Criteria for biocompatibility testing of peritoneal dialysis solutions

  • C. J. Holmes
Part of the Developments in Nephrology book series (DINE, volume 39)


The characterization of the biocompatibility of materials employed for medical diagnostic and therapeutic purposes is now well established as a fundamental requirement for such materials, as evidenced by the comprehensive and general guide published in the International Standard ISO-10993


Hyaluronic Acid Peritoneal Dialysis Mesothelial Cell Dialysis Solution Dialysis Fluid 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 2.
    Duwe AK, Vas SI and Weatherhead JW. Effects of the composition of peritoneal dialysis fluid on chemiluminescence, phagocytosis and bactericidal activity in vitro. Infect Immun 1981; 33:130–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 3.
    Holmes CJ. Biocompatibility of peritoneal dialysis solutions [editorial comment]. Peril Dial lnt 1993; 13:88–94.Google Scholar
  3. 5.
    Di Paolo N, Garosi G, Monaci G and Brardi S. Biocompatibility of peritoneal dialysis treatment. Nephrol Dialysis Transplant 1997; 12:78–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 6.
    Breborowicz A, Bolaskas E, Oreopoulos D et al. A new approach in the study of dialysis fluid toxicity on the peritoneal membrane. Perit Dial Int 1991; 11:A29.Google Scholar
  5. 7.
    Topley N. What is the ideal technique for testing the biocompatibility of peritoneal dialysis solutions. Perit Dial Int 1995; 15:205–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 8.
    Anderson B and Amirault H. Important variables in granulocyte chemiluminescence. Proceedings of the society for experimental biology and medicine 1979; 162:139–45.Google Scholar
  7. 9.
    Schmidt R, Chung L, Andrews A and Turner T. Toxicity of L-ascorbic acid to L929 fibroblast cultures: relevance to biocompatibility testing of materials for use in wound management. J Biomedl Mat Res 1993; 27:521–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 10.
    Breborowicz A, Bolaskas E, Oreopoulos D et al. Co-culture of peritoneal dialysate cells with mesothelial cells and fibroblasts. Perit Dial Int 1991; 11:A31.Google Scholar
  9. 11.
    Gotloib L, Shostak A and Wajsbrot V. Detrimental effects of peritoneal dialysis solutions upon in vivo and in situ exposed mesothelium. Perit Dial Int 1997; 17:13–16.Google Scholar
  10. 12.
    Ho-dac-Pannekeet M, Hiralall J, Struijk D and Krediet R. Longitudinal follow-up of CA 125 in peritoneal effluent. Kidney Int 1997; 51:888–93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 13.
    Lai K, Lai K, Szeto C, Ho K, Poon P, Lam C et al. Dialysate cell population and cancer antigen 125 in stable continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis patients: their relationship with transport parameters. Am J Kidney Dis 1997; 29:669–705.Google Scholar
  12. 14.
    Fischereder M, Luckow B, Sitter T, Schroppel B, Banas B and Schlondorff D. Immortalization and characterization of human peritoneal mesothelial cells. Kidney Int 1997; 51:2006–12.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 15.
    Nakayama M, Kawaguchi Y, Yamada K, Hasegawa T, Takazoe K, Katoh N et al. Immunohistochemical detection of advanced glycosylation end-products in the peritoneum and its possible pathophysiological role in CAPD. Kidney Int 1997; 51:182 6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • C. J. Holmes

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations