Monitoring of Long-Term Peritoneal Membrane Function

Objective Peritoneal membrane function influences dialysis prescription and clinical outcome and may change with time on treatment. Increasingly sophisticated tools, ranging from the peritoneal equilibration test (PET) to the standard permeability analysis (SPA) and personal dialysis capacity (PDC) test, are available to the clinician and clinical researcher. These tests allow assessment of a number of aspects of membrane function, including solute transport rates, ultrafiltration capacity, effective reabsorption, transcellular water transport, and permeability to macromolecules. In considering which tests are of greatest value in monitoring long-term membrane function, two criteria were set: those that result in clinically relevant interpatient differences in achieved ultrafiltration or solute clearances, and those that change with time in treatment. Study Selection Clinical validation studies of the PET, SPA, and PDC tests. Studies reporting membrane function using these methods in either long-term (5 years) peritoneal dialysis patients or longitudinal observations (> 2 years). Data Extraction Directly from published data. Additional, previously unpublished analysis of data from the Stoke PD Study. Results Solute transport is the most important parameter. In addition to predicting patient and technique survival at baseline, there is strong evidence that it can increase with time on treatment. Whereas patients with initially high solute transport drop out early from treatment, those with low transport remain longer on treatment, although, over 5 years, a proportion develop increasing transport rates. Ultrafiltration capacity, while being a composite measure of membrane function, is a useful guide for the clinician. Using the PET (2.27% glucose), a net ultrafiltration capacity of < 200 mL is associated with a 50% chance of achieving less than 1 L daily ultrafiltration at the expense of 1.8 hypertonic (3.86%) exchanges in anuric patients. Using a SPA (3.86% glucose), a net ultrafiltration capacity of < 400 mL indicates ultrafiltration failure. While there is circumstantial evidence that, with time on peritoneal dialysis, loss of transcellular water transport might contribute to ultrafiltration failure, none of the current tests is able to demonstrate this unequivocally. Of the other membrane parameters, evidence that interpatient differences are clinically relevant (permeability to macro-molecules), or that they change significantly with time on treatment (effective reabsorption), is lacking. Conclusion A strong case can be made for the regular assessment by clinicians of solute transport and ultrafiltration capacity, a task made simple to achieve using any of the three tools available.