方法选取血液透析患者80例，按照随机数字表平均分成高通量血液透析组（HFHD）和常规血液透析组（LFHD），各40例，另取30例健康体检者作为正常对照组，对比分析血清CRP、β2-MG水平。
基于44个网页-相关网页
方法:回顾性分析进入血液透析6个月以上的ESRD病人,高通量透析组(HFHD)30例,低通量量透析组(LFHD)30例,记录进入血液透析时及透析后6个月病人的空腹血糖、空腹胰岛素、hs-CRP、iPTH、白蛋白、血钙、血红...
基于40个网页-相关网页
...睡、(Epwort h sleepi ness Scale．ESS)基表调食患者的睡眠质盛，根据睡眠质最情况将患 者配对分组为普通透析组(Hemodialysis HD)20人和长槲透析组)6个月的临床试验。
基于1个网页-相关网页
量透析组 LFHD
高通量透析组 HFHD ; High Flux Group ; HF GROUP
低通量透析组 LFHD
血液透析组 HPHD
常规透析组 Low Flux Group ; LF GROUP
常规血液透析组 conventional hemodialysis group ; CHD GROUP
急性透析质量指导组 ADQI ; acute dialysis quality initiative group
全国透析研究协作组织 National Cooperative Dialysis Study
血液透析滤过组 HDF GROUP ; hemodiafiltration group
但总重吸收率和直接淋巴吸收率在各透析组之间无显著差异。
The peritoneal fluid absorption rate as well as direct lymphatic absorption rate had no significant difference between all the groups.
方法：观察血液透析组与非血液透析组的平均住院日、肾功能恢复的时间、病情转归。
Methods: To observe the average hospitalization day and the time that kidney function began recovering in hemodialysis group and no-hemodialysis group.
结果高通量透析组其临床症状、神经传导速度均有较为明显改善，而普通血液透析组改善不明显。
Results the clinic symptom and nerve conduction velocity in group high flow hemodialysis got improved obviously; there was almost no change in common hemodialysis group.
应用推荐