Abstract
A two-needle method for calculating recirculation was compared with the standard three-needle method, substituting the standard phlebotomy of a remote vessel during dialysis with blood obtained from the dialyzer inlet needle 15 minutes after the termination of dialysis. Twenty patients were studied prospectively. There was no significant difference between corrected blood flow calculated with the standard and two-needle methods. The BUN obtained from the inlet needle 15 minutes after conclusion of the treatment did not differ significantly from the BUN concentration in the specimen from a contralateral arm drawn five minutes before termination of dialysis. Recirculation calculated by the two-needle method correlated well with the results obtained with the standard three-needle method. The two-needle method provides a convenient alternative to the standard three-needle method of determining recirculation.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 203-206 |
| Number of pages | 4 |
| Journal | Clinical Nephrology |
| Volume | 33 |
| Issue number | 4 |
| State | Published - 1990 |
| Externally published | Yes |
Fingerprint
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes
- Nephrology
Cite this
Two-needle calculation of recirculation compared with the standard three-needle method. / Pederson, J. A.; Dunlay, Robert W.; Williams, C.; Llach, F.
In: Clinical Nephrology, Vol. 33, No. 4, 1990, p. 203-206.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Two-needle calculation of recirculation compared with the standard three-needle method
AU - Pederson, J. A.
AU - Dunlay, Robert W.
AU - Williams, C.
AU - Llach, F.
PY - 1990
Y1 - 1990
N2 - A two-needle method for calculating recirculation was compared with the standard three-needle method, substituting the standard phlebotomy of a remote vessel during dialysis with blood obtained from the dialyzer inlet needle 15 minutes after the termination of dialysis. Twenty patients were studied prospectively. There was no significant difference between corrected blood flow calculated with the standard and two-needle methods. The BUN obtained from the inlet needle 15 minutes after conclusion of the treatment did not differ significantly from the BUN concentration in the specimen from a contralateral arm drawn five minutes before termination of dialysis. Recirculation calculated by the two-needle method correlated well with the results obtained with the standard three-needle method. The two-needle method provides a convenient alternative to the standard three-needle method of determining recirculation.
AB - A two-needle method for calculating recirculation was compared with the standard three-needle method, substituting the standard phlebotomy of a remote vessel during dialysis with blood obtained from the dialyzer inlet needle 15 minutes after the termination of dialysis. Twenty patients were studied prospectively. There was no significant difference between corrected blood flow calculated with the standard and two-needle methods. The BUN obtained from the inlet needle 15 minutes after conclusion of the treatment did not differ significantly from the BUN concentration in the specimen from a contralateral arm drawn five minutes before termination of dialysis. Recirculation calculated by the two-needle method correlated well with the results obtained with the standard three-needle method. The two-needle method provides a convenient alternative to the standard three-needle method of determining recirculation.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0025246641&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0025246641&partnerID=8YFLogxK
M3 - Article
C2 - 2350908
AN - SCOPUS:0025246641
VL - 33
SP - 203
EP - 206
JO - Clinical Nephrology
JF - Clinical Nephrology
SN - 0301-0430
IS - 4
ER -