New Delhi's nuclear planners can never be accused of thinking small. Even at the very beginning of India's nuclear efforts, Homi Bhabha proposed an ambitious three-stage plan for Indian nuclear development that sought to develop original technology that would allow the country to compensate for its insufficient uranium reserves.

 

Thermal reactors—today's typical power reactors—represented the first part of Bhabha's vision. Thermal reactors use slow or thermal energy neutrons to fission uranium-235, a naturally occurring fissile isotope of uranium.

 

Bhabha envisioned that, in a second stage, spent fuel from these thermal reactors would be reprocessed to separate plutonium for fueling breeder reactors, which would "breed" more plutonium.

 

In the third and final stage, this plutonium would fuel reactors that would irradiate thorium to make uranium-233. India has about one-third of the world's known supply of thorium, which is not useful by itself but can transform into the fissile material U-233. U-233 can power nuclear reactors and provide the fissile material for nuclear weapons. This material could therefore provide additional fuel for India's electrical power production reactors and additional material for nuclear weapons.

 

If India were able to develop the thorium fuel cycle, it could have available as much as 155,502 gigawatt-years of electrical energy (GWe-yr), in comparison to the potential for 328 GWe-yr from indigenously fueled thermal reactors; 10,660 GWe-yr from indigenous coal (which now provides 69 percent of Indian electricity); and 42,231 GWe-yr from plutonium breeder reactors.[1] Currently, India has an installed electrical generating capacity of about 140 GWe, and the rate of electricity demand is expected to increase by 6 to 8 percent per year through 2020 during this period of projected ambitious economic growth.[2] Thus, the thorium cycle holds out the potential to provide a huge portion of India's projected electricity needs for several hundred years.

 

Indian engineers have recognized, however, that significant hurdles block the way toward commercializing the thorium fuel cycle. High costs and major technical problems are likely to delay full commercialization of the thorium cycle until at least 2050, according to Indian energy experts.

 

To fully realize the thorium cycle, Indian engineers first face the mainly financial challenge of proving the commercial viability of the plutonium breeder program. India has operated a small 40-megawatt pilot-scale breeder reactor since 1985.Although India is building a commercial-scale breeder reactor, which is projected to be completed in 2011, and is planning to build four more of these reactors by 2020, ramping up to a fleet of breeder reactors will likely take decades, and it is uncertain if this program will succeed commercially. Thus, full realization of India's civilian nuclear energy vision appears blurry, and this program could remain stuck at a low level for the next few decades.

 

Indeed, after nearly half a century of investment, nuclear energy provides only about 4,000 megawatts of electricity, or 3 percent of India's electricity needs. That compares to about 20 percent in the United States. Even if the nuclear deal were to go through and India were to meet all of its goals for nuclear power generation, nuclear-generated electricity would only account for about 5 percent of India's projected electricity demands in 2020. —CHARLES D. FERGUSON

 

ENDNOTES

 

1. Subhinder Thakur, Interview with author, Mumbai, January 4, 2008. Similar estimates appear in R. B. Grover and Subhash Chandra, "Scenario for Growth of Electricity in India," Energy Policy, November 2006, pp. 2834-2847. For data on coal use, see World Coal Institute, www.worldcoal.org/pages/content/index.asp?PageID=402.

2. John Stephenson and Peter Tynan, "Will the U.S.-India Civil Nuclear Cooperation Initiative Light India?" in Gauging U.S. Indian Strategic Cooperation, Henry Sokolski, editor (Strategic Studies Institute, 2007), p. 24.

 

India's Planned Nuclear Triad: Seeking a "Credible Deterrent"

 

Charles D. Ferguson

 

If the U.S.-Indian nuclear deal were to move forward without any conditions, it would allow India to achieve its goal of deploying a triad of land-, sea-, and air-based nuclear weapons without hampering its nuclear energy ambitions.

 

India's desire for a nuclear triad arises out of its stated need for a "credible minimal deterrent." Exactly what that means is still being debated within the country, although the emphasis is clearly on "credibility" not minimalism. "Minimal" has been dropped at times from government pronouncements, but Indian analysts have consistently underscored the notion of credibility.[1] Even those who are strong supporters of eventual nuclear disarmament generally agree that credibility requires a second-strike capability.

 

Second-strike capability demands survivable nuclear forces. To achieve this, Indian analysts have borrowed from the U.S.-Soviet experience during the Cold War and have sought to acquire nuclear-armed submarines. In late February, India took a decisive step toward a sea-based nuclear capability by conducting a test of the K-15 ballistic missile from a submerged pontoon. The K-15 has a reported top range of 700 kilometers, allowing it to strike many targets in Pakistan. Deployed K-15 missiles on submarines could also target high-value sites in China.

 

The Indian military has been less successful in building nuclear submarines from which to launch such missiles. India's nuclear-powered submarine program has limped along since 1985, although the Indian navy is trying to ready its first nuclear submarine for sea trials next year. India also received some experience in nuclear submarine operations from 1988 to 1991 when it leased a nuclear-powered attack submarine from the Soviet Union. A Russian crew manned this submarine while training Indian sailors. Presently, Russia is building an Akula-class nuclear submarine for lease to India.

 

Despite the substantial delays in deploying nuclear-powered submarines, these types of warships are not essential for deploying nuclear-armed forces at sea. India could use conventionally powered submarines as missile carriers, surface ships carrying nuclear-armed cruise missiles, or aircraft carriers with nuclear-capable bombers. Russia is refitting an aircraft carrier for India. Having fallen behind schedule, Moscow will likely complete the refit by late 2010. India has renamed the Admiral Gorshkov carrier as the Vikramaditya, which would be capable of helping protect India's submarine fleet as well as launching fighter-bomber aircraft.[2] Of these platforms, Indian defense planners prefer the submarine force, whether nuclear or conventionally powered, to optimize survivability of this leg of the envisioned triad.

 

At this stage, India has not indicated how large its nuclear-armed submarine force could become. Submarines are least vulnerable to a pre-emptive attack when deployed; in port, a submarine is more exposed to attack. Even when deployed, a small submarine force could be vulnerable to anti-submarine warfare. If Pakistan develops effective anti-submarine capabilities, Indian defense planners would feel pressure to build a larger fleet of submarines, thereby increasing the perceived need for more weapons-usable fissile material and more nuclear weapons.

 

The other two legs of the triad would also require ready-to-deploy nuclear weapons. In the absence of clarifying information from the Indian government, there has been considerable debate about the deployment status of India's nuclear weapons. Estimates of weapons that are fully assembled or can be fully assembled within days to weeks vary from a few to up to 100 with many analysts settling on about 30 to 50.[3]

 

There is even more certainty about the numbers of aircraft India has. India has more than 300 nuclear-capable planes, but it is uncertain how many are devoted to the nuclear mission. The most likely nuclear delivery systems are the Jaguar IS and Mirage 2000H fighter-bombers. Russian-acquired older MiG-27 and newer Su-30MKI fighter-bombers might also have a nuclear role.[4] India plans to upgrade its military aircraft within the next few years by purchasing 126 multipurpose planes for up to $12 billion. During a late February 2008 official visit to India, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates reportedly promoted sales of U.S.-made aircraft.[5] It is uncertain how many aircraft India has armed or would consider arming with nuclear weapons.

 

Although the number of nuclear-armed land-based missiles is also uncertain, tests of these missiles are easier to track. The Prithvi I, with a range of 150 kilometers and a payload of 1,000 kilograms, has been approved for the Indian army. The Dhanush is the naval version of the Prithvi II, which is under development and has a range of approximately 350 kilometers. In addition, India has been developing longer-range Agni missiles. Although the Agni I with a 700-kilometer range and the Agni II with a range greater than 2,000 kilometers have reportedly been "inducted" into the army's missile groups, their operational status is uncertain. In addition, the Agni III with a range greater than 3,000 kilometers is still under development and was test-launched on April 12, 2007. The Natural Resources Defense Council estimates that the Agni I and II will become fully operational in the next two years. Both can be deployed on road or rail launchers.[6] Once operational, these missile systems would significantly enhance India's nuclear strike capabilities and could strike parts of China. India is estimated to have up to 100 ballistic missiles with more than half of those in the longer-range Agni class, but it is uncertain how many of these could be armed with nuclear warheads.[7]

 

Perceived pressures to deter China as well as Pakistan could increase the numbers of deployed and reserve Indian nuclear weapons. Although the actual size of the Indian arsenal is unknown, accounting for even modestly sized bomber, land-based missile, and submarine legs in a triad can give a rough estimate of the potential future size. For aircraft, India may choose to have a few dozen nuclear bombs. Presently, for example, India has about 48 Mirage 2000H planes and about 70 Jaguar ISs, but probably only a portion would have nuclear bombs devoted to them. In the missile leg, a few dozen Prithvi and Agni missiles could be devoted to nuclear missions. In the submarine leg, to ensure survivable forces, India would likely plan at a minimum for one submarine in the shipyard, one in port readying for deployment, and one or two at sea. Assuming up to a dozen missiles per submarine, India may have at least a few dozen warheads for the submarine force. If multiple warheads are placed on the missiles, the warhead numbers could expand by three or more times.

 

In sum, India's triad including a single-warhead missile force based on land and underwater and a bomber fleet could exceed more than 100 operational weapons in the coming years. In addition, this warhead amount could increase by a factor of two or more depending on the size of a reserve fissile material stockpile

Plutonium Production

 

To be sure, Indian officials I interviewed, as well as some deal supporters in the United States, contend that whether or not the deal goes through will not significantly affect India's weapons-grade plutonium production.[4] Given New Delhi's dedication to maintaining such production at full capacity, the deal's potential impact in this regard is indeed murky.

 

New Delhi has neither published its weapons-usable fissile material holdings nor indicated how large a nuclear arsenal it intends to make. Unofficial estimates by the Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS) indicate that India may have amassed 575 kilograms of weapons-grade plutonium as of the end of 2004.[5] ISIS has also estimated that India may have consumed about 131 kilograms of this plutonium in nuclear weapons tests, as reactor fuel, and in processing losses. The CIRUS reactor could produce about 9 kilograms of weapons-grade plutonium annually, and Dhruva could make about 23 kilograms annually. If these estimates are accurate, India may have had available 540 kilograms of weapons-grade plutonium as of the end of 2007. Using the conservative International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) estimates that 8 kilograms of plutonium are needed to make a nuclear bomb, the stockpiled Indian plutonium could fuel a minimum of 67 first-generation fission bombs. Some analysts have argued that more advanced designs could use as little as a few kilograms of plutonium.[6] Therefore, the upper bound estimate for India's current warhead capacity is somewhat more than 100 nuclear weapons.

 

It does appear that, in at least one respect, the deal could stimulate near-term growth in weapons-grade plutonium production. Under the deal, India has pledged to shut down the aging CIRUS reactor by 2010. CIRUS is contentious because India obtained it from Canada in the late 1950s and gave assurances "that the reactor would be used only for peaceful uses." The United States had provided the heavy water for the reactor. This reactor, however, produced plutonium for India's 1974 "peaceful" nuclear test, which spurred the United States and other countries to form the NSG. India has considered replacing this 40-megawatt thermal (MWth) reactor with a larger capacity 100 MWth reactor.[7] This replacement reactor could produce about two-and-a-half times the amount of plutonium produced annually by CIRUS, or about 23 kilograms compared to 9 kilograms.

 

In addition to its weapons-grade plutonium stockpile, with or without the deal, India can make hundreds of nuclear weapons from several tons of unsafeguarded reactor-grade plutonium in spent nuclear fuel it has already accumulated, although the deal could somewhat affect future production. It is unknown how much reactor-grade plutonium India has separated from spent fuel, but the unsafeguarded reactors have produced more than 20 times the amount of plutonium that India has obtained from the two weapons-plutonium-production reactors. The deal did not place any of this past production under safeguards.

 

The most direct and immediate means of using this material would be as fissile material in nuclear weapons. Although weapons-grade plutonium is ideal for weapons use, reactor-grade plutonium can also serve this purpose.[8] Reportedly, India may have used reactor-grade plutonium in one of its May 1998 tests.[9]

 

Moreover, this feedstock of unsafeguarded plutonium could fuel India's planned breeder reactor program (the second stage of Bhabha's three-stage plan), which will remain outside of safeguards. The five planned breeder reactors by 2020 would require two initial cores of plutonium before recycling of plutonium would make the breeders more than self-sufficient. If only the first 500-megawatt electric Prototype Fast Breeder Reactor were dedicated to weapons production, it could produce up to 140 kilograms of weapons-grade plutonium each year, more than four times the current rate of production from CIRUS and Dhruva.[10]

 

It should be noted that, in a few years, the deal might lower the future rate of production of reactor-grade plutonium. Without the deal, India would have only six reactors under safeguards: the U.S.-built Tarapur 1 and 2, the Canadian-built Rajasthan 1 and 2, and the two Russian reactors under construction at Kudankulam. With the deal, India has agreed to place eight additional indigenously made reactors under safeguards, meaning that eight pressurized heavy-water reactors and their produced plutonium would remain outside of safeguards. Over the course of the next seven years, the net result would be that the annual production rate of unsafeguarded plutonium would be set to peak at about 2,000 kilograms per year in the next two years and fall to about 1,250 kilograms per year by 2015, when safeguards would be applied to all of the reactors subject to the deal.

 

Therefore, the deal would serve to lower India's future unsafeguarded plutonium production rate by about one-third.[11] In that respect, the deal is arguably positive for nonproliferation as long as permanent safeguards are applied. Nonetheless, existing and future stocks of spent fuel would be more than sufficient to fuel the breeder program or to provide direct fissile material for nuclear weapons. Furthermore, the deal as structured has given implicit U.S. approval to India's nuclear weapons program under the guise of bringing India into "the nonproliferation mainstream."

 

Directing India Onto a More Responsible Path

 

To truly bring India into the nonproliferation mainstream, the NSG and Congress must insist on certain conditions. These conditions are minimal in the sense that they would not roll back India's nuclear weapons program and would not significantly curtail India's weapons-usable fissile material production capabilities. In that sense, India will have won what it has most sought, recognition of its nuclear weapons program. Even if the deal dies, the United States in effect has already bestowed that recognition. Nonetheless, as a price for that acknowledgement, India should be willing to accept more responsible behavior that would lessen the damage to the nonproliferation regime.

 

Nuclear trade should be contingent on India refraining from nuclear testing. Also, such commerce should depend on maintenance of permanent safeguards on all designated nuclear facilities. Moreover, the NSG should hold back on transferring enrichment, reprocessing, and heavy-water technologies that could further enhance India's weapons production capabilities. In addition, the United States should press for India to sign the CTBT and adhere to a weapons-usable fissile material cap. Fully implementing these measures, however, will depend on Chinese and Pakistani actions.

 

Although most Indian policymakers and analysts have supported the country's unilateral testing moratorium since 1998, all interviewees agreed that India's accession to the CTBT has become increasingly tied to the U.S. position on the treaty. India will not ratify the treaty unless the United States does so. Although there is no direct nuclear threat between India and the United States, Indian analysts have made a direct connection between U.S. nuclear actions and India's place in the world. Summing up this view, Professor Pratap Mehta, the executive director of the Center for Policy Research, based in New Delhi, said India "cannot support a world order that gives into the U.S. maintaining its nuclear primacy." Moreover, he said that "as long as the U.S. holds out on modernizing its arsenal, India will not sign the FMCT [fissile material cutoff treaty] or the CTBT."

 

Acknowledging U.S. influence, top defense expert K. Santhanam, who had a leadership role during the 1998 tests, drew a more direct connection to China and Pakistan. He expressed willingness for India to continue indefinitely the testing moratorium as long as China and Pakistan refrain from testing.

 

All of the five original nuclear-weapon states, including China, have signed the CTBT. Even if ratification by the United States remains out of reach for the time being, India should be encouraged in tandem with Pakistan to take a step beyond the moratorium and sign the treaty.

 

Similarly, fissile material production depends crucially on Chinese and Pakistani production. All of the five legally recognized nuclear-weapon states but China have committed to stop making fissile material for weapons. China is believed to have stopped weapons-usable fissile material production, but Beijing has never officially said so. If China would make a public pledge not to make fissile material for weapons, it would put added pressure on India to specify when it would stop stockpiling nuclear weapons material. To bring Pakistan into this arrangement, India could offer a series of alternating unilateral moves. For example, India could verifiably shut down one of its plutonium-production reactors for a period of time. Pakistan could take a similar step with one of its production reactors. Verification could be achieved through third-party commercial satellite monitoring of the status of the reactors.

 

Although turning back the growth in India's nuclear arsenal appears unlikely for the foreseeable future, the NSG and the United States have opportunities to shape the future direction of India's strategic weapons program. They should take it.

India's Nuclear Energy Program: Ambitious Dreams, Sober Realities

 

                                                Arms Control Today   April 2008

           

 

           

Reshaping the U.S.-Indian Nuclear Deal to Lessen the Nonproliferation Losses

 

Charles D. Ferguson

India's Nuclear Energy Program: Ambitious Dreams, Sober Realities

India's Planned Nuclear Triad: Seeking a "Credible Deterrent"

 

For decades, India's nuclear programs have been defined by two contradictory forces: the country's vast ambitions and its limited uranium reserves. Its ambitions have led New Delhi to establish a significant civilian nuclear enterprise, to refuse to sign the nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT), and to develop and test nuclear weapons. Its limited uranium reserves, on the other hand, have clearly slowed India's nuclear energy development, most likely hampered its nuclear weapons program, and intertwined the two efforts to a high degree.

 

The tension between India's goals and resources has grown much stronger in the past decade. By bringing India's nuclear weapons programs into the open, the country's 1998 nuclear tests fueled calls to develop the full panoply of nuclear capabilities, including a nuclear triad. India's recent impressive economic growth has strained the country's energy system, increasing interest in nuclear energy. In particular, India would like to quintuple the production of electricity through nuclear energy by 2020.

 

To the Indian government, the civil nuclear cooperation agreement it signed with the United States last year looks like a way for New Delhi to escape this dilemma, giving it access to global uranium reserves without imposing limits on its nuclear weapons program. India's right and left wings may claim the Congress-led government has somehow shortchanged their country. The truth is that, without the deal, New Delhi will be forced to confront painful trade-offs between its energy and national security goals, as a series of January interviews I conducted in India of nuclear scientists, policy experts, and energy and defense analysts made clear.

 

For the deal to go forward, the 45 members of the voluntary Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) must first agree to carve out an exception for India to its guidelines. These currently require a non-nuclear-weapon state, as India is legally defined under the NPT, to have comprehensive safeguards on all nuclear facilities before receiving civilian nuclear assistance from NSG countries.

 

The U.S. Congress too must sign off on the final nuclear cooperation agreement, meaning that it and the NSG will retain considerable leverage over India. They should use this power to condition the agreement in a way that does less damage to the nuclear nonproliferation regime.

 

The NSG has an opportunity to condition this exception on India's behaviors, including continuing to refrain from testing nuclear explosives and placing permanent safeguards on any foreign technologies and fuel, as well as designated indigenous facilities. Moreover, the NSG should hold back on transferring enrichment and reprocessing technologies, which could further enhance India's weapons production capabilities, and only supply as much reserve fuel as needed for reasonable power plant requirements. U.S. leadership could also influence India to become a more responsible nuclear-armed state through signing the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) and committing to a cutoff of weapons-usable fissile material in addition to adhering to conditions on civilian nuclear commerce.

 

Two Intertwined Visions

 

The roots of the current controversy over the nuclear deal go back to India's emergence as an independent nation in the late 1940s. At that time, Dr. Homi Bhabha, widely viewed as a father of India's nuclear programs, sought to develop these efforts in a way that exploited indigenous resources. He was well aware that India's uranium resources were only sufficient to power a modest nuclear energy program of about 10,000 megawatts per year and even less would be available if some were used for weapons. To compensate, Bhabha laid out a three-stage plan for India to hoard these limited indigenous uranium deposits and to leverage its abundant thorium deposits to bootstrap itself to a massive production of electricity through nuclear energy and to produce weapons-grade plutonium.

 

This vision of self-sufficiency, which arose in part from India's desire to escape its colonial heritage, has remained a guiding vision for India's nuclear establishment even as its practical fulfillment has receded further into the future. India's positions in the discussions on a nuclear cooperation agreement with the United States in many ways reflect a compromise between those who want to be self-reliant and stick almost exclusively with Bhabha's three-stage plan, which one interviewee called "a sacred cow," and those who are willing to bring in outside foreign suppliers. India's preference for autarky was reinforced by its isolation from international nuclear trade after a 1974 nuclear test, which relied on U.S. and Canadian technology and nuclear materials. This is also reflected in India's current negotiating posture, which seeks to ensure that foreign suppliers cannot shut off access to fuel and reactors if New Delhi tests nuclear explosives or commits some other proliferation transgression, such as transferring nuclear technologies to states of concern.

 

Moreover, while Bhabha sought to ensure that fissile materials would be available for a nuclear weapons program, India in recent years has fleshed out what it means when it says that it seeks a "credible minimal deterrent." In its draft nuclear doctrine published soon after the 1998 tests, New Delhi explicitly stated its objective was to deploy a triad of nuclear forces. The triad would consist of land-based ballistic missiles, nuclear-capable aircraft, and nuclear-armed submarines. As with the U.S.-Soviet experience during the Cold War, such a triad is designed to provide India with survivable nuclear forces and a second-strike capability. It would also mean that India's arsenal would increase from an estimated few dozen operational warheads today to as many as 200 or more, a level akin to China and the United Kingdom. The nuclear deal would not prevent India from building up to these projected operational and reserve capacities within several years.

Complications during Peritoneal Dialysis

 

The major complications of peritoneal dialysis are peritonitis, catheter-associated nonperitonitis infections, weight gain a disturbances, and residual uremia (especially among patients with no residual kidney function).

 

Peritonitis typically develops when there has been a break in sterile technique during one or more of the exchange proc defined by an elevated peritoneal fluid leukocyte count (100/mm3, of which at least 50% are polymorphonuclear neutro presentation typically consists of pain and cloudy dialysate, often with fever and other constitutional symptoms. The mo organisms are gram-positive cocci, including Staphylococcus, reflecting the origin from the skin. Gram-negative rod infe fungal and mycobacterial infections can be seen in selected patients, particularly after antibacterial therapy. Most cases managed either with intraperitoneal or oral antibiotics, depending on the organism; many patients with peritonitis do no cases where peritonitis is due to hydrophilic gram negative rods (e.g., Pseudomonas sp.) or yeast, antimicrobial therapy and catheter removal is required to ensure complete eradication of infection. Nonperitonitis catheter-associated infection infections) vary widely in severity. Some cases can be managed with local antibiotic or silver nitrate administration, whi enough to require parenteral antibiotic therapy and catheter removal.

 

Peritoneal dialysis is associated with a variety of metabolic complications. As noted above, albumin and other proteins c peritoneal membrane in concert with the loss of metabolic wastes. The hypoproteinemia induced by peritoneal dialysis o protein intake in order to maintain nitrogen balance. Hyperglycemia and weight gain are also common complications of hundred calories in the form of dextrose are absorbed each day, depending on the concentration employed. Peritoneal d those with type II diabetes mellitus, are then prone to other complications of insulin resistance, including hypertriglycer side, the continuous nature of peritoneal dialysis usually allows for a more liberal diet, due to continuous removal of pot two major dietary components whose accumulation can be hazardous in ESRD.

 

GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE

 

The incidence of ESRD is increasing worldwide with longer life expectancies and improved care of infectious and cardiov management of ESRD varies widely by country and within country by region, and it is influenced by economic and other peritoneal dialysis is more commonly performed in poorer countries owing to its lower expense and the high cost of esta hemodialysis units

PERITONEAL DIALYSIS

 

In peritoneal dialysis, 1.5-3 L of a dextrose-containing solution is infused into the peritoneal cavity and allowed to dwel usually 2-4 h. As with hemodialysis, toxic materials are removed through a combination of convective clearance genera and diffusive clearance down a concentration gradient. The clearance of solutes and water during a peritoneal dialysis e balance between the movement of solute and water into the peritoneal cavity versus absorption from the peritoneal cav diminishes with time and eventually stops when equilibration between plasma and dialysate is reached. Absorption of so peritoneal cavity occurs across the peritoneal membrane into the peritoneal capillary circulation and via peritoneal lymp circulation. The rate of peritoneal solute transport varies from patient to patient and may be altered by the presence of drugs, and physical factors such as position and exercise.

 

Forms of Peritoneal Dialysis

 

Peritoneal dialysis may be carried out as continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD), continuous cyclic peritoneal combination of both. In CAPD, dialysis solution is manually infused into the peritoneal cavity during the day and exchan daily. A nighttime dwell is frequently instilled at bedtime and remains in the peritoneal cavity through the night. The dra performed manually with the assistance of gravity to move fluid out of the abdomen. In CCPD, exchanges are performe usually at night; the patient is connected to an automated cycler that performs a series of exchange cycles while the pa exchange cycles required to optimize peritoneal solute clearance varies by the peritoneal membrane characteristics; as suggest careful tracking of solute clearances to ensure dialysis "adequacy."

 

Peritoneal dialysis solutions are available in volumes typically ranging from 1.5 to 3.0 L. Lactate is the preferred buffer i solutions. The most common additives to peritoneal dialysis solutions are heparin to prevent obstruction of the dialysis c and antibiotics during an episode of acute peritonitis. Insulin may also be added in patients with diabetes mellitus.

 

Access to the Peritoneal Cavity

 

Access to the peritoneal cavity is obtained through a peritoneal catheter. Catheters used for maintenance peritoneal dia made of silicon rubber with numerous side holes at the distal end. These catheters usually have two Dacron cuffs to pro proliferation, granulation, and invasion of the cuff. The scarring that occurs around the cuffs anchors the catheter and s tracking from the skin surface into the peritoneal cavity; it also prevents the external leakage of fluid from the peritonea placed in the preperitoneal plane and ~2 cm from the skin surface.

 

The peritoneal equilibrium test is a formal evaluation of peritoneal membrane characteristics that measures the transfer glucose across the peritoneal membrane. Patients are classified as low, low-average, high-average, and high "transpor equilibration (i.e., high transporters) tend to absorb more glucose and lose efficiency of ultrafiltration with long daytime also tend to lose larger quantities of albumin and other proteins across the peritoneal membrane. In general, patients w characteristics require more frequent, shorter dwell time exchanges, nearly always obligating use of a cycler for feasibil average) transporters tend to do well with fewer exchanges. The efficiency of solute clearance also depends on the volu Larger volumes allow for greater solute clearance, particularly with CAPD in patients with low and low-average transpor Interestingly, solute clearance also increases with physical activity, presumably related to more efficient flow dynamics

 

As with hemodialysis, the optimal dose of peritoneal dialysis is unknown. Several observational studies have suggested and creatinine clearance (the latter generally measured in L/week) are associated with lower mortality rates and fewer u However, a randomized clinical trial (ADEMEX) failed to show a significant reduction in mortality or complications with a in urea clearance. In general, patients on peritoneal dialysis do well when they retain residual kidney function. The rates increase with years on dialysis and have been correlated with loss of residual function to a greater extent than loss of p capacity. Recently, a nonabsorbable carbohydrate (icodextrin) has been introduced as an alternative osmotic agent. Stu more efficient ultrafiltration with icodextrin than with dextrose-containing solutions. Icodextrin is typically used as the "l CCPD or for the longest dwell in patients on CAPD. For some patients in whom CCPD does not provide sufficient solute c approach can be adopted where one or more daytime exchanges are added to the CCPD regimen. While this approach c clearance and prolong a patient's capacity to remain on peritoneal dialysis, the burden of the hybrid approach can be ov

Complications during Hemodialysis

 

Hypotension is the most common acute complication of hemodialysis, particularly among diabetics. Numerous factors ap hypotension, including excessive ultrafiltration with inadequate compensatory vascular filling, impaired vasoactive or au osmolar shifts, overzealous use of antihypertensive agents, and reduced cardiac reserve. Patients with arteriovenous fis develop high output cardiac failure due to shunting of blood through the dialysis access; on rare occasions, this may nec fistula or graft. Because of the vasodilatory and cardiodepressive effects of acetate, its use as the buffer in dialysate wa hypotension. Since the introduction of bicarbonate-containing dialysate, dialysis-associated hypotension has become les management of hypotension during dialysis consists of discontinuing ultrafiltration, the administration of 100 23% saturated hypertonic saline, and administration of salt-poor albumin. Hypotension during dialysis can frequently be evaluation of the dry weight and by ultrafiltration modeling, such that more fluid is removed at the beginning rather tha procedure. Additional maneuvers include the performance of sequential ultrafiltration followed by dialysis; the use of mi adrenergic pressor agent; cooling of the dialysate during dialysis treatment; and avoiding heavy meals during dialysis. Muscle cramps during dialysis are also a common complication of the procedure. The etiology of dialysis-associated cram Changes in muscle perfusion because of excessively aggressive volume removal, particularly below the estimated dry w sodium-containing dialysate, have been proposed as precipitants of dialysis-associated cramps. Strategies that may be include reducing volume removal during dialysis, ultrafiltration profiling, and the use of higher concentrations of sodium modeling (see above).

 

Anaphylactoid reactions to the dialyzer, particularly on its first use, have been reported most frequently with the bioinco containing membranes. With the gradual phasing out of cuprophane membranes in the United States, dialyzer reactions uncommon. Dialyzer reactions can be divided into two types, A and B. Type A reactions are attributed to an IgE hypersensitivity reaction to ethylene oxide used in the sterilization of new dialyzers. This reaction typically occurs soon a treatment (within the first few minutes) and can progress to full-blown anaphylaxis if the therapy is not promptly discon steroids or epinephrine may be needed if symptoms are severe. The type B reaction consists of a symptom complex of n pain, which appears to result from complement activation and cytokine release. These symptoms typically occur several run and typically resolve over time with continued dialysis.

 

diseases constitute the major causes of death in patients with ESRD. Cardiovascular mortality and event patients than in patients posttransplantation, although rates are extraordinarily high in both populations. The underlying disease is unclear but may be related to shared risk factors (e.g., diabetes mellitus), chronic inflammation, massive cha volume (especially with high interdialytic weight gains), inadequate treatment of hypertension, dyslipidemia, anemia, dy calcification, hyperhomocysteinemia, and, perhaps, alterations in cardiovascular dynamics during the dialysis treatment cardiovascular risk reduction in ESRD patients; none have demonstrated consistent benefit. Nevertheless, most experts cardioprotective strategies (e.g., lipid-lowering agents, aspirin, -adrenergic antagonists) in dialysis patients based on t risk profile, which appears to be increased by more than an order of magnitude relative to persons unaffected by kidney

DIALYSIS ACCESS

 

The fistula, graft, or catheter through which blood is obtained for hemodialysis is often referred to as a dialysis access the anastomosis of an artery to a vein (e.g., the Brescia-Cimino fistula, in which the cephalic vein is anastomosed end results in arterialization of the vein. This facilitates its subsequent use in the placement of large needles (typically 15 ga circulation. Although fistulas have the highest long-term patency rate of all dialysis access options, fistulas are created i the United States. Many patients undergo placement of an arteriovenous graft (i.e., the interposition of prosthetic mate polytetrafluoroethylene, between an artery and a vein) or a tunneled dialysis catheter. In recent years, nephrologists, v health care policy makers in the United States have encouraged creation of arteriovenous fistulas in a larger fraction of initiative). Unfortunately, even when created, arteriovenous fistulas may not mature sufficiently to provide reliable acce they may thrombose early in their development. Novel surgical approaches (e.g., brachiobasilic fistula creation with tran fistula to the arm surface) have increased options for "native" vascular access.

 

Grafts and catheters tend to be used among persons with smaller-caliber veins or persons whose veins have been dama venipuncture, or after prolonged hospitalization. The most important complication of arteriovenous grafts is thrombosis failure, due principally to intimal hyperplasia at the anastomosis between the graft and recipient vein. When grafts (or f guided angioplasty can be used to dilate stenoses; monitoring of venous pressures on dialysis and of access flow, thoug may assist in the early recognition of impending vascular access failure. In addition to an increased rate of access failur catheters are associated with much higher rates of infection than fistulas.

 

Intravenous large-bore catheters are often used in patients with acute and chronic kidney disease. For persons on main tunneled catheters (either two separate catheters or a single catheter with two lumens) are often used when arterioven failed or are not feasible due to anatomical considerations. These catheters are tunneled under the skin; the tunnel redu from the skin, resulting in a lower infection rate than with nontunneled temporary catheters. Most tunneled catheters ar

                jugular veins; the external jugular, femoral, and subclavian veins may also be used. Nephrologists, interventional radiol surgeons generally prefer to avoid placement of catheters into the subclavian veins; while flow rates are usually excelle frequent complication and, if present, will likely prohibit permanent vascular access (i.e., a fistula or graft) in the ipsilat rates may be higher with femoral catheters. For patients with multiple vascular access complications and no other optio access, tunneled catheters may be the last "lifeline" for hemodialysis. Translumbar or transhepatic approaches into the required if the superior vena cava or other central veins draining the upper extremities are stenosed or thrombosed.

 

Goals of Dialysis

 

The hemodialysis procedure is targeted at removing both low- and high-molecular-weight solutes. The procedure consis blood through the dialyzer at a flow rate of 300-500 mL/min, while dialysate flows in an opposite counter-current The efficiency of dialysis is determined by blood and dialysate flow through the dialyzer as well as dialyzer characteristic removing solute). The dose of dialysis, which is currently defined as a derivation of the fractional urea clearance during is further governed by patient size, residual kidney function, dietary protein intake, the degree of anabolism or catabolis comorbid conditions.

 

Since the landmark studies of Sargent and Gotch relating the measurement of the dose of dialysis using urea concentra National Cooperative Dialysis Study, the delivered dose of dialysis has been measured and considered as a quality assur tool. While the fractional removal of urea nitrogen and derivations thereof are considered to be the standard methods b dialysis" is measured, a large multicenter randomized clinical trial (the HEMO Study) failed to show a difference in morta difference in urea clearance. Still, multiple observational studies and widespread expert opinion have suggested that hig warranted; current targets include a urea reduction ratio (the fractional reduction in blood urea nitrogen per hemodialys and a body water-indexed clearance x time product (KT/V) above 1.3 or 1.05, depending on whether urea concentration For the majority of patients with ESRD, between 9 and 12 h of dialysis are required each week, usually divided into thre studies have suggested that longer hemodialysis session lengths may be beneficial, although these studies are confound characteristics, including body size and nutritional status. Hemodialysis "dose" should be individualized, and factors othe should be considered, including the adequacy of ultrafiltration or fluid removal. Several authors have highlighted improv associated with more frequent hemodialysis (i.e., more than three times a week), although these studies are also confo A randomized clinical trial is currently underway to test whether more frequent dialysis results in differences in a variety functional markers.

The Dialyzer

 

There are three essential components to hemodialysis: the dialyzer, the composition and delivery of the dialysate, and The dialyzer consists of a plastic device with the facility to perfuse blood and dialysate compartments at ve surface area of modern dialysis membranes in adult patients is usually in the range of 1.5-2.0 m2. The hollow use in the United States. These dialyzers are composed of bundles of capillary tubes through which blood circulates whil outside of the fiber bundle.

 

 

Recent advances have led to the development of many different types of membrane material. Broadly, there are four ca membranes: cellulose, substituted cellulose, cellulosynthetic, and synthetic. Over the past three decades, there has bee cellulose-derived to synthetic membranes, because the latter are more "biocompatible." Bioincompatibility is generally d membrane to activate the complement cascade. Cellulosic membranes are bioincompatible because of the presence of f membrane surface. In contrast, with the substituted cellulose membranes (e.g., cellulose acetate) or the cellulosyntheti groups are chemically bound to either acetate or tertiary amino groups, resulting in limited complement activation. Syn polysulfone, polymethylmethacrylate, and polyacrylonitrile membranes, are even more biocompatible because of the ab groups. Polysulfone membranes are now used in >60% of the dialysis treatments in the United States. Reprocessing and reuse of hemodialyzers are often employed for patients on maintenance hemodialysis in the United St manufacturing costs for disposable dialyzers have declined, more and more outpatient dialysis facilities are no longer re most centers employing reuse, only the dialyzer unit is reprocessed and reused, whereas in the developing world blood reused. The reprocessing procedure can be either manual or automated. It consists of the sequential rinsing of the bloo compartments with water, a chemical cleansing step with reverse ultrafiltration from the dialysate to the blood compart patency of the dialyzer, and, finally, disinfection of the dialyzer. Formaldehyde, peracetic acid-hydrogen peroxide, gluta all been used as reprocessing agents.

 

Dialysate

 

The potassium concentration of dialysate may be varied from 0 to 4 mmol/L depending on the predialysis plasma potass usual dialysate calcium concentration in U.S. hemodialysis centers is 1.25 mmol/L (2.5 meq/L), although modification m settings (e.g., higher dialysate calcium concentrations may be used in patients with hypocalcemia associated with secon or following parathyroidectomy). The usual dialysate sodium concentration is 140 mmol/L. Lower dialysate sodium conc with a higher frequency of hypotension, cramping, nausea, vomiting, fatigue, and dizziness. In patients who frequently their dialysis run, "sodium modeling" to counterbalance urea-related osmolar gradients is often used. When sodium mod concentration is gradually lowered from the range of 145-155 meq/L to isotonic concentrations (140 meq/L) near the e treatment, typically declining either in steps or in a linear or exponential fashion. Because patients are exposed to appro during each dialysis treatment, water used for the dialysate is subjected to filtration, softening, deionization, and, ultim During the reverse osmosis process, water is forced through a semipermeable membrane at very high pressure to remo contaminants and >90% of dissolved ions.

 

Blood Delivery System

 

The blood delivery system is composed of the extracorporeal circuit in the dialysis machine and the dialysis access. The of a blood pump, dialysis solution delivery system, and various safety monitors. The blood pump moves blood from the dialyzer, and back to the patient. The blood flow rate may range from 250-500 mL/min, depending largely on the type vascular access. Negative hydrostatic pressure on the dialysate side can be manipulated to achieve desirable fluid remo Dialysis membranes have different ultrafiltration coefficients (i.e., mL removed/min per mmHg) so that along with hydro removal can be varied. The dialysis solution delivery system dilutes the concentrated dialysate with water and monitors conductivity, and flow of dialysate.

TREATMENT OPTIONS FOR ESRD PATIENTS

 

Commonly accepted criteria for initiating patients on maintenance dialysis include the presence of uremic symptoms, th unresponsive to conservative measures, persistent extracellular volume expansion despite diuretic therapy, acidosis ref a bleeding diathesis, and a creatinine clearance or estimated glomerular filtration rate (GFR) below 10 mL/min per 1.73 estimating equations). Timely referral to a nephrologist for advanced planning and creation of a dialysis access, educati options, and management of the complications of advanced chronic kidney disease, including hypertension, anemia, aci hyperparathyroidism, is advisable.

 

In ESRD, treatment options include hemodialysis (in center or at home); peritoneal dialysis, as either continuous ambul (CAPD) or continuous cyclic peritoneal dialysis (CCPD); or transplantation (Chap. 276). Although there are geographic v remains the most common therapeutic modality for ESRD (>90% of patients) in the United States. In contrast to hemo is continuous, but much less efficient, in terms of solute clearance. While no large-scale clinical trials have been comple among patients randomized to either hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis, outcomes associated with both therapies are s the decision of which modality to select is often based on personal preferences and quality-of-life considerations.

 

HEMODIALYSIS

 

Hemodialysis relies on the principles of solute diffusion across a semipermeable membrane. Movement of metabolic was down a concentration gradient from the circulation into the dialysate. The rate of diffusive transport increases in respon including the magnitude of the concentration gradient, the membrane surface area, and the mass transfer coefficient of is a function of the porosity and thickness of the membrane, the size of the solute molecule, and the conditions of flow o membrane. According to the laws of diffusion, the larger the molecule, the slower its rate of transfer across the membra as urea (60 Da), undergoes substantial clearance, whereas a larger molecule, such as creatinine (113 Da), is cleared les diffusive clearance, movement of waste products from the circulation into the dialysate may occur as a result of ultrafilt clearance occurs because of solvent drag, with solutes being swept along with water across the semipermeable dialysis .

DIALYSIS IN THE TREATMENT OF RENAL FAILURE: INTRODUCTION

 

Dialysis may be required for the treatment of either acute or chronic kidney disease. The use of continuous renal replac and slow, low-efficiency dialysis (SLED) is specific to the management of acute renal failure and is discussed in Chap. 2 performed continuously (CRRT) or over 6-12 hours per session (SLED), in contrast to the 3-4 hours of an intermittent Advantages and disadvantages of CRRT and SLED.

Peritoneal dialysis is rarely used in developed countries for the treatment of acute renal failure because of the increased will be discussed in more detail below) less efficient clearance per unit of time. The focus of the majority of this chapter dialysis for end-stage renal disease (ESRD).

 

With the widespread availability of dialysis, the lives of hundreds of thousands of patients with ESRD have been prolong alone, there are now approximately 450,000 patients with ESRD, the vast majority of whom require dialysis. The incide cases per million population per year. The incidence of ESRD is disproportionately higher in African Americans (approxim population per year) as compared with white Americans (259 per million population per year). In the United States, the diabetes mellitus, currently accounting for nearly 45% of newly diagnosed cases of ESRD. Over one-quarter (27%) of p been attributed to hypertension, although it is unclear whether in these cases hypertension is the cause or a consequen other unknown causes of kidney failure. Other important causes of ESRD include glomerulonephritis, polycystic kidney d uropathy.

 

Globally, mortality rates for patients with ESRD are lowest in Europe and Japan but very high in the developing world b availability of dialysis. In the United States, the mortality rate of patients on dialysis is approximately 18-20% per year of approximately 30-35%. Deaths are due mainly to cardiovascular diseases and infections (approximately 50 and 15% Older age, male sex, nonblack race, diabetes mellitus, malnutrition, and underlying heart disease are important predict

Noninvasive Cardiac Imaging: Echocardiography, Nuclear Cardiology, and MRI/CT Imaging:

Cardiovascular imaging has significantly enhanced the practice of cardiology over the past few decades. Two

(2D) echocardiography is able to visualize the heart directly in real time using ultrasound, providing instantaneous

assessment of the myocardium, cardiac chambers, valves, pericardium, and great vessels. Doppler echocardiography

measures the velocity of moving red blood cells and has become a noninvasive alternative to cardiac catheterization for assessment of hemodynamics. Transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) provides a unique window for high
imaging of posterior structures of the heart, particularly the left atrium, mitral valve, and aorta. Nuclear cardiology uses isotopes to assess myocardial perfusion and ventricular function and has contributed greatly to the evaluation of patient with ischemic heart disease. Cardiac MRI and CT can delineate cardiac structure and function with high resolution. They particularly useful in the examination of cardiac masses, the pericardium, and the great vessels. MRI stress testing is no possible examining both ventricular function and perfusion. Detection of coronary calcification by CT as well as direct
visualization of coronary arteries by CT angiography (CTA) are of growing utility in patients with suspected coronary art
disease (CAD). This chapter provides an overview of the basic concepts of these cardiac imaging modalities, as well as t clinical indications for each procedure. The illustrations in this chapter are supplemented by "real time" and other static images in Chap. e20, "The Atlas of Noninvasive Cardiac Imaging."

Two-Dimensional Echocardiography

BASIC PRINCIPLES

2D echocardiography uses the principle of ultrasound reflection off cardiac structures to produce images of the heart (T 222-1). For a transthoracic echocardiogram (TTE), the imaging is performed with a handheld transducer placed directly the chest wall. In selected patients, a TEE may be performed, in which an ultrasound transducer is mounted on the tip o endoscope placed in the esophagus and directed toward the cardiac structures.

 

Table 1 Clinical Uses of Echocardiography

 

Two-Dimensional Echocardiography                Doppler Echocardiography

Cardiac chambers                                                 Valve stenosis

Chamber size                                                         Gradient

Left ventricular                                                         Valve area

Hypertrophy                                                       Valve regurgitation

Regional wall motion abnormalities                  Semiquantitation

Valve                                                                         Intracardiac pressures

Morphology and motion                                  Volumetric flow

Pericardium                                                             Diastolic filling

Effusion                                                             Intracardiac shunts

Tamponade                                                      Transesophageal Echocardiography

 

 

Masses                                                                    Inadequate transthoracic images

Great vessels                                                          Aortic disease

Stress Echocardiography                                     Infective endocarditis

Two-dimensional                                                   Source of embolism

Myocardial ischemia                                       Valve prosthesis

Viable myocardium                                         Intraoperative

Doppler

Valve disease

 

Current echocardiographic machines are portable and can be wheeled directly to the patient's bedside. Thus, a major

advantage of echocardiography over other imaging modalities is the ability to obtain instantaneous images of the cardia structures for immediate interpretation. Handheld echocardiographic units weighing 6 lb (<2.7 kg) have now become available, further enhancing the ease and portability of echocardiography. They are becoming an essential initial diagno modality for the critically ill patient in the emergency room and critical care setting.

A limitation of TTE is the inability to obtain high-quality images in all patients, especially those with a thick chest wall o severe lung disease, as ultrasound waves are poorly transmitted through lung parenchyma. New technology such as harmonic imaging and IV contrast agents (which traverse the pulmonary circulation) can now be used to enhance
endocardial borders in patients with poor acoustic windows.

CHAMBER SIZE AND FUNCTION

2D echocardiography is an ideal imaging modality for assessing left ventricular (LV) size and function (Fig. 1

qualitative assessment of the cavity sizes of the ventricles and systolic function can be made directly from the 2D imag experienced observers. 2D echocardiography is useful in the diagnosis of LV hypertrophy and is the imaging modality o choice for the diagnosis of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. Other chamber sizes are assessed by visual analysis, including left atrium and right-sided chambers.

 

Figure 1

 

 

Two-dimensional echocardiographic still-frame images from a normal patient with a normal heart. Top: Parasternal l axis view during systole and diastole (left) and systole (right). During systole, there is thickening of the myocardium and reducti the size of the left ventricle (LV). The valve leaflets are thin and open widely. Bottom: Parasternal short axis view during diastol (left) and systole (right) demonstrating a decrease in the left ventricular cavity size during systole as well as an increase in wall thickening. LA, left atrium; RV, right ventricle; Ao, aorta.