Figure - PMC

Skip to main content

View full-text article in PMC

. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2013 Oct 2.

Published in final edited form as: Semin Nephrol. 2009 Jan;29(1):75–84. doi: 10.1016/j.semnephrol.2008.10.011

Forearm muscle protein homeostasis dynamic components during HD, comparing control (□), IDPN (), and PO (■) in 8 CHD patients with deranged nutritional status. Skeletal muscle protein homeostasis during HD improved with both IDPN and PO versus control (P = .005 and .009 for IDPN versus control and PO versus control, respectively). Oral supplementation resulted in persistent anabolic benefits in the post-HD phase for muscle protein metabolism, when anabolic benefits of IDPN dissipated (data not shown in figure). Units are ug/100 mL/min. *P < .05 versus control. Adapted with permission from American Society of Nephrology.¹⁸

Inline graphic — Forearm muscle protein homeostasis dynamic components during HD, comparing control (□), IDPN (), and PO (■) in 8 CHD patients with deranged nutritional status. Skeletal muscle protein homeostasis during HD improved with both IDPN and PO versus control (P = .005 and .009 for IDPN versus control and PO versus control, respectively). Oral supplementation resulted in persistent anabolic benefits in the post-HD phase for muscle protein metabolism, when anabolic benefits of IDPN dissipated (data not shown in figure). Units are ug/100 mL/min. *P < .05 versus control. Adapted with permission from American Society of Nephrology.¹⁸