scholarly journals Incremental peritoneal dialysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 40 (3) ◽  
pp. 320-326 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter G Blake ◽  
Jie Dong ◽  
Simon J Davies
Keyword(s):  
Renal Function ◽  
Peritoneal Dialysis ◽  
Renal Clearance ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Residual Renal Function ◽  
Peritoneal Membrane ◽  
Full Dose ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Initiation Of Dialysis

Incremental peritoneal dialysis (PD) has been variably defined. It involves taking advantage of the residual renal function that is usually present at initiation of dialysis to initially prescribe less onerous lower doses of PD while still achieving individualized clearance goals. We propose that incremental PD be defined as a strategy, rather than a particular regime, in which: (1) less than standard “full-dose” PD is initially prescribed in recognition of the value of residual renal function; (2) peritoneal clearance is initially less than the individualized clearance goal but the combination of peritoneal plus renal clearance achieves or exceeds that goal clearance; and (3) there is a clear intention to increase dose of PD as renal clearance declines and/or symptoms appear. Incremental PD by its nature lessens the workload of dialysis for those doing PD, reduces cost and exposure of the peritoneal membrane to glucose, and may lessen mechanical symptoms. Evidence that incremental PD improves clinical outcomes compared to the use of full-dose PD is lacking but one randomized controlled trial, multiple observational studies, and a systematic review all suggest that outcomes are at least as good. Given that incremental PD costs less and is inherently less onerous, it is reasonable, pending larger randomized trials, to adopt this strategy.

scholarly journals Effects of ACEIs and ARBs on the Residual Renal Function in Peritoneal Dialysis Patients: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Lei Ding ◽  
Jingjuan Yang ◽  
Lizhu Li ◽  
Yi Yang
Keyword(s):  
Renal Function ◽  
Peritoneal Dialysis ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Active Control ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Residual Renal Function ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Active Control Group ◽  
Randomized Controlled

Background. In peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients, whether angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) could protect residual renal function is still controversial. To assess the effects of ACEIs and ARBs on the residual renal function and cardiovascular (CV) events in peritoneal dialysis patients, we performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Materials and Methods. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, the CNKI database, and the Wanfang database for relevant articles from database inception to November 30, 2019. Randomized controlled trials were included. The primary outcome was the decline in the residual renal function (RRF). Results. Thirteen trials with 625 participants were included in the meta-analysis. The average residual GFR declined by 1.79 ml/min per 1.73 m2 in the ACEI/ARB group versus 1.44 ml/min per 1.73 m2 in the placebo or active control group at 3 mo. The average residual GFR declined by 2.02 versus 2.06, 2.16 versus 2.72, and -0.04 versus 2.74 ml/min per 1.73 m2 in the placebo or active control group at 6 months (mo), 12 mo, and 24 mo, respectively. The decline in residual GFR showed a significant difference between the ACEI/ARB group and the placebo or active control group at 12 mo (MD=−0.64 ml/min per 1.73 m2; 95% CI: -0.97~-0.32; I2=44%; P<0.0001). No significant difference was observed in Kt/V, urinary protein excretion, weekly creatinine clearance, CV events, or serum potassium levels. Conclusions. In the present study, we found that the use of ACEIs and ARBs, especially long-term treatment, decreased the decline of RRF in patients on PD. ACEIs and ARBs do not cause an additional risk of side effects.

Association between Peritoneal Glucose Exposure and Peritonitis in Peritoneal Dialysis Patients: TheBalANZ Trial

2017 ◽  
Vol 37 (4) ◽  
pp. 407-413 ◽  
Author(s):  
Melissa Nataatmadja ◽  
Yeoungjee Cho ◽  
Elaine M. Pascoe ◽  
Darsy Darssan ◽  
Carmel M. Hawley ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Peritoneal Dialysis ◽  
High Glucose ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Exposure Group ◽  
Peritoneal Membrane ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Low Glucose ◽  
Glucose Exposure

BackgroundGlucose is the primary osmotic medium used in most peritoneal dialysis (PD) solutions, and exposure to glucose has been shown to exert detrimental effects both locally, at the peritoneal membrane, and systemically. Moreover, high dialysate glucose exposure may predispose patients to an increased risk of peritonitis, perhaps as a result of impaired host defences, vascular disease, and damage to the peritoneal membrane.MethodsIn this post-hoc analysis of a multicenter, multinational, open-label randomized controlled trial of neutral pH, low-glucose degradation product (GDP) versus conventional PD solutions ( balANZ trial), the relationship between peritonitis rates of low (< 123.1 g/day) versus high (≥ 123.1 g/day) dialysate glucose exposure was evaluated in 177 incident PD patients over a 2-year study period.ResultsPeritonitis rates were 0.44 episodes per patient-year in the low-glucose exposure group and 0.31 episodes per patient-year in the high-glucose exposure group, (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 0.69, p = 0.09). There was no significant association between dialysate glucose exposure and peritonitis-free survival on univariable analysis (high glucose exposure hazard ratio [HR] 0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.40 –1.08) or on multivariable analysis (adjusted HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.39 – 1.05). Moreover, there was no relationship between peritoneal glucose exposure and type of organism causing peritonitis. Physician-rated severity of first peritonitis episodes was similar between groups, as was rate and duration of hospital admission.ConclusionsOverall, this study did not identify an association between peritoneal dialysate glucose exposure and peritonitis occurrence, severity, hospitalization, or outcomes. A further large-scale, prospective, randomized controlled trial evaluating patient-level outcomes is merited.

scholarly journals P1135WHETHER USPD PATIENTS ARE SUITABLE FOR INCREMENTAL PERITONEAL DIALYSIS:YES OR NO?

2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (Supplement_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Wenjing Zhang ◽  
Jia LV ◽  
Lan Li ◽  
Zhigang Wang ◽  
Dapeng Hao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Renal Function ◽  
Peritoneal Dialysis ◽  
Urine Volume ◽  
Residual Renal Function ◽  
Dialysis Dose ◽  
Dialysis Adequacy ◽  
Exit Site Infection ◽  
Full Dose ◽  
Mechanical Complications

Abstract Background and Aims Incremental Peritoneal Dialysis (IPD) is the practice of initiating PD exchange less than four times a day in consideration of residual renal function (RRF). More clinical studies have confirmed the feasibility and effectiveness of IPD, especially in the protection of residual renal function, which is obviously superior to full-dose PD. Urgent-start peritoneal dialysis (USPD) is a popular PD method. Due to lack of pre-dialysis education, most of patients who were newly diagnosed with ESRD in China chose USPD. Well, can incremental peritoneal dialysis be used for USPD patients when starting dialysis? Compared to full-dose PD, whether incremental PD affects the residual renal function in USPD patients? Here we report the first study of incremental peritoneal dialysis’s effect on residual renal function. Method A retrospective analysis of medical records was performed on 169 patients who received USPD from August 2008 to March 2017. Patients were divided into 2 groups according to dialysis dose: incremental PD(i-PD) group (dialysis dose were less than or equal to 6000ml or 3 exchanges per day) and full-dose PD(f-PD) group (dialysis dose were great than or equal to 8000ml or 4 exchanges per day). The demographics, clinical biochemical indexes, dialysis dose, urine volume, dialysis ultrafiltration volume, RRF, dialysis adequacy, peritoneal dialysis infection complications, mechanical complications and survival rates were compared between two groups in 1 year follow-up. Results: (1).A total of 169 patients were enrolled, including 111 patients (average age 45.01±12.84 years) in i-PD group and 58 patients (average age 43.5±15.62 years) in f-PD group. The demographics and clinical biochemical indexes in the two groups before peritoneal dialysis were similar (P&gt;0.05). (2).During the follow-up period, the dialysis dose in f-PD group(8034.48±262.61ml/d, 8080.00±395.80ml/d, 8155.17±523.21ml/d, 8051.72±906.55ml/d) were more than those in i-PD group(5891.89±528.31ml/d, 6159.57±1185.06ml/d, 6468.47±1588.71ml/d, 6900.90±1543.05ml/d), P&lt;0.05. And the dialysis adequacy in both groups were up to standard: the total Kt/V (i-PD group: 1.96±0.56, 2.01±0.70, 2.02±0.55, 1.90±0.52; f-PD group: 2.18±0.47, 2.22±0.55, 2.05±0.44, 2.03±0.42) were greater than 1.7 and the total Ccr (i-PD group: 79.39±29.75, 79.02±25.11, 78.26±30.00, 73.09±29.14; f-PD group: 89.78±29.89, 91.54±35.56, 82.38±29.27, 72.96±23.75) were greater than 60L. (3).During the whole follow-up period, the residual renal function between two groups had no statistically significant(i-PD group: 3.96±2.52ml/min, 3.46±1.95ml/min, 3.58±2.85ml/min, 2.91±2.33ml/min; f-PD group: 4.31±4.83ml/min, 3.45±2.36ml/min, 3.16±2.15ml/min, 2.36±1.65ml/min), P&gt;0.05. (4).During the whole follow-up period, the blood pressure control, correction of anemia, and correction of calcium and phosphorus abnormalities were also similar in both groups, P&gt;0.05. (5).At 1-month and 6-month, the urine volume were higher in i-PD group(1024.33±492.91ml/d, 1017.03±571.66ml/d) than those in f-PD group(782.93±415.89ml/d, 788.27±491.02ml/d), P&lt;0.05. The dialysis ultrafiltration volume in f-PD group (481.67±723.69ml/d, 632.77±687.89ml/d, 338.87±963.14ml/d, 750.43±849.69ml/d) were higher than those in i-PD group(343.30±520.00ml/d, 495.70±916.76ml/d, 341.78±925.57ml/d, 439.65±1297.13ml/d) during the whole follow-up period, but the differences were not statistically significant (P&gt;0.05). (6).The exit-site infection, peritonitis, mechanical complications and technical survival were similar between the two groups (P&gt;0.05). Conclusion Incremental peritoneal dialysis will not cause rapid decline of residual renal function in USPD patients, and the dialysis effect and complications are similar to full-dose peritoneal dialysis. Therefore, we recommend that USPD patients can be treated by incremental peritoneal dialysis.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document