Dataset Information

An update on the comparisons of mortality outcomes of hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis patients.

ABSTRACT: The number of dialysis patients continues to grow. In many parts of the world, peritoneal dialysis (PD) is a less expensive form of treatment. However, it has been questioned whether patients treated with PD can have as good a long-term outcome as that achieved with hemodialysis (HD). This skepticism has fueled ongoing comparisons of outcomes of patients treated with in-center HD and PD using data from national registries or prospective cohort studies. There are major challenges in comparing outcomes with two therapies when the treatment assignment is nonrandom. Furthermore, many of the intermodality comparisons include patients who started dialysis therapy in the 1990s. In many parts of the world, improvements in PD outcome have outpaced those seen with in-center HD. It is not surprising, then, that virtually all the recent observational studies from different parts of the world consistently show that long-term survival of HD and PD patients is remarkably similar. These studies support the case for a greater use of PD for the treatment of end-stage renal disease. This, in turn, could allow more patients to be treated for any given budgetary allocation to long-term dialysis.

SUBMITTER: Chiu YW

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3073732 | biostudies-literature | 2011 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

An update on the comparisons of mortality outcomes of hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis patients.

Chiu Yi-Wen YW Jiwakanon Sirin S Lukowsky Lilia L Duong Uyen U Kalantar-Zadeh Kamyar K Mehrotra Rajnish R

Seminars in nephrology 20110301 2

The number of dialysis patients continues to grow. In many parts of the world, peritoneal dialysis (PD) is a less expensive form of treatment. However, it has been questioned whether patients treated with PD can have as good a long-term outcome as that achieved with hemodialysis (HD). This skepticism has fueled ongoing comparisons of outcomes of patients treated with in-center HD and PD using data from national registries or prospective cohort studies. There are major challenges in comparing out ...[more]

PMID: 21439429

Similar Datasets

Project description:Serum albumin level predicts mortality in dialysis patients and is used to assess their health status and the quality of delivered care. Whether the threshold level of serum albumin at which mortality risk increases in peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients is the same as for hemodialysis (HD) patients has not been studied.Observational cohort study of dialysis patients undertaken to determine the survival-predictability of serum albumin level in PD patients and compare it with that in HD patients.130,052 dialysis patients (PD, 12,171; HD, 117,851) who received treatment in any of the 580 dialysis units owned by DaVita Inc between July 1, 2001, through June 30, 2006, followed up through June 30, 2007.Baseline and time-averaged serum albumin level (assayed using bromcresol green) and change in serum albumin level over 6 months.All-cause, cardiovascular, and infection-related mortality.PD patients with baseline serum albumin level <3.0 g/dL had a more than 3-fold higher adjusted risk of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality and 3.4-fold higher risk of infection-related mortality (reference group: serum albumin, 4.00-4.19 g/dL). Adjusted all-cause mortality was significantly lower in PD patients with a ?0.3-g/dL increase in serum albumin level over 6 months and significantly higher in those for whom it decreased by ?0.2 g/dL (reference group: serum albumin change, +0.1 to -0.1 g/dL). A significant increase in death risk was evident for HD patients with serum albumin level <4.0 g/dL, but at <3.8 g/dL for PD patients. For each albumin category, overall death risk for PD patients was lower than for HD patients (reference group: HD patients with serum albumin of 4.00-4.19 g/dL).Study can identify associations only without attribution of causality and residual confounding cannot be excluded.Serum albumin predicts all-cause, cardiovascular, and infection-related mortality in both PD and HD patients. However, the threshold at which risk of death increases varies by dialysis modality, and this difference should be considered by agencies or organizations that set quality standards.

Project description:Rationale & objectiveWe sought to compare outcomes of patients receiving dialysis after cardiothoracic surgery on the basis of dialysis modality (intermittent hemodialysis [HD] vs peritoneal dialysis [PD]).Study designThis was a retrospective analysis.Setting & participantsIn total, 590 patients with kidney failure receiving intermittent HD or PD undergoing coronary artery bypass graft and/or valvular cardiac surgery at Cleveland Clinic were included.ExposureThe patients received PD versus HD (intermittent or continuous).OutcomesOur primary outcomes were in-hospital and 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes were length of stay, days in the intensive care unit, the number of intraoperative blood transfusions, postsurgical pericardial effusion, and sternal wound infection, and a composite of the following 4 in-hospital events: death, cardiac arrest, effusion, and sternal wound infection.Analytical approachWe used χ2, Fisher exact, Wilcoxon rank sum, and t tests, Kaplan-Meier survival, and plots for analysis.ResultsAmong the 590 patients undergoing cardiac surgery, 62 (11%) were receiving PD, and 528 (89%) were receiving intermittent HD. Notably, 30-day Kaplan-Meier survival was 95.7% (95% CI: 93.9-97.5) for HD and 98.2% (95% CI: 94.7-100) for PD (P = 0.30). In total, 75 patients receiving HD (14.2%) and 1 patient receiving PD (1.6%) had a composite of 4 in-hospital events (death, cardiac arrest, effusion, and sternal wound infection) (P = 0.005). Out of 62 patients receiving PD, 16 (26%) were converted to HD.LimitationsRetrospective analyses are prone to residual confounding. We lacked details about nutritional data. Intensive care unit length of stay was used as a surrogate for volume status control. Patients have been followed in a single health care system. The HD cohort outnumbered the PD cohort significantly.ConclusionsWhen compared with PD, HD does not appear to improve outcomes of patients with kidney failure undergoing cardiothoracic surgery. Patients receiving PD had a lower incidence of a composite outcome of 4 in-hospital events (death, cardiac arrest, pericardial effusion, and sternal wound infections).

Project description:BackgroundSeveral studies have suggested that urgent-start peritoneal dialysis (PD) is a feasible alternative to hemodialysis (HD) in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD), but the impact of the dialysis modality on outcome, especially on short-term complications, in urgent-start dialysis has not been directly evaluated. The aim of the current study was to compare the complications and outcomes of PD and HD in urgent-start dialysis ESRD patients.MethodsIn this retrospective study, ESRD patients who initiated dialysis urgently without a pre-established functional vascular access or PD catheter at a single center from January 2013 to December 2014 were included. Patients were grouped according to their dialysis modality (PD and HD). Each patient was followed for at least 30 days after catheter insertion (until January 2016). Dialysis-related complications and patient survival were compared between the two groups.ResultsOur study enrolled 178 patients (56.2% male), of whom 96 and 82 patients were in the PD and HD groups, respectively. Compared with HD patients, PD patients had more cardiovascular disease, less heart failure, higher levels of serum potassium, hemoglobin, serum albumin, serum pre-albumin, and lower levels of brain natriuretic peptide. There were no significant differences in gender, age, use of steroids, early referral to a nephrologist, prevalence of primary renal diseases, prevalence of co-morbidities, and other laboratory characteristics between the groups. The incidence of dialysis-related complications during the first 30 days was significantly higher in HD than PD patients. HD patients had a significantly higher probability of bacteremia compared to PD patients. HD was an independent predictor of short-term (30-day) dialysis-related complications. There was no significant difference between PD and HD patients with respect to patient survival rate.ConclusionIn an experienced center, PD is a safe and feasible dialysis alternative to HD for ESRD patients with an urgent need for dialysis.

Project description:ObjectiveEnd-stage renal disease (ESRD) leads to renal replacement therapy and certainly has an impact on patients' health-related quality of life (HRQoL). This study aimed to review and compare the HRQoL between peritoneal dialysis (PD) and hemodialysis (HD) patients using the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), EuroQoL-5-dimension (EQ-5D) and the Kidney Disease Quality of Life Instrument (KDQOL).MethodologySystematic review was conducted by identify relevant studies through MEDLINE and SCOPUS up to April 2017. Studies were eligible with following criteria: studied in ESRD patients, compare any pair of renal replacement modalities, and reported HRQoL. The unstandardized mean differences (USMD) of HRQoL among modalities were calculated and pooled using a random-effect models if heterogeneity was present, otherwise a fixed-effect model was applied.ResultsA total of twenty-one studies were included with 29,000 participants. Of them, mean age and percent male were 48.1 years and 45.1, respectively. The pooled USMD (95% CI) of SF-36 between PD and HD (base) were 1.86 (0.47, 3.24) and 0.42 (- 1.99, 2.82) for mental component and physical component summary scores, respectively. For EQ-5D, the pooled USMD of utility and visual analogue scale (VAS) score were 0.02 (- 0.06, 0.10) and 3.56 (1.73, 5.39), respectively. The pooled USMD of KDQOL were 9.67 (5.67, 13.68), 6.71 (- 5.92, 19.32) 6.30 (- 0.41, 12.18), 2.35 (- 4.35, 9.04), 2.10 (0.07, 4.13), and 1.21 (- 2.98, 5.40) for burden of kidney disease, work status, effects of kidney disease, quality of social interaction, symptoms, and cognitive function.ConclusionPatients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) stage 5 or ESRD treated with PD had better generic HRQoL measured by SF-36 and EQ-5D than HD patients. In addition, PD had higher specific HRQoL by KDQOL than HD patients in subdomain of physical functioning, role limitations due to emotional problems, effects and burden of kidney disease.

Dataset Information

An update on the comparisons of mortality outcomes of hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis patients.

Publications

An update on the comparisons of mortality outcomes of hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis patients.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets