570
Views
13
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Clinical Study

Impact of Volume Status on Blood Pressure and Left Ventricle Structure in Patients Undergoing Chronic Hemodialysis

, , , , , , & show all
Pages 377-381 | Received 05 Oct 2010, Accepted 16 Feb 2011, Published online: 30 Apr 2011

Abstract

In this study, we aimed to examine the impact of volume status on blood pressure (BP) and on left ventricular mass index (LVMI) in chronic hemodialysis (HD) patients. This study enrolled 74 patients (F/M: 36/38, mean age 53.5 ± 15.3 years, mean HD time 41.5 ± 41 months) that were on HD treatment for at least 3 months. Demographics, biochemical tests, hemogram and C-reactive protein levels, mean interdialytic weight gain (IDWG), mean percentage of ultrafiltration (UF), and intradialytic complications such as hypotension and cramps were determined. Mean values of predialysis and postdialysis BP measurements were recorded a month before echocardiographic examination. On the day after a midweek dialysis session, 24 h ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) and echocardiographic examination were made concurrently. The patients were classified into two groups according to volume status: normovolemic (group 1; 14F/24M, mean age 50 ± 16.7 years, mean dialysis time 47.7 ± 47.7 months) and hypervolemic (group 2; 15F/21M, mean age 57.3 ± 12.7 years, mean dialysis time 34.9 ± 32 months). HD duration, IDWG, UF, and interdialytic complication rates were similar between the two groups (p < 0.05). Eleven patients (28.9%) of group 1 and 8 patients (22.2%) of group 2 showed dipper (p = 0.50). Valvular damage was more common in group 2 (p = 0.002). Whereas 33 patients (91.7%) had left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) in group 2, 21 patients of the group 1 (55.3%) had LVH (p < 0.001). Although LVMI showed a significant positive correlation with cardiothoracic index, predialysis and postdialysis BP, IDWG, UF, daytime and nighttime BP measurements of 24 h ABPM, a significant negative correlation was seen with Kt/V urea and serum albumin levels. In conclusion, increased IDWG and UF and elevated BP are independent predictors of LVH for HD patients. Increased volume status leads to IDWG and elevated BP and eventually causes severe LVMI increases.

INTRODUCTION

Hypertension is one of the major risk factors for cardiovascular diseases influencing the life expectancy in patients undergoing dialysis as well as in general population. Although patients with renal failure before dialysis showed a hypertension prevalence of 80%, it was reported as 56–86% in the patients undergoing hemodialysis (HD).Citation1–4

In HD patients, the most important probable mechanism leading to hypertension is positive sodium balance and extracellular fluid accumulation, and there are many studies that report this as the main reason observed in 90–95% of the patients.Citation5,Citation6 In addition, hypertension is an important cause of left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) in these patientsCitation7,Citation8 Hypertension is associated with cardiac dilatation, myocardial ischemia, fibrosis, arrhythmia, and increased mass of left ventricular muscle leading to LVH.Citation9 LVH is also very common in HD patients and has been shown to be a strong predictor of cardiovascular mortality.Citation10,Citation11

In this study, the effect of volume status on blood pressure (BP) and on left ventricular muscle mass (LVM) and the factors that may be associated with them in chronic HD patients were evaluated.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study enrolled patients on chronic HD treatment for at least 3 months. Demographic data, biochemical test results (serum urea, creatinine, sodium, potassium, calcium, phosphorus, parathormone, and albumin levels), hemogram, and C-reactive protein levels and medical treatments within the last month and mean Kt/V urea and mean urea reduction ratio of the last 3 months were determined from the medical records of the patients.

Based on the medical records, mean interdialytic weight gain (IDWG) (kg/day), mean percentage of ultrafiltration (UF) (the ratio of mean amount of fluid drawn to the dry weight per session), intradialytic hypotension episodes (a fall of 20 mmHg in pre-systolic BP and/or a fall of 10 mmHg in pre-diastolic BP),Citation12 and the number of sessions for which intradialytic cramp occurred during the last month were recorded.

Mean values of systolic and diastolic BP were calculated from the records of predialysis and postdialysis measurements before and after the last 12 HD sessions. Hypertension was defined as predialysis BP >130/80 mmHg.

On the day after a midweek dialysis session, all patients underwent 24 h ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) and echocardiographic examination, concurrently. Twenty-four hours of BP monitoring from the upper portion of the non-fistula-bearing arm was performed by the oscillometer method using a noninvasive ABPM equipment (Spacelabs, Issaquah, WA, USA). Daytime and nighttime BPs were defined as the average values during the awake period (between 6:00 am and 10:00 pm) and during the sleeping period (between 10:00 pm and 6:00 am), respectively. Measurements were done at 15 min intervals during the daytime and at 30 min intervals during the nighttime. “Dippers” were defined as those patients who showed a nighttime decline of 10% or more in the mean BP than the average daytime mean BP. Patients not meeting the dipper criteria were defined as “non-dippers.”

With the echocardiography performed on the same day with 24 h BP monitorization, left atrium diameter (LA), left ventricular systolic and end-diastolic diameter, interventricular septum thickness and left ventricular posterior wall thickness (PWT), and valvular functions and ejection fractions of the patients were measured. LVM was calculated using the formula described by Devereux and ReichekCitation13:

LVH was defined as left ventricular mass index [(LVMI (LVM to body surface area)] of >131 g/m2 in males and 104 g/m2 in females.Citation14 We described LVH as “severe” when LVMI exceeded 140 and 160 g/m2 for females and males, respectively.

The patients were divided in two groups as normovolemic (those with dry weight) and hypervolemic (those exceeding dry weight), according to volume status by evaluating in terms of cardiothoracic index (CTI) (below or above 45%), predialysis BP (below or above 130/80 mmHg), LA (below or above 3.6 cm), and clinical evaluation (pretibial edema, intradialytic hypotension, and cramp episodes). Demographics, biochemical test results, hematologic parameters, intradialytic complications, IDWGs, percentages of UF, 24 h BP monitorization data, and echocardiographic findings were compared between the two groups. The parameters that may be related to left ventricle (LV) muscular mass and hypervolemia were investigated.

All data were recorded using SPSS 12.0 statistical software. Parametric data were expressed as mean ± SD. Whereas t-test was used for the analysis of parametric data, Spearsman and Pearson tests were used for correlation analysis. For the analysis of nonparametric data Mann–Whitney U test was used. In the analyses, p < 0.05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

This study included 74 HD patients; 36 of them were women. Mean age of the patients was 53.5 ± 15.3 (21–92) years and mean duration of HD was 41.5 ± 41 (3–192) months.

Normovolemic group (group 1) included 38 patients, 14 of whom were women. Mean age of the patients was 50 ± 16.7 years and mean duration of HD was 47.7 ± 47.7 months. Most frequent etiologies of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) were hypertension (29%), chronic glomerulonephritis (29%), and diabetes (16%). Mean IDWG was 1.14 ± 0.25 kg/day, and percentage of UF drawn per dialysis session was 4.2 ± 1.0 in this group.

Hypervolemic group (group 2) included 36 patients, 15 of whom were women. Mean age of the patients was 57.3 ± 12.7 years and mean duration of HD was 34.9 ± 32 months. Most commonly observed etiologies of disease in this group were hypertension (44%), diabetes (22%), and chronic glomerulonephritis (14%). For the patients of this group, mean IDWG was 1.2 ± 0.45 kg/day and percentage of UF drawn per dialysis session was 4.75 ± 1.58. There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of HD duration (p = 0.18). Although IDWG and intradialytic UF percentage were higher in the patients of group 2, this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.47 and 0.08, respectively).

The groups did not show a significant difference in terms of etiology (p = 0.40). Hemogram and biochemical parameters were found to be similar (). Whereas half of the patients of group 1 showed intradialytic hypotension and 42% had cramp, 58% of patients developed intradialytic hypotension and 50% of patients developed cramp in group 2. Although intradialytic hypotension and cramp complications were more common in group 2, the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.47 and 0.49). Whereas only two patients were using antihypertensive drugs (angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor and beta blocker) in group 1, seven patients were using antihypertensive drugs (four patients calcium channel blocker, one patient ACE inhibitor, one patient angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB), and one patient beta blocker) in group 2. Between the two groups, there was no significant difference in the use of antihypertensive drug (p = 0.22).

Table 1.  Laboratory parameters of the patients

For the two groups, predialysis and postdialysis BP and interdialytic 24 h ABPM values are shown in .

Table 2.  Predialytic, postdialytic, and 24 h ABPM results of both groups

Regarding 24 h ABPM, 11 patients of group 1 (28.9%) and 8 patients of group 2 (22.2%) showed dipper form. The two groups did not show a significant difference in terms of dipper ratio (p = 0.50).

Based on the data obtained from echocardiography, only four patients (10.5%) of group 1 had valvular damage (all of them had mild mitral insufficiency). However, 15 patients of group 2 (41.7%) had valvular damage (13 of them with various graded mitral insufficiency and/or 4 patients with tricuspid insufficiency, 3 patients with aortic stenosis, and 3 patients with aortic insufficiency). Valvular damage was statistically significantly more frequent in group 2 (p = 0.002). Left ventricular diastolic dysfunction was similar in both groups (p = 0.35).

Twenty-one patients of group 1 (55.3%) had LVH, and 11 of them had severe LVH. Whereas 33 patients of group 2 (91.7%) had LVH, 22 of them had severe form. LVH and severe form were significantly more frequent in the patients of group 2 (p  <  0.001). Echocardiographic data of both groups are shown in .

Table 3.  Echocardiography results of the patients

We found a significantly positive correlation between LVMI and CTI, IDWG, percentage of UF, predialysis and postdialysis systolic and diastolic BP, and daytime and nighttime systolic and diastolic BP measurements of 24 h ABPM. Negative correlation was found between LVMI and Kt/V urea and serum albumin levels (). There was no correlation between LVMI and the duration of HD, biochemical and hematologic parameters other than albumin, hypotensive attacks, and cramps.

Table 4.  Parameters associated with left ventricular muscular mass index

DISCUSSION

Cardiovascular diseases are the main cause of death in chronic renal failure patients. LVH is an important risk factor for cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in chronic HD patients and it is significantly promoted by hypertension. In these patients, LVH is a common finding with an incidence of nearly 75–80% in dialysis patients.Citation8–11,Citation15 In addition, antihypertensive drug regimen does not prevent the progression of LVH in hypertensive HD patients.Citation7,Citation8 In this study, whereas incidence of LVH in the normovolemic HD patients was 53%, it was found to be 91% in the hypervolemic (mildly hypertensive) patients.

Hypertension is a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease affecting the life expectancy of the general and also ESRD population. It has been reported that 80% of patients with ESRD manifested hypertension just before beginning chronic dialysis.Citation1 Increased LV mass in association with nocturnal hypertension has been reported in predialysis and dialysis patients.Citation16,Citation17

BP may be measured during the predialysis, postdialysis, or interdialytic periods in HD patients. In these patients, there is a conflict about which BP will be taken as the essential parameter for the diagnosis or follow-up of the hypertension. Several studies assessed the prediction that can be attributed to BP levels measured before or after the dialysis session. Postdialysis rather than predialysis BP was found to be independently related to increased mortality.Citation18,Citation19 Since the development and clinical application of ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM), various studies have shown that assessing the circadian BP profile is more predictive than office BP readings in estimating cardiovascular risk.Citation20–22 ABPM has been generally considered as the most accurate method for evaluating BP overload in the general population as well as in HD patients.Citation23

In a recent study of hypertensive patients with LVH, 24 h ABPM was not superior to nurse-recorded seated BP in terms of associations with treatment-induced changes in LV mass.Citation24 Zoccali et al. also used 24 h ambulatory BP monitoring and reported that it did not add any significant information to the dialysis unit BP.Citation25 The authors concluded that the average of 12 predialysis BPs was as useful as ABPM in the prediction of LVH. Cannella et al. also measured 24 h ABPM, and routine dialysis unit BP averaged over 12 sessions. They reported close correlations for BPs between ABPM and routine BP measurements.Citation26 In our study, we obtained the average of at least 12 consecutive predialysis and postdialysis BP measurements. In addition to daytime and nighttime BPs obtained during the 24 h ABPM, predialysis and postdialysis BPs were found to be correlated with left ventricular mass as well.

Cross-sectional studies in hypertensive patients have, in general, shown only modest correlations between clinic BP and left ventricular mass. However, during the studies performed with ABPM; Amar et al. found a strong relationship of pulse pressure with total mortality.Citation27 Another study from Zocalli's group found that the night/day systolic BP ratio was the sole BP indicator associated with all-cause and cardiovascular mortality.Citation28 The best correlation between left ventricular mass index and BP was seen with ABPM. Systolic BP overload was a unique and independent predictor of LVMI and interventricular septal thickness (both measures of LVH), whereas nighttime ambulatory systolic BP was the best predictor for left ventricular PWT.Citation29

Although the reason of the hypertension that is commonly seen in HD patients is multifactorial, the importance of volume status on BP in HD patients has long been recognized.Citation30 In HD patients, the basis for the occurrence of high predialysis BP can result from a number of factors: changes in extracellular volume (i.e., volume expansion), low compliance to restricted salt intake,Citation31 and sympathetic and renin angiotensin overactivation.Citation32 The importance of volume status for the BP was investigated in many studies, and some of them reported that intradialytic changes of pressure were independent from IDWG or intradialytic loss of body weight,Citation33,Citation34 whereas others state that IDWG or intradialytic loss of body weight shows positive correlation with the BP.Citation35–37 IDWG and intradialytic UF percentage were found to be higher in our hypervolemic patients. Although this elevation was not significant, we believe that IDWG has an effect on the BP.

In many studies, it was shown that in addition to pressure overload, volume overload may also be an important factor for the development of LVH in dialysis patients. It was found that systolic BP and IDWG are independent determinants of the LVH development.Citation38,Citation39 Elevated BP caused by volume overload was associated not only with LVH, but also with left atrial dilatation and valvular insufficiency.Citation40–42 In our patients with hypervolemia, in addition to elevated LVH rate, we also found that 47% of the patients had cardiac valvular insufficiency.

Non-dipping occurs in a variety of conditions and diseases, such as chronic renal failure, sleep apnea, volume overload, nocturia, and those with sympathetic activation.Citation43 Non-dipping is associated with LVHCitation44 and increased cardiovascular risk.Citation45 In our study, 71% of normovolemic patients and 78% of hypervolemic patients showed non-dipper. However, this difference was not significant.

As a conclusion, elevations of BP measurements obtained by 24 h ABPM, IDWG, and increase of the amount of fluid drawn are independent predictors of the LVH development. For HD patients, sensitive mechanisms play an important role in the maintenance of normovolemia (ideal weight and dry weight). Even slight but continuing increases of volume may lead to elevation of BP and increased LVMI, causing LVH eventually.

Declaration of interest

The authors report no conflicts of interest. The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of the paper.

References

  • Hull A, Long D, Pettinger WA, Parker TF, III. The control of hypertension in patients undergoing regular maintenance hemodialysis. Kidney Int. 1974;7(Suppl. 2):187–194.
  • Goodkin DA, Bragg-Gresham JL, Koenig KG, Association of comorbid conditions and mortality in hemodialysis patients in Europe, Japan, and the United States: The Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (DOPPS). J Am Soc Nephrol. 2003;14:3270–3277.
  • Salem MM. Hypertension in the hemodialysis population: A survey of 649 patients. Am J Kidney Dis. 1995;26:461–468.
  • Goodkin DA, Young EW, Kurokawa K, Prutz KG, Levin NW. Mortality among hemodialysis patients in Europe, Japan, and the United States: Case-mix effects. Am J Kidney Dis. 2004;44:16–21.
  • Koomans HA, Roos JC, Dorhout Mees EJ, Delawi IM. Sodium balance in renal failure: A comparison of patients with normal subjects under extremes of sodium intake. Hypertension. 1985;7:714–721.
  • Kooman JP, Van Der Sande FM, Leunissen KM. Role of sodium and volume in the pathogenesis of hypertension in dialysis patients: Reflections on pathophysiological mechanisms. Blood Purif. 2004;22:55–59.
  • Zoccali C, Benedetto FA, Tripepi G, Mallamaci F. Cardiac consequences of hypertension in hemodialysis patients. Semin Dial. 2004;17:299–303.
  • Harnett JD, Kent GM, Barre PE, Taylor R, Parfrey PS. Risk factors for the development of left ventricular hypertrophy in a prospectively followed cohort of dialysis patients. J Am Soc Nephrol. 1994;4:1486–1490.
  • Cuspidi C, Ciulla M, Zanchetti A. Hypertensive myocardial fibrosis. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2006;21:20–23.
  • Stewart GA, Gansevoort RT, Mark PB, Electrocardiographic abnormalities and uremic cardiomyopathy. Kidney Int. 2005;67:217–226.
  • Middleton RJ, Parfrey PS, Foley RN. Left ventricular hypertrophy in the renal patient. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2001;12:1079–1084.
  • K/DOQI. K/DOQI clinical practice guidelines for cardiovascular disease in dialysis patients. Am J Kidney Dis. 2005;45(Suppl. 3):16–153.
  • Devereux RB, Reichek N. Echocardiographic determination of left ventricular mass in man. Anatomic validation of the method. Circulation. 1977;55:613–618.
  • Devereux RB, Lutas EM, Casale PN, Standardization of M-mode echocardiographic left ventricular anatomic measurements. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1984;4:1222–1230.
  • Foley RN, Parfrey PS, Harnett JD, Clinical and echocardiographic disease in patients starting end-stage renal disease therapy. Kidney Int. 1995;47:186–192.
  • Tucker B, Fabbian F, Giles M, Left ventricular hypertrophy and ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in chronic renal failure. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 1997;12:724–728.
  • Erturk S, Ertug AE, Ates K, Relationship of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring data to echocardiographic findings in hemodialysis patients. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 1996;11:2050–2054.
  • Foley R, Herzog C, Collins A. Blood pressure and long-term mortality in United States hemodialysis patients: ESRD waves 3 and 4 study. Kidney Int. 2002;62:1784–1790.
  • Mendes R, Santos S, Dorigo D, The use of peridialysis blood pressure and intradialytic blood pressure changes in the prediction of interdialytic blood pressure in hemodialysis patients. Blood Pres Monit. 2003;8:243–248.
  • Verdecchia P, Porcellati C, Schillaci G, Ambulatory blood pressure. An independent predictor of prognosis in essential hypertension. Hypertension. 1994;24:793–801.
  • Dolan E, Stanton A, Thijs L, Superiority of ambulatory over clinic blood pressure measurement in predicting mortality: The Dublin outcome study. Hypertension. 2005;46:156–161.
  • Clement DL, De Buyzere ML, De Bacquer DA, Prognostic value of ambulatory blood-pressure recordings in patients with treated hypertension. N Engl J Med. 2003;348:2407–2415.
  • Peixoto A, Santos S, Mendes R, Reproducibility of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in hemodialysis patients. Am J Kidney Dis. 2000;36:983–990.
  • Nystrom F, Malmqvist K, Ohman KP, Kahan T. Nurse recorded and ambulatory blood pressure predicts treatment induced reduction of left ventricular hypertrophy equally well in hypertension: Results from the Swedish irbesartan left ventricular hypertrophy investigation versus atenolol (SILVHIA) study. J Hypertens. 2002;20:1527–1533.
  • Zoccali C, Mallamaci F, Tripepi G, Prediction of left ventricular geometry by clinic, pre-dialysis and 24-h ambulatory BP monitoring in hemodialysis patients: CREED investigators. J Hypertens. 1999;17:1751–1758.
  • Cannella G, Paoletti E, Ravera G, Inadequate diagnosis and therapy of arterial hypertension as causes of left ventricular hypertrophy in uremic dialysis patients. Kidney Int. 2000;58:260–268.
  • Amar J, Vernier I, Rossignol E, Nocturnal blood pressure and 24-hour pulse pressure are potent indicators of mortality in hemodialysis patients. Kidney Int. 2000;57:2485–2491.
  • Tripepi G, Fagugli RM, Dattolo P, Prognostic value of 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring and of night/day ratio in nondiabetic, cardiovascular events-free hemodialysis patients. Kidney Int. 2005;68:1294–1302.
  • Agarwal R. Assessment of blood pressure in hemodialysis patients. Semin Dial. 2002;15(5):299–304.
  • Leypoldt J, Cheung A, Delmez J, Relationship between volume status and blood pressure during chronic hemodialysis. Kidney Int. 2002;61:266–275.
  • Khosla U, Johnson R. Hypertension in the hemodialysis patient and the “lag phenomenon”: Insights into pathophysiology and clinical management. Am J Kidney Dis. 2004;43:739–751.
  • Blankestijn P. Sympathetic hyperactivity in chronic kidney disease. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2004;19:1354–1357.
  • Luik AJ, Gladziwa U, Kooman JP, Influence of interdialytic weight gain on blood pressure in hemodialysis patients. Blood Purif. 1994;12:259–266.
  • Luik AJ, van Kuijk WHM, Spek J, Effects of hypervolemia on interdialytic hemodynamics and blood pressure control in hemodialysis patients. Am J Kidney Dis. 1997;30:466–474.
  • Rahman M, Dixit A, Donley V, Factors associated with inadequate blood pressure control in hypertensive hemodialysis patients. Am J Kidney Dis. 1999;33:498–506.
  • Rocco MV, Yan G, Heyka RJ, Risk factors for hypertension in chronic hemodialysis patients: Baseline data from the HEMO Study. Am J Nephrol. 2001;21:280–288.
  • Inrig JK, Patel UD, Gillespie BS, Relationship between interdialytic weight gain and blood pressure among prevalent hemodialysis patients. Am J Kidney Dis. 2007;50(1):108–118.
  • Mominadam S, Ozkahya M, Kayikcioglu M, Interdialytic blood pressure obtained by ambulatory blood pressure measurement and left ventricular structure in hypertensive hemodialysis patients. Hemodial Int. 2008;12:322–327.
  • Kayikcioglu M, Tumuklu M, Ozkahya M, The benefit of salt restriction in the treatment of end-stage renal disease by hemodialysis. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2009;24(3):956–962.
  • Gunal AI, Kirciman E, Guler M, Yavuzkir M, Celiker H. Should the preservation of residual renal function cost volume overload and its consequence left ventricular hypertrophy in new hemodialysis patients? Ren Fail. 2004;26(4): 405–409.
  • Gunal AI, Karaca I, Aygen B, Yavuzkir M, Dogukan A, Celiker H. Strict fluid volume control and left ventricular hypertrophy in hypertensive patients on chronic hemodialysis: A cross-sectional study. J Int Med Res. 2004;32(1):70–77.
  • Covic A, Goldsmith DJ, Covic M Reduced blood pressure diurnal variability as a risk factor for progressive left ventricular dilatation in hemodialysis patients. Am J Kidney Dis. 2000;35:617–623.
  • Agarwal R, Peixoto AJ, Santos SF, Zoccali C. Out-of-office blood pressure monitoring in chronic kidney disease. Blood Press Monit. 2009;14:2–11.
  • Verdecchia P, Schillaci G, Guerrieri M, Circadian blood pressure changes and left ventricular hypertrophy in essential hypertension. Circulation. 1990;81:528–536.
  • Verdecchia P, Angeli F, Cavallini C. Ambulatory blood pressure for cardiovascular risk stratification. Circulation. 2007;115:2091–2093.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.