Why the study?
Frequent venepuncture to monitor serum urea and creatinine in CKD patients on dialysis can lead to venous damage and infection, prompting evaluation of salivary samples as an alternative.
Can salivary urea and creatinine serve as a non-invasive substitute for serum samples in diagnosing and monitoring CKD patients undergoing hemodialysis?
Can salivary urea and creatinine serve as a non-invasive substitute for serum samples in diagnosing and monitoring CKD patients undergoing hemodialysis?
Salivary urea may serve as a feasible, non-invasive alternative to serum urea for diagnosing and monitoring CKD patients undergoing hemodialysis.
May support noninvasive salivary monitoring to reduce venepuncture risks in dialysis patients; hypothesis-generating and requires prospective validation before practice change.
Background Frequent venepuncture for monitoring of serum urea and creatinine in chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients on dialysis will result in venous damage and infection. In this research, we assessed the feasibility of utilizing salivary samples as a substitute for serum samples in determining the levels of urea and creatinine in patients with CKD undergoing dialysis. Methods The study participants included 50 patients diagnosed with CKD undergoing hemodialysis and an equal number of apparently healthy individuals. We measured the serum and salivary levels of urea and creatinine in normal subjects. CKD patients were also subjected to similar investigations both before and after hemodialysis. Results In our study, we found that the mean value of salivary urea and creatinine are significantly elevated in the case group (salivary urea: 99.56 ± 43.28 mg/dL, salivary creatinine: 1.10 ± 0.83 mg/dL) as compared to the control group (salivary urea: 33.62 ± 23.84 mg/dL, salivary creatinine: 0.15±0.12 mg/dL, p value: <0.001). There was a statistically significant reduction in the mean value of salivary urea and creatinine in the post-dialysis sample (salivary urea: 45.06 ± 30.37 mg/dL, salivary creatinine: 0.43±0.44 mg/dL) compared to the pre-dialysis sample (salivary urea: 99.56 ± 43.28 mg/dL, salivary creatinine: 1.10 ± 0.83 mg/dL; p value: <0.001) in the case group. The salivary urea is significantly positively correlated with serum urea (r value: 0.366, p value: 0.009). But there is no significant correlation seen between salivary and serum creatinine. We have created a cut-off for salivary urea (52.5 mg/dL) to diagnose CKD which has a good sensitivity (84%) and specificity (78%). Conclusion The results of our study suggest that the estimation of salivary urea and creatinine could serve as a non-invasive, alternative marker for the diagnosis of CKD, and benefit in risk-free monitoring of their progress before and after hemodialysis.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bhuvaneswari et al. (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: