Physical examination for the detection of hypervolemia among patients on chronic dialysis: A diagnostic-test study

Use of lung ultrasound to assess volume status and its association with physical examination in patients with chronic kidney disease

Introduction

Defining the optimal hydration status in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) is challenging, and the quest for an objective accurate method continues. Lung ultrasound (LUS) is a well-validated technique to estimate volume status. Previous studies examining the relationship between LUS and physical examination demonstrated conflicting results. We aimed to evaluate the correlation between LUS results and physical examination for assessing volume status in patients with CKD, and to compare different LUS protocols.

Methods

A prospective, single-center trial correlating physical examination findings to LUS results in different CKD groups, including non-dialysis and dialysis patients. Hemodialysis patients were tested twice, before and after dialysis, to compare results with ultrafiltration volume. Different LUS protocols were performed and compared, including 16-, 12-, and 8-zone measurements.

Results

We recruited 175 participants. A strong positive correlation was demonstrated between 16- and 12-zone protocols [r = .91 (P < .001)] and between 12- and 8-zone protocols (r = .951, P < .001). Correlation was significant in various CKD groups. While blood pressure did not correlate with LUS score, there was a significant correlation between LUS and other components of the physical examination including lung crackles (OR = 1.15 (95%CI 1.096-1.22), P < .01), pleural effusion (OR = 1.15 (95%CI 1.09-2.13), P < .01) and peripheral edema (r = .24, P < .001). Ultrafiltration volume did not correlate significantly with change in LUS scores pre- and post-dialysis (r = .169, P = .065).

Conclusion

Most components of physical examination findings correlated with extravascular lung water assessment on LUS in CKD patients. The use of a simplified pragmatic LUS protocol may facilitate LUS use in clinical practice.

Which congestion presentation pattern on the physical findings is associated with future adverse events? A cluster analysis in the multicenter acute heart failure registry

BACKGROUND

Clinical congestion is the most frequent reason for hospital admission in patients with acute heart failure (AHF). However, few studies have investigated the patterns and prognostic implication of the physical congestion using unbiased and robust statistical methods.

METHODS

A hierarchical agglomerative clustering analysis was performed in the multicenter Japanese AHF registry (N = 3151) with the distance calculated by Jaccard's distance for jugular vein distention (JVD), leg edema, S3, crackles, and orthopnea. The primary outcome was a composite of cardiac death and heart failure readmission within 1-year.

RESULTS

At the time of admission, the median number of prevalent congestive signs was 2. We identified three phenogroups: 'no physical congestions' (N = 251); 'congestion without JVD' (N = 1415); and 'congestion with JVD' (N = 1495). Patients in 'no physical congestion' were the youngest (median 75 [62, 83] years) with the lowest systolic blood pressure (122 [106, 142] mmHg). Patients in 'congestion without JVD', and 'congestion with JVD' were similar in terms of age (77 [67, 84] vs. 78 [69, 84] years) and systolic blood pressure (138 [118, 160] vs. 137 [118, 158] mmHg). While 30-day mortality was similar (4.0%, 3.7%, and 4.3% in 'no physical congestion,' 'congestion without JVD,' and 'congestion with JVD', respectively), the patients in 'congestion with JVD' were at the highest risk for the primary outcome (adjusted hazard ratio 1.79, 95% CI 1.26-2.55 when 'no physical congestion' was a reference).

CONCLUSIONS

Our clustering analysis demonstrated that congestion signs, particularly JVD, allowed identification of AHF phenogroups with distinct clinical characteristics and long-term outcomes.

This study aimed to evaluate IPC and NMES in haemodialysis patients with lower limb oedema. As a secondary objective, it also set out to evaluate the impact of localised fluid (oedema) on BCM measured fluid status

BACKGROUND

The presence of localised oedema can make measurement and removal of excess fluid in haemodialysis challenging.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate (i) the effectiveness of intermittent pneumatic compression and neuromuscular electrical stimulation at mobilising oedema and (ii) the impact of localised fluid on bioimpedance measured fluid status.

DESIGN

A single centre, cross-over study design. Participants were monitored weekly during mid-week dialysis sessions. Four sessions with each of the interventions and no interventions, with washout periods between, were included.

PARTICIPANTS

Six participants with lower limb oedema and established on haemodialysis for at least 3 months.

MEASUREMENTS

The effectiveness of mobilising oedema and improving haemodynamic stability was assessed by: reduction in ankle circumference; ultrafiltration volume achieved; blood pressure changes; participant symptoms and achievement of target weight. The impact of localised fluid on bioimpedance measurements was assessed by comparing measurements across affected tissue with measurements avoiding the site of oedema.

RESULTS

There were no differences in ultrafiltration volumes, achievement of target weight, participant symptoms or reductions in ankle circumference and systolic blood pressure between intermittent pneumatic compression and neuromuscular electrical stimulation sessions compared to control sessions. Measurements of fluid overload with bioimpedance were 1.7 and 1.8 L higher when measuring across oedematous tissue compared to non-oedematous tissue.

CONCLUSIONS

We were unable to demonstrate improved mobilisation of fluid in the participant's lower limb, though there was a low number of study participants and notable interindividual variation observed. Bioimpedance offers potential for monitoring fluid management in individuals with lower limb oedema but specific protocols are necessary.