DA-67

Objective: To evaluate treatment preferences of patients with lower urinary tract symptoms suggestive of benign prostatic hyperplasia (LUTS/BPH) before and after using a web-based decision aid (DA). Patients and methods: Between July 2016 and January 2017 patients were invited to use a web-based LUTS/BPH DA. Treatment preferences (for lifestyle advices, medication or surgery) before and after DA use and responses on values clarification exercises were extracted from the DA. Results: In total, 126 patients were included in the analysis. Thirty-four percent (43/126) had not received any previous treatment and were eligible for (continuation of) lifestyle advices or to start medication, as initial treatment. The other 66% (83/126) did use medication and were eligible, either for continuing medication or to undergo surgery. Before being exposed to the DA, 67 patients (53%) were undecided and 59 patients (47%) indicated an initial treatment preference. Half of the patients who were initially undecided were able to indicate a preference after DA use (34/67, 51%). Of those with an initial preference, 80% (47/59) confirmed their initial preference after DA use. Five out of 7 values clarification exercises used in the DA were discriminative between final treatment preferences. In 79%, the treatment preferred after DA use matched the received treatment. Overall, healthcare providers were positive about DA feasibility. Conclusion: Our findings suggest that a LUTS/BPH DA may help patients to confirm their initial treatment preference and support them in forming a treatment preference if they did not have an initial preference.

A simple and sensitive colorimetric assay for serum diamine oxidase (DAO) activity was based on a coupled reaction with peroxidase and a new chromogen, 10-(carboxymethyl-aminocarbonyl)-3,7-bis(dimethylamino) phenothiazine sodium salt (DA-67). In the presence of peroxidase and DA-67, peroxidase catalyzes the formation of methylene blue having an absorption maximum at 668 nm. The proposed method eliminates the interferences occurring in serum with use of ascorbate oxidase and stops the reaction with sodium diethyldithiocarbamate, leaving the methylene blue in the reaction mixture stable for about 2 h. Low normal basal values of serum DAO can be determined in the range 2.8-9.0 units/l. Since all reagents are commercially available the method is suitable for the clinical laboratory.

Background: Portable hemodialysis has the potential to improve health outcomes and quality of life for patients with kidney failure at reduced costs. Urea removal, required for dialysate regeneration, is a central function of any existing/potential portable dialysis device. Urea in the spent dialysate coexists with non-urea uremic toxins, nutrients, and electrolytes, all of which will interfere with the urea removal efficiency, regardless of whether the underlying urea removal mechanism is based on urease conversion, direct urea adsorption, or oxidation. The aim of the current review is to identify the amount of the most prevalent chemicals being removed during a single dialysis session and evaluate the potential benefits of an urea-selective membrane for portable dialysis. Methods: We have performed a literature search using Web of Science and PubMed databases to find available articles reporting (or be able to calculate from blood plasma concentration) > 5 mg of individually quantified solutes removed during thrice-weekly hemodialysis sessions. If multiple reports of the same solute were available, the reported values were averaged, and the geometric mean of standard deviations was taken. Further critical literature analysis of reported dialysate regeneration methods was performed using Web of Science and PubMed databases. Results: On average, 46.0 g uremic retention solutes are removed in a single conventional dialysis session, out of which urea is only 23.6 g. For both urease- and sorbent-based urea removal mechanisms, amino acids, with 7.7 g removal per session, could potentially interfere with urea removal efficiency. Additionally for the oxidation-based urea removal system, plentiful nutrients such as glucose (24.0 g) will interfere with urea removal by competition. Using a nanofiltration membrane between dialysate and oxidation unit with a molecular weight cutoff (MWCO) of ~200 Da, 67.6 g of non-electrolyte species will be removed in a single dialysis session, out of which 44.0 g are non-urea molecules. If the membrane MWCO is further decreased to 120 Da, the mass of non-electrolyte non-urea species will drop to 9.3 g. Reverse osmosis membranes have been shown to be both effective at blocking the transport of non-urea species (creatinine for example with ~90% rejection ratio), and permissive for urea transport (~20% rejection ratio), making them a promising urea selective membrane to increase the efficiency of the oxidative urea removal system. Conclusions: Compiled are quantified solute removal amounts greater than 5 mg per session during conventional hemodialysis treatments, to act as a guide for portable dialysis system design. Analysis shows that multiple chemical species in the dialysate interfere with all proposed portable urea removal systems. This suggests the need for an additional protective dialysate loop coupled to urea removal system and an urea-selective membrane.