-
Peritoneal Dialysis International :... 2014Residual renal function (RRF) plays an important role in outcome of peritoneal dialysis (PD) including mortality. It is, therefore, important to provide a strategy for... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Residual renal function (RRF) plays an important role in outcome of peritoneal dialysis (PD) including mortality. It is, therefore, important to provide a strategy for the preservation of RRF. The objective of this study was to evaluate relative protective effects of new glucose-based multicompartmental PD solution (PDS), which is well known to be more biocompatible than glucose-based conventional PDS, on RRF compared to conventional PDS by performing a systematic review (SR) of randomized controlled trials.
METHODS
We searched studies presented up to January 2014 in MEDLINE, EMBASE, the COCHRANE library, and local databases. Three independent reviewers reviewed and extracted prespecified data from each study. The random effects model, a more conservative analysis model, was used to combine trials and to perform stratified analyses based on the duration of follow-up. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane Handbook for risk of bias. Eleven articles with 1,034 patients were identified for the SR.
RESULTS
The heterogeneity of the studies under 12 months was very high, and the heterogeneity decreased substantially when we stratified studies by the duration of follow-up. The mean difference of the studies after 12 months was 0.46 mL/min/1.73 m(2) (95% confidence interval = 0.25 to + 0.67).
CONCLUSION
New PDS showed the effect to preserve and improve RRF for long-term use compared to conventional PDS, even though it did not show a significant difference to preserve RRF for short-term use.
Topics: Biocompatible Materials; Cause of Death; Dialysis Solutions; Female; Follow-Up Studies; Humans; Kidney Failure, Chronic; Kidney Function Tests; Male; Peritoneal Dialysis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Republic of Korea; Risk Assessment; Severity of Illness Index; Survival Analysis; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 25185015
DOI: 10.3747/pdi.2012.00331 -
Peritoneal Dialysis International :... May 2022Glucose-containing dialysate underpins peritoneal dialysis (PD) therapy. However, its use is associated with amino acid loss in the dialysis effluent, a risk factor for... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Glucose-containing dialysate underpins peritoneal dialysis (PD) therapy. However, its use is associated with amino acid loss in the dialysis effluent, a risk factor for protein-energy wasting (PEW) in PD patients. Amino acid-based dialysis solutions (AAD) may ameliorate this loss. However, the evidence of clinical benefit in preventing PEW is unclear. The aim of this review was to assess the effect of AAD versus standard dialysis solutions (STD) on anthropometric measures and serum albumin.
METHODS
Studies up until 30 September 2020 were identified from databases including MEDLINE and Embase, using a prespecified protocol (PROSPERO - CRD42020209581). Studies evaluating adults on PD were included. Data pertaining to muscle mass (primary outcome), other anthropometric measures and serum albumin were extracted. A meta-analysis of the eligible studies was conducted.
RESULTS
A total of 6945 abstracts were reviewed, from which 14 studies (9 randomised and 5 non-randomised) were included. There was no significant difference in any of the anthropometric measures, between AAD and STD during follow-up. Serum albumin at 6 months was statistically lower with AAD compared to STD [mean difference = -0.89 (95%CI -1.77 to -0.01, = 0.046)]. The quality of evidence was graded low for each outcome.
CONCLUSIONS
AAD may not alter anthropometric measures when compared to STD. The impact on serum albumin is uncertain, with an estimated difference that is unlikely to be of clinical value. These findings should be cautiously interpreted due to low quality of the evidence. Robust studies are needed to address the limitations in evidence.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Amino Acids; Dialysis Solutions; Peritoneal Dialysis; Serum Albumin
PubMed: 34350791
DOI: 10.1177/08968608211035964 -
Journal of the American Society of... Feb 2024Why are there so few biomarkers accepted by health authorities and implemented in clinical practice, despite the high and growing number of biomaker studies in medical...
SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT
Why are there so few biomarkers accepted by health authorities and implemented in clinical practice, despite the high and growing number of biomaker studies in medical research ? In this meta-epidemiological study, including 804 studies that were critically appraised by expert reviewers, the authors have identified all prognostic kidney transplant biomarkers and showed overall suboptimal study designs, methods, results, interpretation, reproducible research standards, and transparency. The authors also demonstrated for the first time that the limited number of studies challenged the added value of their candidate biomarkers against standard-of-care routine patient monitoring parameters. Most biomarker studies tended to be single-center, retrospective studies with a small number of patients and clinical events. Less than 5% of the studies performed an external validation. The authors also showed the poor transparency reporting and identified a data beautification phenomenon. These findings suggest that there is much wasted research effort in transplant biomarker medical research and highlight the need to produce more rigorous studies so that more biomarkers may be validated and successfully implemented in clinical practice.
BACKGROUND
Despite the increasing number of biomarker studies published in the transplant literature over the past 20 years, demonstrations of their clinical benefit and their implementation in routine clinical practice are lacking. We hypothesized that suboptimal design, data, methodology, and reporting might contribute to this phenomenon.
METHODS
We formed a consortium of experts in systematic reviews, nephrologists, methodologists, and epidemiologists. A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library between January 1, 2005, and November 12, 2022 (PROSPERO ID: CRD42020154747). All English language, original studies investigating the association between a biomarker and kidney allograft outcome were included. The final set of publications was assessed by expert reviewers. After data collection, two independent reviewers randomly evaluated the inconsistencies for 30% of the references for each reviewer. If more than 5% of inconsistencies were observed for one given reviewer, a re-evaluation was conducted for all the references of the reviewer. The biomarkers were categorized according to their type and the biological milieu from which they were measured. The study characteristics related to the design, methods, results, and their interpretation were assessed, as well as reproducible research practices and transparency indicators.
RESULTS
A total of 7372 publications were screened and 804 studies met the inclusion criteria. A total of 1143 biomarkers were assessed among the included studies from blood ( n =821, 71.8%), intragraft ( n =169, 14.8%), or urine ( n =81, 7.1%) compartments. The number of studies significantly increased, with a median, yearly number of 31.5 studies (interquartile range [IQR], 23.8-35.5) between 2005 and 2012 and 57.5 (IQR, 53.3-59.8) between 2013 and 2022 ( P < 0.001). A total of 655 studies (81.5%) were retrospective, while 595 (74.0%) used data from a single center. The median number of patients included was 232 (IQR, 96-629) with a median follow-up post-transplant of 4.8 years (IQR, 3.0-6.2). Only 4.7% of studies were externally validated. A total of 346 studies (43.0%) did not adjust their biomarker for key prognostic factors, while only 3.1% of studies adjusted the biomarker for standard-of-care patient monitoring factors. Data sharing, code sharing, and registration occurred in 8.8%, 1.1%, and 4.6% of studies, respectively. A total of 158 studies (20.0%) emphasized the clinical relevance of the biomarker, despite the reported nonsignificant association of the biomarker with the outcome measure. A total of 288 studies assessed rejection as an outcome. We showed that these rejection studies shared the same characteristics as other studies.
CONCLUSIONS
Biomarker studies in kidney transplantation lack validation, rigorous design and methodology, accurate interpretation, and transparency. Higher standards are needed in biomarker research to prove the clinical utility and support clinical use.
Topics: Humans; Biomarkers; Kidney Transplantation; Prognosis; Retrospective Studies; Systematic Reviews as Topic
PubMed: 38053242
DOI: 10.1681/ASN.0000000000000260 -
Clinical and Experimental Nephrology Jun 2024The optimal dialysate calcium (Ca) concentration for patients undergoing hemodialysis remains inconclusive, particularly concerning cardiovascular protection. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The impact of low and high dialysate calcium concentrations on cardiovascular disease and death in patients undergoing maintenance hemodialysis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
The optimal dialysate calcium (Ca) concentration for patients undergoing hemodialysis remains inconclusive, particularly concerning cardiovascular protection.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review of 19 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and a meta-analysis of eight RCTs to determine the optimal dialysate Ca concentration for cardiovascular protection. We compared outcomes in patients receiving maintenance hemodialysis treated with either a low-Ca dialysate (LCD) (1.125 or 1.25 mmol/L) or a high-Ca dialysate (HCD) (1.5 or 1.75 mmol/L). The outcomes were coronary artery calcification score (CACS), all-cause and cardiovascular death, cardiovascular function and structure, and serum biochemical parameters.
RESULTS
There was no significant difference between LCD and HCD concerning CACS (standardized mean difference [SMD] = -0.16, 95% confidence interval [CI]: [-0.38, 0.07]), the risk of all-cause death, and cardiovascular death in patients treated with chronic maintenance hemodialysis. Conversely, LCD was associated with a significantly lower intima-media thickness (SMD = -0.49, 95% CI [-0.94, -0.05]) and pulse wave velocity than HCD (SMD = -0.86, 95% CI [-1.21, -0.51]). Furthermore, LCD significantly decreased serum Ca levels (mean difference [MD] = 0.52 mg/dL, 95% CI [0.19, 0.85]) and increased serum parathyroid hormone levels (MD = 44.8 pg/mL, 95% CI [16.2, 73.3]) compared with HCD. Notably, most RCTs examined in our analysis did not include patients receiving calcimimetics.
CONCLUSIONS
Our meta-analysis showed no significant differences in cardiovascular calcification and death between LCD and HCD and revealed a paucity of RCTs on dialysate Ca concentrations, including those involving patients on calcimimetics, indicating the urgent need for further studies.
Topics: Humans; Renal Dialysis; Calcium; Cardiovascular Diseases; Hemodialysis Solutions; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Parathyroid Hormone; Middle Aged; Vascular Calcification; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 38396314
DOI: 10.1007/s10157-024-02460-3 -
International Journal of Surgery... Jul 2020Fluid overload and hypertension frequently results in cardiovascular disease, which is one of the leading causes of death in dialysis patients. It is plausible that low... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND & AIM
Fluid overload and hypertension frequently results in cardiovascular disease, which is one of the leading causes of death in dialysis patients. It is plausible that low dialysate [Na+] may decrease total body sodium content, thereby reducing fluid overload and hypertension, and ultimately reducing cardiovascular disease morbidity and mortality. This meta-analysis was designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of using a low (<138 mM) dialysate [Na+] for maintenance haemodialysis (HD) patients.
METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science up to August 22, 2019. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), both parallel and cross-over, of low (<138 mM) versus neutral (138-140 mM) or high (>140 mM) dialysate [Na+] for maintenance HD patients were included. Mean difference (MD), risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) values were estimated to compare the outcomes. Two reviewers extracted data and assessed trial quality independently. All statistical analyses were performed using the standard statistical procedures of RevMan 5.2.
RESULTS
12 Randomised controlled trials with 390 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Of these studies, three studies were parallel group, and the remaining nine were crossover. Compared to neutral or high dialysate [Na], low dialysate [Na] reduced dialysis mean arterial pressure (MAP) with a pooled MD of -3.38 mmHg (95% CI -4.57 to -2.19; P < 0.00001), reduced interdialytic weight gain with a pooled MD of -0.35 kg (95% CI -0.51 to -0.18; P < 0.0001), reduced predialysis serum [Na] with a pooled MD of -2.62 mM (95% CI -3.59 to -1.66; P < 0.00001). In contrast, low dialysate [Na] increased intradialytic hypotension events with a pooled RR of 1.54 (95% CI 1.16 to 2.05; P = 0.003), increased the incidence of intradialytic cramps with a pooled RR of 1.77 (95% CI 1.15 to 2.73; P = 0.01). However, no difference was found between lower and higher dialysate [Na] in systolic blood pressure and diastolic blood pressure.
CONCLUSIONS
Though our pooled result indicated that low dialysate [Na+] reduced MAP, interdialytic weight gain and predialysis serum [Na] significantly, it also indicated that low dialysate [Na+] could increase the incidence of intradialytic hypotension and intradialytic cramps events. Considering the contradiction in efficacy and safety of low dialysate [Na+] in our analysis, future larger and up-to-date definitive studies are needed to evaluate the medium to long-term effects of low sodium levels in dialysis fluid, and better inform clinical practice.
Topics: Dialysis Solutions; Humans; Hypotension; Renal Dialysis; Sodium; Weight Gain
PubMed: 32447003
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2020.05.027 -
American Journal of Therapeutics 2020Intradialytic hypotension (IDH) is one of the most common complications of the hemodialysis procedure. Although there are no clear-cut answers as to the best strategy on...
BACKGROUND, AREAS OF UNCERTAINTY
Intradialytic hypotension (IDH) is one of the most common complications of the hemodialysis procedure. Although there are no clear-cut answers as to the best strategy on the management of IDH, data suggest that the administration of osmotically active drugs may decrease the occurrence of blood pressure decline during dialysis. The use of mannitol for IDH management in hemodialysis patients is scarce. This article highlights the use and benefits of mannitol and to assess the role of mannitol role in the management of IDH.
DATA SOURCES
Primary literature identified through MEDLINE/PubMed database and Google Scholar with no restrictions. Relevant and current literatures related to mannitol and IDH were used.
RESULTS AND DATA SYNTHESIS
Multiple studies have shown the benefits of mannitol for the management of IDH. Because of its oncotic effect, mannitol increases plasma osmolality to maintain adequate blood pressure and prevent the occurrence of IDH. Two observational studies and several reports were identified as being the most recent and applicable to clinical practice. Studies and data on the use of mannitol in IDH are scarce or outdated. The 2 studies used in this article conclude that mannitol carries benefits for both the adult and pediatric population. However, additional research in the future will be needed to confirm the evidence for various age groups. These 2 observational trials were also very small in number, and any future studies conducted should have a longer duration and larger population size. Although lacking data, these studies will suffice in introducing the benefits of mannitol in IDH.
CONCLUSIONS
Mannitol may be considered for the management of IDH; however, additional studies are required to evaluate the long-term risk and benefits associated with mannitol, as it carries a risk of accumulation in the body.
Topics: Blood Pressure; Humans; Hypertonic Solutions; Hypotension; Kidney Failure, Chronic; Mannitol; Observational Studies as Topic; Osmolar Concentration; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Renal Dialysis; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 30272595
DOI: 10.1097/MJT.0000000000000855 -
Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) May 2021cardiovascular complications (CVC) are the leading cause of death in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Standard cardiovascular disease risk prediction models... (Review)
Review
cardiovascular complications (CVC) are the leading cause of death in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Standard cardiovascular disease risk prediction models used in the general population are not validated in patients with CKD. We aim to systematically review the up-to-date literature on reported outcomes of computational methods such as artificial intelligence (AI) or regression-based models to predict CVC in CKD patients. the electronic databases of MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, and ScienceDirect were systematically searched. The risk of bias and reporting quality for each study were assessed against transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis (TRIPOD) and the prediction model risk of bias assessment tool (PROBAST). sixteen papers were included in the present systematic review: 15 non-randomized studies and 1 ongoing clinical trial. Twelve studies were found to perform AI or regression-based predictions of CVC in CKD, either through single or composite endpoints. Four studies have come up with computational solutions for other CV-related predictions in the CKD population. the identified studies represent palpable trends in areas of clinical promise with an encouraging present-day performance. However, there is a clear need for more extensive application of rigorous methodologies. Following the future prospective, randomized clinical trials, and thorough external validations, computational solutions will fill the gap in cardiovascular predictive tools for chronic kidney disease.
Topics: Artificial Intelligence; Bias; Computer Simulation; Humans; Prognosis; Renal Insufficiency, Chronic
PubMed: 34072159
DOI: 10.3390/medicina57060538 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2019Cardiovascular (CV) disease is the leading cause of death in dialysis patients, and strongly associated with fluid overload and hypertension. It is plausible that low... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Cardiovascular (CV) disease is the leading cause of death in dialysis patients, and strongly associated with fluid overload and hypertension. It is plausible that low dialysate [Na+] may decrease total body sodium content, thereby reducing fluid overload and hypertension, and ultimately reducing CV morbidity and mortality.
OBJECTIVES
This review evaluated harms and benefits of using a low (< 138 mM) dialysate [Na+] for maintenance haemodialysis (HD) patients.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 7 August 2018 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), both parallel and cross-over, of low (< 138 mM) versus neutral (138 to 140 mM) or high (> 140 mM) dialysate [Na+] for maintenance HD patients were included.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two investigators independently screened studies for inclusion and extracted data. Statistical analyses were performed using random effects models, and results expressed as risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous outcomes, and mean differences (MD) or standardised MD (SMD) for continuous outcomes, with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Confidence in the evidence was assessed using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 12 studies randomising 310 patients, with data available for 266 patients after dropout. All but one study evaluated a fixed concentration of low dialysate [Na+], and one profiled dialysate [Na+]. Three studies were parallel group, and the remaining nine cross-over. Of the latter, only two used a washout between intervention and control periods. Most studies were short-term with a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 3 (3, 8.5) weeks. Two were of a single HD session, and two of a single week's HD. Half of the studies were conducted prior to 2000, and five reported use of obsolete HD practices. Risks of bias in the included studies were often high or unclear, lowering confidence in the results.Compared to neutral or high dialysate [Na+], low dialysate [Na+] had the following effects on "efficacy" endpoints: reduced interdialytic weight gain (10 studies: MD -0.35 kg, 95% CI -0.18 to -0.51; high certainty evidence); probably reduced predialysis mean arterial blood pressure (BP) (4 studies: MD -3.58 mmHg, 95% CI -5.46 to -1.69; moderate certainty evidence); probably reduced postdialysis mean arterial BP (MAP) (4 studies: MD -3.26 mmHg, 95% CI -1.70 to -4.82; moderate certainty evidence); probably reduced predialysis serum [Na+] (7 studies: MD -1.69 mM, 95% CI -2.36 to -1.02; moderate certainty evidence); may have reduced antihypertensive medication (2 studies: SMD -0.67 SD, 95% CI -1.07 to -0.28; low certainty evidence). Compared to neutral or high dialysate [Na+], low dialysate [Na+] had the following effects on "safety" endpoints: probably increased intradialytic hypotension events (9 studies: RR 1.56, 95% 1.17 to 2.07; moderate certainty evidence); probably increased intradialytic cramps (6 studies: RR 1.77, 95% 1.15 to 2.73; moderate certainty evidence).Compared to neutral or high dialysate [Na+], low dialysate [Na+] may make little or no difference to: intradialytic BP (2 studies: MD for systolic BP -3.99 mmHg, 95% CI -17.96 to 9.99; diastolic BP 1.33 mmHg, 95% CI -6.29 to 8.95; low certainty evidence); interdialytic BP (2 studies:, MD for systolic BP 0.17 mmHg, 95% CI -5.42 to 5.08; diastolic BP -2.00 mmHg, 95% CI -4.84 to 0.84; low certainty evidence); dietary salt intake (2 studies: MD -0.21g/d, 95% CI -0.48 to 0.06; low certainty evidence).Due to very low quality of evidence, it is uncertain whether low dialysate [Na+] changed extracellular fluid status, venous tone, arterial vascular resistance, left ventricular mass or volumes, thirst or fatigue. Studies did not examine cardiovascular or all-cause mortality, cardiovascular events, or hospitalisation.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
It is likely that low dialysate [Na+] reduces intradialytic weight gain and BP, which are effects directionally associated with improved outcomes. However, the intervention probably also increases intradialytic hypotension and reduces serum [Na+], effects that are associated with increased mortality risk. The effect of the intervention on overall patient health and well-being is unknown. Further evidence is needed in the form of longer-term studies in contemporary settings, evaluating end-organ effects in small-scale mechanistic studies using optimal methods, and clinical outcomes in large-scale multicentre RCTs.
Topics: Antihypertensive Agents; Blood Pressure; Dialysis Solutions; Humans; Hypertension; Hypotension; Muscle Cramp; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Renal Dialysis; Sodium; Weight Gain
PubMed: 30646428
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011204.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2023Peritoneal dialysis (PD) relies on the optimal functionality of the flexible plastic PD catheter present within the peritoneal cavity to enable effective treatment. As a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Peritoneal dialysis (PD) relies on the optimal functionality of the flexible plastic PD catheter present within the peritoneal cavity to enable effective treatment. As a result of limited evidence, it is uncertain if the PD catheter's insertion method influences the rate of catheter dysfunction and, thus, the quality of dialysis therapy. Numerous variations of four basic techniques have been adopted in an attempt to improve and maintain PD catheter function. This review evaluates the association between PD catheter insertion technique and associated differences in PD catheter function and post-PD catheter insertion complications OBJECTIVES: Our aims were to 1) evaluate if a specific technique used for PD catheter insertion has lower rates of PD catheter dysfunction (early and late) and technique failure; and 2) examine if any of the available techniques results in a reduction in post-procedure complication rates including postoperative haemorrhage, exit-site infection and peritonitis.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 24 November 2022 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) examining adults and children undergoing PD catheter insertion. The studies examined any two PD catheter insertion techniques, including laparoscopic, open-surgical, percutaneous and peritoneoscopic insertion. Primary outcomes of interest were PD catheter function and technique survival. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently performed data extraction and assessed the risk of bias for all included studies. Main outcomes in the Summary of Findings tables include primary outcomes - early PD catheter function, long-term PD catheter function, technique failure and postoperative complications. A random effects model was used to perform meta-analyses; risk ratios (RRs) were calculated for dichotomous outcomes, and mean differences (MD) were calculated for continuous outcomes, using 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for effect estimates. The certainty of the evidence was evaluated using the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach. MAIN RESULTS: Seventeen studies were included in this review. Nine studies were suitable for inclusion in quantitative meta-analysis (670 randomised participants). Five studies compared laparoscopic with open PD catheter insertion, and four studies compared a 'medical' insertion technique with open surgical PD catheter insertion: percutaneous (2) and peritoneoscopic (2). Random sequence generation was judged to be at low risk of bias in eight studies. Allocation concealment was reported poorly, with only five studies judged to be at low risk of selection bias. Performance bias was judged to be high risk in 10 studies. Attrition bias and reporting bias were judged to be low in 14 and 12 studies, respectively. Six studies compared laparoscopic PD catheter insertion with open surgical insertion. Five studies could be meta-analysed (394 participants). For our primary outcomes, data were either not reported in a format that could be meta-analysed (early PD catheter function, long-term catheter function) or not reported at all (technique failure). One death was reported in the laparoscopic group and none in the open surgical group. In low certainty evidence, laparoscopic PD catheter insertion may make little or no difference to the risk of peritonitis (4 studies, 288 participants: RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.48; I² = 7%), PD catheter removal (4 studies, 257 participants: RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.64; I² = 0%), and dialysate leakage (4 studies, 330 participants: RR 1.40, 95% CI 0.49 to 4.02; I² = 0%), but may reduce the risk of haemorrhage (2 studies, 167 participants: RR 1.68, 95% CI 0.28 to 10.31; I² = 33%) and catheter tip migration (4 studies, 333 participants: RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.92; I² = 12%). Four studies compared a medical insertion technique with open surgical insertion (276 participants). Technique failure was not reported, and no deaths were reported (2 studies, 64 participants). In low certainty evidence, medical insertion may make little or no difference to early PD catheter function (3 studies, 212 participants: RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.29 to 1.83; I² = 0%), while one study reported long-term PD function may improve with peritoneoscopic insertion (116 participants: RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.92). Peritoneoscopic catheter insertion may reduce the episodes of early peritonitis (2 studies, 177 participants: RR 0.21, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.71; I² = 0%) and dialysate leakage (2 studies, 177 participants: RR 0.13, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.71; I² = 0%). Medical insertion had uncertain effects on catheter tip migration (2 studies, 90 participants: RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.15 to 3.73; I² = 0%). Most of the studies examined were small and of poor quality, increasing the risk of imprecision. There was also a significant risk of bias therefore cautious interpretation of results is advised.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The available studies show that the evidence needed to guide clinicians in developing their PD catheter insertion service is lacking. No PD catheter insertion technique had lower rates of PD catheter dysfunction. High-quality, evidence-based data are urgently required, utilising multi-centre RCTs or large cohort studies, in order to provide definitive guidance relating to PD catheter insertion modality.
Topics: Adult; Child; Humans; Peritoneal Dialysis; Renal Dialysis; Dialysis Solutions; Catheters; Peritonitis
PubMed: 36810986
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012478.pub2 -
Nephrologie & Therapeutique Jul 2016Acute renal failure (ARF) in adults in the intensive care unit (ICU) often evolves in a context of multiple organ failure, which explains the high mortality rate and... (Review)
Review
Acute renal failure (ARF) in adults in the intensive care unit (ICU) often evolves in a context of multiple organ failure, which explains the high mortality rate and increase treatment needs. Among, two modalities of renal replacement therapy, peritoneal dialysis (PD) was the first modality used for the treatment of ARF in the 1950s. Today, while PD is generalized for chronic renal failure treatment, its use in the ICU is limited, particularly, due to the advent of new hemodialysis techniques and the development of continuous replacement therapy. Recently, a renewed interest in the use of PD in patients with ARF has manifested in several emerging countries (Brazil, Vietnam). A systematic review in 2013 showed a similar mortality in ARF patients having PD (58%) and those treated by hemodialysis or hemodiafiltration/hemofiltration (56.1%). In the International society of peritoneal dialysis (ISPD)'s guideline (2013), PD may be used in adult ARF as the other blood extracorporeal epuration technics (recommendation with grade 1B). PD is the preferred method in cardiorenal syndromes, in frailty patients with hemodynamic instability and those lacking vascular access; finally PD is also an option in elderly and patients with bleeding tendency. In industrial countries, high volume automated PD with a flexible catheter (usually Tenckhoff) is advocated.
Topics: Acute Kidney Injury; Dialysis Solutions; Humans; Peritoneal Dialysis; Renal Dialysis
PubMed: 27318887
DOI: 10.1016/j.nephro.2016.01.016