Dataset Information

Comparative study of peritoneal dialysis versus hemodialysis on the clinical outcomes in Korea: a population-based approach.

ABSTRACT: There has been paucity of data regarding the secular trend of adverse outcomes in peritoneal dialysis (PD) as compared with hemodialysis (HD) in Korea. 96,596 patients who started dialysis between 2004-2015 in Korea were identified using the National Health Insurance Service database. The adjusted hazard ratio (HR) (95% confidence interval, CI) of PD over HD for mortality was 1.31 (1.27-1.36; P?

SUBMITTER: Lee SW

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6459886 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparative study of peritoneal dialysis versus hemodialysis on the clinical outcomes in Korea: a population-based approach.

Lee Sung Woo SW Lee Na Rae NR Son Soo Kyung SK Kim Jimin J Sul Ah Ram AR Kim Yunjung Y Park Jung Tak JT Lee Jung Pyo JP Ryu Dong-Ryeol DR

Scientific reports 20190411 1

There has been paucity of data regarding the secular trend of adverse outcomes in peritoneal dialysis (PD) as compared with hemodialysis (HD) in Korea. 96,596 patients who started dialysis between 2004-2015 in Korea were identified using the National Health Insurance Service database. The adjusted hazard ratio (HR) (95% confidence interval, CI) of PD over HD for mortality was 1.31 (1.27-1.36; P < 0.001) in the period of 2004-2007 and 1.21 (1.16-1.27; P < 0.001) in the period of 2008-2011. Howeve ...[more]

PMID: 30976069

Similar Datasets

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:Rationale & objectiveComparisons of outcomes between in-center hemodialysis (HD) and peritoneal dialysis (PD) are confounded by selection bias because PD patients are typically younger and healthier and may have received longer predialysis care. We compared first-year survival between what we hypothesized were clinically equivalent groups; namely, patients who initiate maintenance HD using an arteriovenous fistula (AVF) and those selecting PD as their initial modality.Study designObservational, registry-based, retrospective cohort study.Setting & participantsUS Renal Data System data for 5 annual cohorts (2010-2014; n = 130,324) of incident HD with an AVF and incident PD patients.Exposures and predictorsExposure was more than 1 day receiving PD or more than 1 day receiving HD with an AVF. Time at risk for both cohorts was determined for 12 consecutive 30-day segments, censoring for transplantation, loss to follow-up, or end of time. Predictors included patient-level characteristics obtained from Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services 2728 Form and other data sources.OutcomesPatient survival.Analytical approachUnadjusted and multivariable risk-adjusted HRs for death of HD versus PD patients, averaged over 2010 to 2014, were calculated.ResultsThe HD cohort's average unadjusted mortality rate was consistently higher than for the PD cohort. The HR of HD versus PD was 1.25 (95% CI, 1.20-1.30) in the unadjusted model and 0.84 (95% CI, 0.80-0.87) in the adjusted model. However, multivariable risk-adjusted analyses showed the HR of HD versus PD for the first 90 days was 1.06 (95% CI, 0.98-1.14), decreasing to 0.74 (95% CI, 0.68-0.80) in the 270- to 360-day period.LimitationsResidual confounding due to selection bias inherent in dialysis modality choice and the observational study design. Form 2728 provides baseline data at dialysis incidence alone, but not over time.ConclusionsUS patients receiving HD with an AVF appear to have a survival advantage over PD patients after 90 days of dialysis initiation after accounting for patient characteristics. These findings have implications in the choice of initial dialysis modality and vascular access for patients.

Project description:If a technical failure occurs during peritoneal dialysis (PD), the patients undergoing PD may be transitioned to hemodialysis (HD). However, the clinical outcomes of patients who have undergone such a transition are under studied. This study assessed whether patients undergoing HD who have transitioned from PD have the same clinical outcomes as HD-only patients. This research was a retrospective cohort study by searching a National Health Insurance research database for data on patients in Taiwan who had undergone HD between January 2006 and December 2013. The patients were divided into two groups, namely a case group in which the patients were transitioned from PD to HD and a HD-only control group, through propensity score matching at a ratio of 1:4 (n = 1,100 vs. 4,400, respectively). We used the Cox regression model to estimate the hazard ratios (HRs) for all-cause death, all-cause hospitalization, infection-related admission, and major adverse cardiac events (MACE). Those selected patients will be followed until death or the end of the study period (December, 2017), whichever occurs first. Over a mean follow-up of 3.2 years, 1,695 patients (30.8%) died, 3,825 (69.5%) required hospitalization, and 1,142 (20.8%) experienced MACE. Patients transitioning from PD had a higher risk of all-cause death (HR: 1.36; 95% CI: 1.21-1.53) than HD-only patients. However, no significant difference was noted in terms of MACE (HR: 0.91; 95% CI: 0.73-1.12), all-cause hospitalization (HR: 1.07; 95% CI: 0.96-1.18), or infection-related admission (HR: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.80-1.18) between groups. Because of the violation of the proportional hazard assumption, the piecewise-HRs showed that the risk of mortality in the case group was significant within 5 months of the transition (HR: 2.61; 95% CI: 2.04-3.35) not in other partitions of the time axis. In conclusion, patients undergoing HD who transitioned from PD had a higher risk of death than the HD-only patients, especially in the first 5 months after transition (a 161% higher risk). Therefore, more caution and monitoring may be required for patients undergoing HD who transitioned from PD.

Dataset Information

Comparative study of peritoneal dialysis versus hemodialysis on the clinical outcomes in Korea: a population-based approach.

Publications

Comparative study of peritoneal dialysis versus hemodialysis on the clinical outcomes in Korea: a population-based approach.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets