scholarly journals Chronic hemodialysis patients: A comparison of clinical, laboratory and nutritional parameters among elderly and non-elderly patients

2021 ◽  
Vol 48 (6) ◽  
pp. 825-831
Author(s):  
Tássia Ney Portantiolo ◽  
Alessandra Doumid Borges Pretto ◽  
Gabriela de Lemos Uliano ◽  
Camila Irigonhé Ramos ◽  
Sandra Costa Valle
1996 ◽  
Vol 49 (2) ◽  
pp. 551-556 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tom F. Parker ◽  
Rebecca L. Wingard ◽  
Leigh Husni ◽  
T. Alp Ikizler ◽  
Robert A. Parker ◽  
...  

1995 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 579-583 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard A. Sherman ◽  
Ronald P. Cody ◽  
Mary Ellen Rogers ◽  
Joan C. Solanchick

2015 ◽  
Vol 30 (suppl_3) ◽  
pp. iii619-iii620
Author(s):  
Ruta Vaiciuniene ◽  
Irmante Stramaityte ◽  
Edita Ziginskiene ◽  
Vytautas Kuzminskis ◽  
Inga Arune Bumblyte

2005 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 217-224 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen M. Majchrzak ◽  
Lara B. Pupim ◽  
Kong Chen ◽  
Cathi J. Martin ◽  
Sheila Gaffney ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 4
Author(s):  
Romain Vial ◽  
Marion Gully ◽  
Mickael Bobot ◽  
Violaine Scarfoglière ◽  
Philippe Brunet ◽  
...  

Background: Daily management to shield chronic dialysis patients from SARS-CoV-2 contamination makes patient care cumbersome. There are no screening methods to date and a molecular biology platform is essential to perform RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2; however, accessibility remains poor. Our goal was to assess whether the tools routinely used to monitor our hemodialysis patients could represent reliable and quickly accessible diagnostic indicators to improve the management of our hemodialysis patients in this pandemic environment. Methods: In this prospective observational diagnostic study, we recruited patients from La Conception hospital. Patients were eligible for inclusion if suspected of SARS-CoV-2 infection when arriving at our center for a dialysis session between March 12th and April 24th 2020. They were included if both RT-PCR result for SARS-CoV-2 and cell blood count on the day that infection was suspected were available. We calculated the area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic curve. Results: 37 patients were included in the final analysis, of which 16 (43.2%) were COVID-19 positive. For the day of suspected COVID-19, total leukocytes were significantly lower in the COVID-19 positive group (4.1 vs. 7.4 G/L, p = 0.0072) and were characterized by lower neutrophils (2.7 vs. 5.1 G/L, p = 0.021) and eosinophils (0.01 vs. 0.15 G/L, p = 0.0003). Eosinophil count below 0.045 G/L identified SARS-CoV-2 infection with AUC of 0.9 [95% CI 0.81—1] (p < 0.0001), sensitivity of 82%, specificity of 86%, a positive predictive value of 82%, a negative predictive value of 86% and a likelihood ratio of 6.04. Conclusions: Eosinophil count enables rapid routine screening of symptomatic chronic hemodialysis patients suspected of being COVID-19 within a range of low or high probability.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document