{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.031835205992509365, 'fraction_numerical': 0.004993757802746567, 'mean_word_length': 5.00374531835206, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Theoretical and Numerical Analysis of Different Adequacy Indices for Hemodialysis and Peritoneal Dialysis

Background: Apart from KT/V, equivalent urea clearance (EKR) and fractional solute removal (FSR) can also be used to assess the dialysis adequacy. Our objective was to analyze the relationships between these indices for different dialysis modalities and schedules, using urea kinetic modeling. Methods: EKR and FSR were calculated for HD (three or six times per week), automatic nightly PD (ANPD) and CAPD using the following reference values of urea concentration and mass in the body: peak, peak average, time average and treatment time average. Results: The standard KT/V approach is related to the treatment time average, whereas the standard EKR is related to the time average reference values. In spite of KT/V = 3.5 (K meaning dialyzer clearance or peritoneal diffusive mass transport coefficient), EKR and FSR were lower for ANPD and CAPD than for HD. The ratio of EKR to FSR was essentially the same for the different treatment modalities (range 3.48–4.07 ml/min). This could be explained by the theoretical analysis which predicts the value of EKR/FSR = V/Tc, independent of the treatment modality and schedules (V is a solute distribution volume, Tc is the time of the full dialysis cycle). Conclusion: Whereas the index KT/V in its standard form cannot be used to compare different dialysis regimens, EKR and FSR provide very similar evaluation of different dialysis modalities and schedules, and may be considered as equivalent measures for comparative studies of dialysis adequacy.