Nephron
Original Paper
Effects of Different Forms of Dialytic Treatment on Serum Antibacterial Activity in Patients with Chronic Renal FailureMinelli Bertazzoni E.a · Panzetta G.baInstitute of Pharmacology and bDivision of Nephrology, University Hospital, Verona, Italy
|
|
Log in to MyKarger to check if you already have access to this content.
KAB
Buy a Karger Article Bundle (KAB) and profit from a discount!
If you would like to redeem your KAB credit, please log in.
Save over 20% compared to the individual article price.
Article / Publication Details
Accepted: June 06, 1983
Published online: December 03, 2008
Issue release date: 1984
Number of Print Pages: 6
Number of Figures: 0
Number of Tables: 0
ISSN: 1660-8151 (Print)
eISSN: 2235-3186 (Online)
For additional information: https://www.karger.com/NEF
Abstract
The antibacterial activity of fresh and heat-inactivated normal serum was compared with that of sera from patients with renal failure: 16 on diet, 9 on regular hemodialysis (HD) and 9 on continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD). The antibacterial activity was determined on Proteus rettgeri (Sanelli) by a turbidimetric method. The inhibitory activity of fresh serum was only slightly descreased in nondialyzed uremic patients, whereas it was significantly impaired in CAPD and HD patients. Heat-inactivated normal serum (56°C, 30 min) lost its antibacterial activity. Only CAPD patients’ sera behaved as the normal ones. In fact, a consistent residual antibacterial activity was found in heat-inactivated sera of nondialyzed and hemodialyzed patients. The results are in keeping with the view that uremic patients have reduced host-defence reactions. Dialysis treatment appears to further depress the antibacterial capacity of uremic patient’s sera. The residual antibacterial activity of heat-inactivated sera is due to substances, not present in normal controls, which act with a mechanism independent of the complement system. CAPD seems more effective than hemodialysis in removing these substances.
© 1984 S. Karger AG, Basel
Related Articles:
Article / Publication Details
Accepted: June 06, 1983
Published online: December 03, 2008
Issue release date: 1984
Number of Print Pages: 6
Number of Figures: 0
Number of Tables: 0
ISSN: 1660-8151 (Print)
eISSN: 2235-3186 (Online)
For additional information: https://www.karger.com/NEF
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.

Get Permission