Why the study?
The study was conducted to compare cognitive performance between patients with stage 5 CKD not receiving hemodialysis and patients receiving hemodialysis.
Does hemodialysis affect cognitive performance in patients with end-stage kidney disease?
Does hemodialysis affect cognitive performance in patients with end-stage kidney disease?
End-stage kidney disease is associated with mild cognitive impairment, and the hemodialysis procedure itself may acutely worsen neurodynamic and attention indices.
Hemodialysis may associate with slower visual-motor reaction in ESKD; hypothesis-generating for acute procedural effects, needs prospective confirmation.
THE AIM. Compare cognitive performance in patients with CKD not receiving HD and patients on HD. PATIENTS AND METHODS. The study included patients of young and middle age (from 18 to 60 years) (n = 40) who have stage 5 of chronic kidney disease (CKD) and 40 patients on hemodialysis of comparable age (from 18 to 58 years) who make up the comparison group. The exclusion criteria for both groups were: a history of diseases of the central nervous system; brain injury; episodes of cerebral circulation of varying severity; coronary heart disease; chronic heart failure; pregnancy; alcohol abuse; refusal to participate in the study. Cognitive impairments were assessed using the Status PF software package. RESULTS. All patients were examined with software package Status PF. They demonstrated light cognitive dysfunctions in neurodynamics, memory, and attention indices. The differences in indices were statistically significant with the experimental group. CONCLUSION. In patients of young and middle age with 5 stages of CKD, the use of modern software complex Status PF allows us to diagnose mild cognitive impairment. After dialysis, patients showed greater response time and psychomotor slowdown. The average exposure level of SHER in the group without HD was 359.4 ± 48.84 msec, in the group of HD – 381.1 ± 63.34 msec (p = 0.04). The average exposure to CHER in patients before the procedure was 515.57 ± 83.89 ms, after HD, this figure was lower – 498.87 ± 80.8 (p = 0.036).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Smakotina et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: