Dataset Information

Peritoneal Effluent Cell-Free DNA Sequencing in Peritoneal Dialysis Patients With and Without Peritonitis.

ABSTRACT:

Rationale & objective

Conventional culture can be insensitive for the detection of rare infections and for the detection of common infections in the setting of recent antibiotic usage. Patients receiving peritoneal dialysis (PD) with suspected peritonitis have a significant proportion of negative conventional cultures. This study examines the utility of metagenomic sequencing of peritoneal effluent cell-free DNA (cfDNA) for evaluating the peritoneal effluent in PD patients with and without peritonitis.

Study design

Prospective cohort study.

Setting & participants

We prospectively characterized cfDNA in 68 peritoneal effluent samples obtained from 33 patients receiving PD at a single center from September 2016 to July 2018.

Outcomes

Peritoneal effluent, microbial, and human cfDNA characteristics were evaluated in culture-confirmed peritonitis and culture-negative peritonitis.

Analytical approach

Descriptive statistics were analyzed and microbial cfDNA was detected in culture-confirmed peritonitis and culture-negative peritonitis.

Results

Metagenomic sequencing of cfDNA was able to detect and identify bacterial, viral, and eukaryotic pathogens in the peritoneal effluent from PD patients with culture-confirmed peritonitis, as well as patients with recent antibiotic usage and in cases of culture-negative peritonitis.

Limitations

Parallel cultures were not obtained in all the peritoneal effluent specimens.

Conclusions

Metagenomic cfDNA sequencing of the peritoneal effluent can identify pathogens in PD patients with peritonitis, including culture-negative peritonitis.

SUBMITTER: Burnham P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8767090 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundResults concerning the association between peritoneal dialysis-related peritonitis and mortality in peritoneal dialysis patients are inconclusive, with one potential reason being that the time-dependent effect of peritonitis has rarely been considered in previous studies. This study aimed to evaluate whether peritonitis has a negative impact on mortality in a large cohort of peritoneal dialysis patients. We also assessed the changing impact of peritonitis on patient mortality with respect to duration of follow-up.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study included incident patients who started peritoneal dialysis from 1 January 2006 to 31 December 2011. Episodes of peritonitis were recorded at the time of onset, and peritonitis was parameterized as a time-dependent variable for analysis. We used the Cox regression model to assess whether peritonitis has a negative impact on mortality.ResultsA total of 1321 patients were included. The mean age was 48.1 ± 15.3 years, 41.3% were female, and 23.5% with diabetes mellitus. The median (interquartile) follow-up time was 34 (21-48) months. After adjusting for confounders, peritonitis was independently associated with 95% increased risk of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 1.95; 95% confidence interval: 1.46-2.60), 90% increased risk of cardiovascular mortality (hazard ratio, 1.90; 95% confidence interval: 1.28-2.81) and near 4-fold increased risk of infection-related mortality (hazard ratio, 4.94; 95% confidence interval: 2.47-9.86). Further analyses showed that peritonitis was not significantly associated with mortality within 2 years of peritoneal dialysis initiation, but strongly influenced mortality in patients dialysed longer than 2 years.ConclusionsPeritonitis was independently associated with higher risk of all-cause, cardiovascular and infection-related mortality in peritoneal dialysis patients, and its impact on mortality was more significant in patients with longer peritoneal dialysis duration.

Project description:INTRODUCTION: Continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) peritonitis may develop after endoscopic procedures, and the benefit of prophylactic antibiotics is unclear. In the present study, we investigated whether prophylactic antibiotics reduce the incidence of peritonitis in these patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all endoscopic procedures, including esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD), colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy, cystoscopy, hysteroscopy, and hysteroscopy-assisted intrauterine device (IUD) implantation/removal, performed in CAPD patients at Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taiwan, between February 2001 and February 2012. RESULTS: Four hundred and thirty-three patients were enrolled, and 125 endoscopies were performed in 45 patients. Eight (6.4%) peritonitis episodes developed after the examination. Antibiotics were used in 26 procedures, and none of the patients had peritonitis (0% vs. 8.1% without antibiotic use; p=0.20). The peritonitis rate was significantly higher in the non-EGD group than in the EGD group (15.9% [7/44] vs. 1.2% [1/81]; p<0.005). Antibiotic use prior to non-EGD examinations significantly reduced the endoscopy-associated peritonitis rate compared to that without antibiotic use (0% [0/16] vs. 25% [7/28]; p<0.05). Peritonitis only occurred if invasive procedures were performed, such as biopsy, polypectomy, or IUD implantation, (noninvasive procedures, 0% [0/20] vs. invasive procedures, 30.4% [7/23]; p<0.05). No peritonitis was noted if antibiotics were used prior to examination with invasive procedures (0% [0/10] vs. 53.8% [7/13] without antibiotic use; p<0.05). Although not statistically significant, antibiotics may play a role in preventing gynecologic procedure-related peritonitis (antibiotics, 0% [0/4] vs. no antibiotics, 55.6% [5/9]; p=0.10). CONCLUSION: Antibiotic prophylaxis significantly reduced endoscopy-associated PD peritonitis in the non-EGD group. Endoscopically assisted invasive procedures, such as biopsy, polypectomy, IUD implantation/removal, and dilatation and curettage (D&C), pose a high risk for peritonitis. Prophylactic antibiotics for peritonitis prevention may be required in colonoscopic procedures and gynecologic procedures.

Project description:Background and objectivesThere is conflicting evidence comparing peritonitis rates among patients treated with continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) or automated peritoneal dialysis (APD). This study aims to clarify the relationship between peritoneal dialysis (PD) modality (APD versus CAPD) and the risk of developing PD-associated peritonitis.Design, setting, participants, & measurementsThis study examined the association between PD modality (APD versus CAPD) and the risks, microbiology, and clinical outcomes of PD-associated peritonitis in 6959 incident Australian PD patients between October 1, 2003, and December 31, 2011, using data from the Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry. Median follow-up time was 1.9 years.ResultsPatients receiving APD were younger (60 versus 64 years) and had fewer comorbidities. There was no association between PD modality and time to first peritonitis episode (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] for APD versus CAPD, 0.98; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.91 to 1.07; P=0.71). However, there was a lower hazard of developing Gram-positive peritonitis with APD than CAPD, which reached borderline significance (HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.80 to 1.00; P=0.05). No statistically significant difference was found in the risk of hospitalizations (odds ratio, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.93 to 1.35; P=0.22), but there was a nonsignificant higher likelihood of 30-day mortality (odds ratio, 1.33; 95% CI, 0.93 to 1.88; P=0.11) at the time of the first episode of peritonitis for patients receiving APD. For all peritonitis episodes (including subsequent episodes of peritonitis), APD was associated with lower rates of culture-negative peritonitis (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 0.81; 95% CI, 0.69 to 0.94; P=0.002) and higher rates of gram-negative peritonitis (IRR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.13 to 1.46; P=0.01).ConclusionsPD modality was not associated with a higher likelihood of developing peritonitis. However, APD was associated with a borderline reduction in the likelihood of a first episode of Gram-positive peritonitis compared with CAPD, and with lower rates of culture-negative peritonitis and higher rates of Gram-negative peritonitis. Peritonitis outcomes were comparable between both modalities.