Examinando por Materia "Hemodialysis Solutions"
Mostrando 1 - 2 de 2
- Resultados por página
- Opciones de ordenación
Ítem Acceso abierto Efficacy of the use of convective method (hemodiafiltration) compared to the use of diffusive method (hemodialysis) in reducing mortality (general and cardiovascular) in adult patients with end-stage renal failure.(Universidad Privada Norbert Wiener, 2018-07-08) Meléndez López, Edwin Moisés; Matta Solis, Hernan HugoObjective: Analyze and systematize the evidence found regarding the effectiveness of the convective method (Hemodiafiltration) vs. the use of diffusive method modalities (Hemodialysis) to decrease mortality (general and cardiovascular) in adult patients with terminal chronic kidney failure. Materials and Methods: Systematic review, Randomized and non-randomized clinical trials, with 10 scientific evidences obtained from the following databases: Epistemonikos and Pubmed. Therefore, 80% (8/10) are systematic reviews, 10% (1/10) are non-randomized trials, and 10% (1/10) are randomized trials. Of the total evidence, 20% (2/10) come from Romania, followed by 20% (2/10) from Spain, 10% (1/10) from Argentina, 10% (1/10) from Turkey, 10% (1/10) from the U.S., 10% (1/10) from Germany, 10% (1/10) from Australia, and 10% (1/10) from the Netherlands. Results: 70% of the evidence found indicate that the use of the convective method (HDF) is more effective than the use of the diffusive method (HD) in reducing mortality (cardiovascular or general) in adult patients with terminal chronic kidney failure, while 30% indicate no significant difference between the two renal replacement therapies. Conclusion: Of the evidence, 7 out of 10 indicate that the use of the convective method (Hemodiafiltration) is more effective than the use of the diffusive method (Hemodialysis) in reducing mortality (cardiovascular and general) in adult patients with terminal chronic kidney failure, while 3 out of 10 indicate no significant difference.Ítem Acceso abierto Efficacy of the use of convective method (hemodiafiltration) compared to the use of diffusive method (hemodialysis) in reducing mortality (general and cardiovascular) in adult patients with end-stage renal failure.(Universidad Privada Norbert Wiener, 2018-07-08) Bendezú Moreno, Wilma Erika; Meléndez López, Edwin Moisés; Matta Solis, Hernan HugoObjective: Analyze and systematize the evidence found regarding the effectiveness of the convective method (Hemodiafiltration) vs. the use of diffusive method modalities (Hemodialysis) to decrease mortality (general and cardiovascular) in adult patients with terminal chronic kidney failure. Materials and Methods: Systematic review, Randomized and non-randomized clinical trials, with 10 scientific evidences obtained from the following databases: Epistemonikos and Pubmed. Therefore, 80% (8/10) are systematic reviews, 10% (1/10) are non-randomized trials, and 10% (1/10) are randomized trials. Of the total evidence, 20% (2/10) come from Romania, followed by 20% (2/10) from Spain, 10% (1/10) from Argentina, 10% (1/10) from Turkey, 10% (1/10) from the U.S., 10% (1/10) from Germany, 10% (1/10) from Australia, and 10% (1/10) from the Netherlands. Results: 70% of the evidence found indicate that the use of the convective method (HDF) is more effective than the use of the diffusive method (HD) in reducing mortality (cardiovascular or general) in adult patients with terminal chronic kidney failure, while 30% indicate no significant difference between the two renal replacement therapies. Conclusion: Of the evidence, 7 out of 10 indicate that the use of the convective method (Hemodiafiltration) is more effective than the use of the diffusive method (Hemodialysis) in reducing mortality (cardiovascular and general) in adult patients with terminal chronic kidney failure, while 3 out of 10 indicate no significant difference.
