Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Short Communication
  • Published:

Does increased glucose exposure lead to increased body fat and reduced lean body mass in anuric peritoneal dialysis patients?

European Journal of Clinical Nutrition volume 68, pages 1253–1254 (2014)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Residual renal function has been reported to be a major determinant of peritoneal dialysis (PD) technique survival for patients with end-stage kidney disease. Anuria leads to increases in PD prescriptions designed to maintain small solute clearances and ultrafiltration volumes, resulting in greater exposure to hypertonic glucose dialysates. We reviewed the effect of developing anuria in a cohort of 136 PD patients followed for a median of 12 months, to determine whether increasing exposure to higher glucose dialysates affected body composition by increasing body fat and reducing muscle mass. Despite increasing prescription of 22.7 and 38.6 g/l glucose dialysates there was no increase in body fat (31.1±15.4 vs 30.9±16.3 kg) or loss of fat-free weight (36.4±12.1 vs 35.8±12.3 kg). Changing PD prescriptions to maintain small solute clearances and ultrafiltration volumes did not lead to detrimental changes in body composition in the short term.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Davenport A . Peritonitis remains the major clinical complication of peritoneal dialysis: the London, UK, peritonitis audit 2002-2003. Perit Dial Int 2009; 29: 297–302.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Jager KJ, Merkus MP, Dekker FW, Boeschoten EW, Tijssen JG, Stevens P et al. Mortality and technique failure in patients starting chronic peritoneal dialysis: results of The Netherlands Cooperative Study on the Adequacy of Dialysis. NECOSAD Study Group. Kidney Int 1999; 55: 1476–1485.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Davies SJ, Brown EA, Reigel W, Clutterbuck E, Heimbürger O, Diaz NV et al. What is the link between poor ultrafiltration and increased mortality in anuric patients on automated peritoneal dialysis? Analysis of data from EAPOS. Perit Dial Int 2006; 26: 458–465.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. McCafferty K, Fan S, Davenport A . Extracellular volume expansion, measured by multifrequency bioimpedance, does not help preserve residual renal function in peritoneal dialysis patients. Kidney Int 2014; 85: 151–157.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Davenport A, Willicombe M . Comparison of fluid status in patients treated by different modalities of peritoneal dialysis using multi-frequency bioimpedance. Int J Artif Organs 2009; 32: 779–786.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Davenport A, Agarwal B, Wright G, Mantzoukis K, Dimitrova R, Davar J et al. Can non-invasive measurements aid clinical assessment of volume in patients with cirrhosis? World J Hepatol 2013; 5: 433–438.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Davenport A, Willicombe MK . Hydration status does not influence peritoneal equilibration test ultrafiltration volumes. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2009; 4: 1207–1212.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Wright M, Woodrow G, O'Brien S, King N, Dye L, Blundell J et al. Disturbed appetite patterns and nutrient intake in peritoneal dialysis patients. Perit Dial Int 2003; 23: 550–556.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Fürstenberg A, Davenport A . Assessment of body composition in peritoneal dialysis patients using bioelectrical impedance and dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry. Am J Nephrol 2011; 33: 150–156.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Mehrotra R . Nutritional issues in peritoneal dialysis patients: how do they differ from that of patients undergoing haemodialysis? J Ren Nutr 2013; 23: 237–240.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Dr S Fan has accepted monies from Fresenius AG for speaking engagements, and Fresenius AG have provided educational grants to the Royal London & St Bart’s Department of Renal Medicine, and Fresenius. AG have supported the UCL Centre for Nephrology Dialysis course. This study was funded by the Royal Free Hospital and The Royal London Hospital.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Nephrology, Barts & The London NHS Trust, Royal London Hospital, London, UK

    S Fan

  2. UCL Center for Nephrology, Royal Free Hospital, University College London Medical School, London, UK

    A Davenport

Authors
  1. S Fan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. A Davenport
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to S Fan or A Davenport.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Fan, S., Davenport, A. Does increased glucose exposure lead to increased body fat and reduced lean body mass in anuric peritoneal dialysis patients?. Eur J Clin Nutr 68, 1253–1254 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1038/ejcn.2014.119

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ejcn.2014.119

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links