I'd ask the nephrologist, AND the vascular surgeon who is going to do the work about covering/protecting the incision and the soon-to-be fistula itself.
You certainly don't want to restrict blood flow and blood pressure, otherwise the venous fistula will not enlarge from the arterial pressures newly applied to it. And that's the whole idea of doing this procedure.View Thread
Less than 20 ml/min and diabetic fits the general recommendation for dialysis; but docs use that guideline as a very general framework for treatment. A lot of other factors enter in: general health, symptoms like fatigue, mental confusion, inability to sleep well, fluid retention, and also lab numbers like calcium, phosphorus, sodium, potassium.
I tend to round creatinine numbers off to X.x and forget the second decimal place. The accuracy of the test has limits, and the difference between 1.70 and 1.75 isn't significant.
The question about the drug is hard to answer without knowing exactly what is in the medication. But a lot of NSAID pain relievers can eventually cause some damage, especially at higher doses.
If the ultrasound was not a doppler, specifically looking at renal blood flow, then doing one might be a good idea. (It probably was not doppler if they were looking at causes for the back pain.) You'll have to ask.
I can't really guess at a change from 2.7 to 1.7, unless some degree of dehydration was involved in the higher number. That's a really big drop, so I'd wonder about possible errors in the 2.7 test.View Thread
There aren't physical symptoms until things get really serious (fatigue, nausea, changes in skin color, mental confusion). But 1.4 mg/dL is just barely above the normal range.
Ask your doc. The advice will probably be to keep watching it over a couple of years just to be sure it isn't increasing rapidly. Slight increases with every decade above 30 or 40 years is not unusual. Blood testing is the best way to spot early signs of renal damage.
That said, numbness in the legs and slight creatinine increases could both be due to poor circulation, but they aren't really related to each other, except for having a similar cause.View Thread
At a glance, these numbers really aren't all that scary. 125 bG isn't bad for a type II diabetic. Yes it could be a tad lower, but considering that a lot of folks walk around with bG of 175-200 or more, 125 is darned good.
eGFR of 57 is frankly negligible. Remember that the "e" stands for "estimated" and these estimates are often off by a considerable margin. 57 to 60 is withjin the error limitis of the test.
Total protein, too, is within the limits of the test accuracy. If your urine protin losses are high, then it might be a factor to consider, but judged by itself, not a big deal.View Thread
You should be the SYSOP for this thing. Frankly there was nothing wrong with the older system that we all had used for years and had become accustomed to its quirks and glitches. In fact the older system was far superior in that it allowed the user to preview the text before posting it!
There was no need to replace it with this mess (othjer than to keep a few geeks employed doing something).
(Sorry gang. I make my living in geekdom, too. But I never change something that is working more-or-less correctly just for a few added bells and whistles that go largely unused, and a potential boatload of instability.)View Thread