ventricular end diastolic diameter; LVESD, left ventricular end systolic diameter; LVEF, left ventricular ejection fraction; E, early transmitral peak velocity; A, late transmitral peak velocity; DT, deceleration time; E′, mitral annular early diastolic peak velocity; TRV, tricuspid regurgitant velocity.
Table
Table 4. Echocardiographic parameters for evaluating left ventricular diastolic function.
Table 4. Echocardiographic parameters for evaluating left ventricular diastolic function.
VariablesPlanned (n = 11)Unplanned (n = 10)p-Value
LAVI > 34 (%)9 (82)9 (90)1.0
E′ < 7 (%)4 (36)8 (80)0.081
E/E′ > 14 (%)2 (18)8 (80)0.009
TRV > 2.8 (%)0 (0)4 (40)0.035
Diastolic function
Normal (%)7 (64)0 (0)
Indeterminate (%)2 (18)2 (20)
Diastolic dysfunction (%)2 (18)8 (80)0.009
LAVI, left atrial volume index; E, early transmitral peak velocity; E′, mitral annular early diastolic peak velocity; TRV, tricuspid regurgitant velocity.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Yoshioka, T.; Inoue, S.; Kohriyama, H.; Haruna, Y.; Satoh, M.; Inoue, N. Comparison of Left Ventricular Diastolic Function Parameters between Patients with Unplanned and Planned Hemodialysis Initiation: A Cross-Sectional Study. Kidney Dial. 2023, 3, 163-170. https://doi.org/10.3390/kidneydial3020014

AMA Style

Yoshioka T, Inoue S, Kohriyama H, Haruna Y, Satoh M, Inoue N. Comparison of Left Ventricular Diastolic Function Parameters between Patients with Unplanned and Planned Hemodialysis Initiation: A Cross-Sectional Study. Kidney and Dialysis. 2023; 3(2):163-170. https://doi.org/10.3390/kidneydial3020014

Chicago/Turabian Style

Yoshioka, Takayuki, Seiya Inoue, Hitoshi Kohriyama, Yoshisuke Haruna, Minoru Satoh, and Nobutaka Inoue. 2023. "Comparison of Left Ventricular Diastolic Function Parameters between Patients with Unplanned and Planned Hemodialysis Initiation: A Cross-Sectional Study" Kidney and Dialysis 3, no. 2: 163-170. https://doi.org/10.3390/kidneydial3020014

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop