|
|
|
| Effects of interim hemodialysis on survival and clinical outcomes in patients with maintenance peritoneal dialysis |
| BIAN Wei1, GUAN Jichao2, XIE Xishao3, TONG Jin1, ZHANG Xiaohui3, SHOU Zhangfei3 |
1. Department of Nephrology, Zhuji People's Hospital of Zhejiang Province,Zhuji 311800, China;
2. Department of Nephrology, Shaoxing People's Hospital of Zhejiang Province,Shaoxing 312000, China;
3. Kidney Disease Center, the First Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou 310003, China |
|
|
|
Abstract Objective: To investigate the effects of interim hemodialysis (HD) on survival and clinical outcomes in patients with maintenance peritoneal dialysis (PD). Methods: The clinical data of 908 patients undergoing maintenance PD from January 2010 to December 2014 registered in Zhejiang Dialysis Regisration System were retrospectively analyzed. Among all PD patients, 176 cases received interim HD for less than 3 months, and then transferred to PD (transfer group) and 732 cases had initial PD (non-transfer group). The demographic parameters, biochemical data, comorbidity, details of peritonitis and transplantation were documented. Survival curves were made by the Kaplan-Meier method; univariate and multivariate analyses were performed with Cox proportional hazard regression model to identify risk factors of mortality. Results: Compared with patients in transfer group, patients in non-transfer group had significantly higher serum albumin and total Kt/V levels. The survival rate was significantly higher in non-transfer group, but there was no significant difference in technique survival between two groups. After multivariable adjustment, initial dialysis modality (HR=1.60, 95%CI: 1.01~2.56), age (HR=1.07, 95%CI:1.05~1.09) and serum albumin (HR=0.96, 95%CI: 0.93~0.99) and Charslon comorbidity index (HR=2.54, 95%CI:1.63~3.94) were independent factors for long-term survival. Conclusion: Patients who transfer to PD after interim HD have lower survival rate than patients who start with and are maintained on PD. HD is an independent risk factor for PD patients, therefore, patients with PD should be well informed and educated with dialysis protocols.
|
|
Received: 15 August 2015
|
|
|
临时血液透析对维持性腹膜透析患者生存预后的影响
目的: 探讨临时血液透析对维持性腹膜透析患者生存预后的影响及相关因素。方法: 回顾性分析2010年1月1日至2014年12月31日植入腹膜透析管并维持腹膜透析患者的临床资料,患者至少规律随访3个月。数据来自浙江省透析质量控制中心的透析登记系统。患者根据腹膜透析前有或无血液透析史分为两组:未血液透析组和临时血液透析组(血液透析时间少于3个月)。采用Kaplan-Meier生存曲线、Cox回归模型分析比较两组存活率及影响生存的相关因素。结果: 纳入腹膜透析患者共908例,其中未血液透析组732例、临时血液透析组176例。1年、2年、3年、4年患者存活率未血液透析组分别为96.2%、91.4%、88.0%、85.0%,临时血液透析组分别为92.8%、88.8%、78.2%、78.2%,差异均具有统计学意义(均P<0.05);两组患者技术存活率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。Cox回归模型分析结果提示患者临时血液透析史、高龄、血清白蛋白水平以及查尔森合并症指数评分是影响生存的独立危险因素。结论: 有血液透析史的腹膜透析患者长期存活率低于无血液透析史患者,临时血液透析是影响腹膜透析患者生存的独立危险因素之一,需重视患者的透析前计划与宣教。
关键词：
肾功能衰竭,慢性,
腹膜透析,
存活率,
肾透析,
预后,
回顾性研究
|
|
| [1] YU X, YANG X. Peritoneal dialysis in China: meeting the challenge of chronic kidney failure[J]. Am J Kidney Dis, 2015, 65(1):147-151.
[2] 徐 红, 刘炳岩, 刘冬妍,等. 两种腹膜透析管在腹膜透析时的技术生存率比较[J]. 中华肾脏病杂志, 2009, 25(6):441-444. XU Hong,LIU Bingyan,LIU Dongyan,et al. Comparison of technical survival between Tenckhoff double-cuffed straight catheter and swan-neck curled tip catheter in peritoneal dialysis[J]. Chinese Journal of Nephrology,2009, 25(6):441-444. (in Chinese)
[3] HEAF J G, LOKKEGAARD H, MADSEN M. Initial survival advantage of peritoneal dialysis relative to haemodialysis[J]. Nephrol Dial Transplant, 2002, 17(1):112-117.
[4] ZHANG X, HAN F, HE Q, et al. Outcomes and risk factors for mortality after transfer from hemodialysis to peritoneal dialysis in uremic patients[J]. Perit Dial Int, 2008,28(3):313-314.
[5] SIPAHIOGLU M H, AYBAL A, UNAL A, et al. Patient and technique survival and factors affecting mortality on peritoneal dialysis in Turkey: 12 years' experience in a single center[J]. Perit Dial Int, 2008, 28(3):238-245.
[6] ZHANG L, CAO T, LI Z, et al. Clinical outcomes of peritoneal dialysis patients transferred from hemodialysis: a matched case-control study[J]. Perit Dial Int, 2013, 33(3):259-266.
[7] ROCCO M, SOUCIE J M, PASTAN S, et al. Peritoneal dialysis adequacy and risk of death[J]. Kidney Int, 2000, 58(1):446-457.
[8] BARGMAN J M, THORPE K E, CHURCHILL D N, et al. Relative contribution of residual renal function and peritoneal clearance to adequacy of dialysis: a reanalysis of the CANUSA study[J]. J Am Soc Nephrol, 2001, 12(10):2158-2162.
[9] WANG A Y, WANG M, WOO J, et al. Inflammation, residual kidney function, and cardiac hypertrophy are interrelated and combine adversely to enhance mortality and cardiovascular death risk of peritoneal dialysis patients[J]. J Am Soc Nephrol, 2004,15(8):2186-2194.
[10] CHIDAMBARAM M, BARGMAN J M, QUINN R R, et al. Patient and physician predictors of peritoneal dialysis technique failure: a population based, retrospective cohort study[J]. Perit Dial Int, 2011, 31(5):565-573.
[11] MUJAIS S, STORY K. Peritoneal dialysis in the US: evaluation of outcomes in contemporary cohorts[J]. Kidney Int Suppl, 2006, (103):S21-S26.
[12] LOBBEDEZ T, VERGER C, RYCKELYNCK J, et al. Outcome of the sub-optimal dialysis starter on peritoneal dialysis. Report from the French Language Peritoneal Dialysis Registry (RDPLF)[J]. Nephrol Dial Transplant, 2013, 28(5):1276-1283.
[13] NESSIM S J, BARGMAN J M, JASSAL S V, et al. The impact of transfer from hemodialysis on peritoneal dialysis technique survival[J]. Perit Dial Int, 2015, 35(3):297-305.
[14] LOBBEDEZ T, VERGER C, RYCKELYNCK J P, et al. Is assisted peritoneal dialysis associated with technique survival when competing events are considered?[J]. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol, 2012, 7(4):612-618.
[15] GUO A, MUJAIS S. Patient and technique survival on peritoneal dialysis in the United States: evaluation in large incident cohorts [J]. Kidney Int Suppl, 2003,(88):S3-S12.
[16] RUMPSFELD M, MCDONALD S P, JOHNSON D. Higher peritoneal transport status is associated with higher mortality and technique failure in the Australian and New Zealand peritoneal dialysis patient populations[J]. J Am Soc Nephrol, 2006, 17(1):271-278.
[17] BRIMBLE K S, WALKER M, MARGETTS P J, et al. Meta-analysis: peritoneal membrane transport, mortality, and technique failure in peritoneal dialysis[J]. J Am Soc Nephrol, 2006, 17(9):2591-2598.
[18] RUMPSFELD M, MCDONALD S, PURDIE D, et al. Predictors of baseline peritoneal transport status in Australian and New Zealand peritoneal dialysis patients[J]. Am J Kidney Dis, 2004, 43(3):492-501.
[19] COMBE C, CHAUVEAU P, LAVILLE M, et al. Influence of nutritional factors and hemodialysis adequacy on the survival of 1,610 French patients[J]. Am J Kidney Dis, 2001, 37(1 Suppl 2):S81-S88.
[20] DANIELSKI M, IKIZLER T, MCMONAGLE E, et al. Linkage of hypoalbuminemia, inflammation, and oxidative stress in patients receiving maintenance hemodialysis therapy[J]. Am J Kidney Dis, 2003, 42(2):286-294.
[21] SHEMIN D, BOSTOM A, LALIBERTY P, et al. Residual renal function and mortality risk in hemodialysis patients[J]. Am J Kidney Dis, 2001, 38(1):85-90.
[22] TANG Y, ZHONG H, DIAO Y, et al. Peritoneal transport rate, systemic inflammation, and residual renal function determine peritoneal protein clearance in continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis patients[J]. Int Urol Nephrol, 2014, 46(11):2215-2219. |
|
Viewed |
|
|
|
Full text
|
|
|
|
|
Abstract
|
|
|
|
|
Cited |
|
|
|
|
| |
Shared |
|
|
|
|
| |
Discussed |
|
|
|
|
