Publication: Comparison of skin autofluorescence, a marker of tissue advanced glycation end-products in the fistula and non-fistula arms of patients treated by hemodialysis
Issued Date
2020-01-01
Resource Type
ISSN
15251594
0160564X
0160564X
Other identifier(s)
2-s2.0-85087289250
Rights
Mahidol University
Rights Holder(s)
SCOPUS
Bibliographic Citation
Artificial Organs. (2020)
Suggested Citation
Theerasak Tangwonglert, Kornchanok Vareesangthip, Surachet Vongsanim, Andrew Davenport Comparison of skin autofluorescence, a marker of tissue advanced glycation end-products in the fistula and non-fistula arms of patients treated by hemodialysis. Artificial Organs. (2020). doi:10.1111/aor.13741 Retrieved from: https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/123456789/57799
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Authors
Journal Issue
Thesis
Title
Comparison of skin autofluorescence, a marker of tissue advanced glycation end-products in the fistula and non-fistula arms of patients treated by hemodialysis
Abstract
© 2020 International Center for Artificial Organs and Transplantation and Wiley Periodicals LLC Advanced glycosylation end-products (AGEs) are reported to be a risk factor for cardiovascular mortality in hemodialysis (HD) patients. As serum AGEs can change with dialysis, measurement of AGEs deposited in the skin by autofluorescence (SAF) is now a recognized method of measuring AGEs. An arteriovenous fistula (AVF) is the preferred way to access blood in HD patients, and as the creation of an AVF changes blood flow distribution in the arm, we wished to determine whether this affected SAF deposition in the skin. SAF was measured using the AGE reader, which directs ultraviolet light at an intensity range of 300-420 nm (peak 370 nm) in the arms of HD patients dialyzing with an AVF. We measured SAF in 267 patients, 60.3% male, 46.1% diabetic, median duration of dialysis 34.7 (15.1-64.2) months with AVF. The median SAF was lower in the AVF arm (median 3.4 (2.9-4.2) vs. 3.7 (3.2-4.5) AU, P <.001), and for the 160 patients with an upper arm AVF (3.5 (2.9-4.3) vs. 3.8 (3.2-4.5) AU, P <.001), but not for the 107 patients dialyzing with a forearm AVF ((3.4 (2.8-4.2) vs. 3.6 (3.0-4.5) AU, P =.085). Blood flow was greater for upper arm AVF compared to forearm AVFs (1190 (770-1960) vs. (930 (653-1250) mL/min, P =.007), but there was no association between blood flow and SAF (P >.05). AVF alters blood flow in the arm, and we found that SAF measurements were lower in the arm with AVF. We suggest that SAF measurements are made in the non-AVF arm.