Azotemia in Cancer Patients During Inpatient Rehabilitation

The Association of Hydration Status with Physical Signs, Symptoms and Survival in Advanced Cancer-The Use of Bioelectrical Impedance Vector Analysis (BIVA) Technology to Evaluate Fluid Volume in Palliative Care: An Observational Study

BACKGROUND

Hydration in advanced cancer is a controversial area; however, current hydration assessments methods are poorly developed. Bioelectrical impedance vector analysis (BIVA) is an accurate hydration tool; however its application in advanced cancer has not been explored. This study used BIVA to evaluate hydration status in advanced cancer to examine the association of fluid status with symptoms, physical signs, renal biochemical measures and survival.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An observational study of 90 adults with advanced cancer receiving care in a UK specialist palliative care inpatient unit was conducted. Hydration status was assessed using BIVA in addition to assessments of symptoms, physical signs, performance status, renal biochemical measures, oral fluid intake and medications. The association of clinical variables with hydration was evaluated using regression analysis. A survival analysis was conducted to examine the influence of hydration status and renal failure.

RESULTS

The hydration status of participants was normal in 43 (47.8%), 'more hydrated' in 37 (41.1%) and 'less hydrated' in 10 (11.1%). Lower hydration was associated with increased symptom intensity (Beta = -0.29, p = 0.04) and higher scores for physical signs associated with dehydration (Beta = 10.94, p = 0.02). Higher hydration was associated with oedema (Beta = 2.55, p<0.001). Median survival was statistically significantly shorter in 'less hydrated' patients (44 vs. 68 days; p = 0.049) and in pre-renal failure (44 vs. 100 days; p = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

In advanced cancer, hydration status was associated with clinical signs and symptoms. Hydration status and pre-renal failure were independent predictors of survival. Further studies can establish the utility of BIVA as a standardised hydration assessment tool and explore its potential research application, in order to inform the clinical management of fluid balance in patients with advanced cancer.

Hydration in advanced cancer: can bioelectrical impedance analysis improve the evidence base? A systematic review of the literature

CONTEXT

Decisions surrounding the administration of clinically assisted hydration to patients dying of cancer can be challenging because of the limited understanding of hydration in advanced cancer and a lack of evidence to guide health care professionals. Bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) has been used to assess hydration in various patient groupings, but evidence for its use in advanced cancer is limited.

OBJECTIVES

To critically appraise existing methods of hydration status assessment in advanced cancer and review the potential for BIA to assess hydration in advanced cancer.

METHODS

Searches were carried out in four electronic databases. A hand search of selected peer-reviewed journals and conference abstracts also was conducted. Studies reporting (de)hydration assessment (physical examination, biochemical measures, symptom assessment, and BIA) in patients with advanced cancer were included.

RESULTS

The results highlight how clinical examination and biochemical tests are standard methods of assessing hydration, but limitations exist with these methods in advanced cancer. Furthermore, there is disagreement over the evidence for some commonly associated symptoms with dehydration in cancer. Although there are limitations with using BIA alone to assess hydration in advanced cancer, analysis of BIA raw measurements through the method of bioelectrical impedance vector analysis may have a role in this population.

CONCLUSION

The benefits and burdens of providing clinically assisted hydration to patients dying of cancer are unclear. Bioelectrical impedance vector analysis shows promise as a hydration assessment tool but requires further study in advanced cancer. Innovative methodologies for research are required to add to the evidence base and ultimately improve the care for the dying.

Comparison of postoperative rehabilitation in cancer patients undergoing internal and external hemipelvectomy

OBJECTIVE

To compare postoperative rehabilitation, functional outcome, and pain management in cancer patients who underwent an internal hemipelvectomy versus an external hemipelvectomy.

DESIGN

Retrospective study.

SETTING

Tertiary cancer center.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients (N=60) who underwent a hemipelvectomy between February 1996 and November 2005 were included in this study (30 internal hemipelvectomy patients and 30 external hemipelvectomy patients).

INTERVENTIONS

Not applicable.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Hospital and rehabilitation length of stay (LOS), percentage of physiatrist consultation and inpatient rehabilitation, functional status of transfers and ambulation, and pain medication utilization.

RESULTS

The rate of physiatrist consultation and acute rehabilitation admission were 15 (50%) of 30 and 13 (43%) of 30 for internal hemipelvectomy patients, and 16 (53%) of 30 and 16 (53%) of 30 for external hemipelvectomy patients. Median hospital LOS for external hemipelvectomy patients (37d) was significantly longer than for internal hemipelvectomy patients (19d) (P=0.004); median rehabilitation LOS was similar in both groups (20d for external hemipelvectomy patients versus 22 for internal hemipelvectomy patients; P=0.83). On discharge, 14 (47%) of 30 internal hemipelvectomy patients could ambulate without assistance, whereas only 5 (17%) of 30 external hemipelvectomy patients could do so (P=0.013). The median morphine equivalent daily dose at discharge for external hemipelvectomy patients (150mg) was significantly higher than that for internal hemipelvectomy patients (45mg) (P=0.032).

CONCLUSIONS

A similar percentage of internal hemipelvectomy and external hemipelvectomy patients were admitted to inpatient rehabilitation. External hemipelvectomy patients had longer hospital LOS, less favorable functional outcome, and required more intense treatment for pain.