Key result
2D echo LV mass remains unchanged after hemodialysis whereas 1D measurements decrease with volume changes.
Why the study?
1-dimensional echocardiographic LVM calculation is vulnerable to measurement errors and may wrongly vary with LV volume, whereas 2-dimensional methods may better accommodate fluid fluctuations in hemodialysis patients.
Are 2-dimensional echocardiographic methods better than 1-dimensional methods for assessing left ventricular mass in hemodialysis patients with large fluid fluctuations?
Observational
Are 2-dimensional echocardiographic methods better than 1-dimensional methods for assessing left ventricular mass in hemodialysis patients with large fluid fluctuations?
2D echocardiographic methods are less affected by fluid fluctuations than 1D methods for calculating left ventricular mass in hemodialysis patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
2D LVM assessment may be more stable amid HD volume shifts; leaves open whether it improves outcomes versus 1D methods.
Kristensen et al. (2020) conducted an observational in End-stage kidney disease receiving hemodialysis. 2-dimensional echocardiographic methods vs. 1-dimensional echocardiographic methods was evaluated on Significant differences in left ventricular mass after hemodialysis. Left ventricular mass calculated using 2-dimensional echocardiographic methods was not significantly different after hemodialysis, whereas 1-dimensional methods decreased with volume changes.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: