-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2016Catheter malfunction, including thrombosis, is associated with reduced dialysis adequacy, as well as an increased risk of catheter-related bacteraemia and mortality. The... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Catheter malfunction, including thrombosis, is associated with reduced dialysis adequacy, as well as an increased risk of catheter-related bacteraemia and mortality. The role of anticoagulants in the prevention of catheter malfunction remains uncertain.
OBJECTIVES
This review aimed to compare the prophylactic effect of different anticoagulant agents, preparations, doses and administration on the incidence of central venous haemodialysis catheter-related malfunction and sepsis in patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD).
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Renal Group's Specialised Register to 7 January 2016 through contact with the Trials' Search Co-ordinator using search terms relevant to this review.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all randomised controlled trials (RCT) assessing anticoagulants compared with conventional care for the prevention of catheter malfunction in adult patients receiving haemodialysis for ESKD.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
The primary outcome was catheter malfunction defined as a catheter blood flow of 200 mL/min or less, or as defined by study authors. Secondary outcomes were catheter-related bacteraemia, all-cause mortality and bleeding events. Relative risks (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for individual studies were pooled using random effects models within treatment classes. Analyses were conducted by class, with subgroup analyses performed of individual agents within classes.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 27 studies (3003 participants) that were followed up for a median of six months. Study interventions included alternative anticoagulant locking solutions (19 studies, 2216 patients), systemic agents (6 studies, 664 patients) and low or no dose heparin (2 studies, 123 patients). The most common comparison treatment was a locking solution of heparin 5000 IU/mL, used in 17 studies. No significant effect on catheter malfunction was observed for alternative anticoagulant locking solutions (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.26), systemic agents (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.28 to 1.23), or low or no dose heparin (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.10 to 8.31). A significant reduction on incidence of catheter-related bacteraemia was observed for alternative anticoagulant locking solutions (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.66) but not systemic agents (RR 2.41, 95% CI 0.89 to 6.55), and could not be assessed in reports of low or no dose heparin studies. No significant effect on all-cause mortality was observed for alternative anticoagulant locking solutions (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.43) or systemic agents (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.65), and was not reported in studies of low or no dose heparin. Bleeding events were only reported in eight studies, including only 2/5 studies of systemic warfarin, with no clear effect demonstrated (RR 1.43, 95% CI 0.86 to 2.39). For individual agents, recombinant tissue plasminogen (rt-PA) was the only locking solution shown to reduce catheter malfunction (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.91) based on the results of a single study. No significant on catheter malfunction was observed for other individual classes of alternative anticoagulant locking solutions (citrate: RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.69; antibiotic: RR 1.48, 95% CI 0.79 to 2.77; ethanol: RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.21 to 3.67). On the other hand, all individual classes of alternative anticoagulant locking solutions, except ethanol, reduced catheter-related bacteraemia (citrate: RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.68; antibiotic: RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.70; rt-PA: RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.93; ethanol: RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.03 to 4.05). No significant effect on all-cause mortality was observed for any individual agent within the class of alternative locking solutions. Studies were mainly of low quality and underpowered with an average participant number of 75 and study duration of six months. The interpretation of the study evidence was further limited by the variation in tested interventions and outcome reporting.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The relative net benefit of anticoagulant therapies for prevention of catheter malfunction remains uncertain. Multiple agents appear to reduce catheter-related bacteraemia although the lack of clear assessment of harms and the limitations of study quality mean these results should be interpreted with caution. Methodological approaches can be used to avoid methods of reporting unduly affecting on the results of meta-analyses incorporating studies employed mixed reporting methods. Further high quality randomised studies, including safety outcomes, are needed.
Topics: Anticoagulants; Bacteremia; Catheter Obstruction; Catheter-Related Infections; Central Venous Catheters; Heparin; Humans; Kidney Failure, Chronic; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Renal Dialysis
PubMed: 27039404
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009631.pub2 -
Clinical Journal of the American... Mar 2016Lowering the dialysate temperature may improve outcomes for patients undergoing chronic hemodialysis. We reviewed the reported benefits and harms of lower temperature... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES
Lowering the dialysate temperature may improve outcomes for patients undergoing chronic hemodialysis. We reviewed the reported benefits and harms of lower temperature dialysis.
DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register, OVID MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Pubmed until April 15, 2015. We reviewed the reference lists of relevant reviews, registered trials, and relevant conference proceedings. We included all randomized, controlled trials that evaluated the effect of reduced temperature dialysis versus standard temperature dialysis in adult patients receiving chronic hemodialysis. We followed the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach to assess confidence in the estimates of effect (i.e., the quality of evidence). We conducted meta-analyses using random effects models.
RESULTS
Twenty-six trials were included, consisting of a total of 484 patients. Compared with standard temperature dialysis, reduced temperature dialysis significantly reduced the rate of intradialytic hypotension by 70% (95% confidence interval, 49% to 89%) and significantly increased intradialytic mean arterial pressure by 12 mmHg (95% confidence interval, 8 to 16 mmHg). Symptoms of discomfort occurred 2.95 (95% confidence interval, 0.88 to 9.82) times more often with reduced temperature compared with standard temperature dialysis. The effect on dialysis adequacy was not significantly different, with a Kt/V mean difference of -0.05 (95% confidence interval, -0.09 to 0.01). Small sample sizes, loss to follow-up, and a lack of appropriate blinding in some trials reduced confidence in the estimates of effect. None of the trials reported long-term outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS
In patients receiving chronic hemodialysis, reduced temperature dialysis may reduce the rate of intradialytic hypotension and increase intradialytic mean arterial pressure. High-quality, large, multicenter, randomized trials are needed to determine whether reduced temperature dialysis affects patient mortality and major adverse cardiovascular events.
Topics: Arterial Pressure; Chi-Square Distribution; Cold Temperature; Hemodialysis Solutions; Humans; Hypertension; Hypotension; Odds Ratio; Renal Dialysis; Renal Insufficiency, Chronic; Risk Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 26712807
DOI: 10.2215/CJN.04580415 -
BMC Health Services Research Nov 2015The cost of dialysis in low and middle-Income countries has not been systematically reviewed. The objective of this article is to systematically review peer-reviewed... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The cost of dialysis in low and middle-Income countries has not been systematically reviewed. The objective of this article is to systematically review peer-reviewed articles on the cost of dialysis across low and middle-income countries.
METHODS
PubMed and Embase databases were searched for the year 1998 to March 2013, and additional studies were added from Google Scholar search. An article was included if two reviewers agreed that it had reported cost of dialysis from low and middle-Income countries.
RESULTS
The annual cost per patient for hemodialysis (HD) ranged from Int$ 3,424 to Int$ 42,785, and peritoneal dialysis (PD) ranged from Int$ 7,974 to Int$ 47,971. Direct medical cost especially drugs and consumables for HD and dialysis solutions and tubing for PD were the main cost drivers.
CONCLUSION
The number of studies on the economics of dialysis in low and middle-income countries is limited. Few papers indicate that dialysis is an expensive form of treatment for the population of these countries and that the poorer countries have an over-proportional burden to finance dialysis services. Further research is needed to determine the cost of dialysis based on a standard methodology grounded on existing economic guidelines and to address the question whether dialysis should be an element of the essential package of health in resource-poor countries. Used data should be as complete as possible. In case of missing data, proxies can be used. In case of developing countries, expert interviews are often used for estimating missing information.
Topics: Cost-Benefit Analysis; Developing Countries; Humans; Income; Kidney Diseases; Renal Dialysis
PubMed: 26563300
DOI: 10.1186/s12913-015-1166-8 -
International Journal of Clinical and... 2015Locking of central venous catheters with heparin is an accepted practice to maintain catheter patency between dialysis sessions. However, this practice may cause other...
Anticoagulant therapies versus heparin for the prevention of hemodialysis catheter-related complications: systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective randomized controlled trials.
Locking of central venous catheters with heparin is an accepted practice to maintain catheter patency between dialysis sessions. However, this practice may cause other adverse reactions. Although many studies suggest benefits of other catheter lock solutions over heparin on these grounds, no consensus has been reached for clinical practice. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed of randomized controlled trials (RCT) that compared antimicrobial-containing or citrate-alone catheter lock solutions with heparin alone in patients undergoing hemodialysis with central venous catheters. Medline, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from EMBASE, and PubMed were searched for articles published through June 2014. The primary outcomes were catheter-related bacteremia (CRB) and catheter malfunction (CM). The secondary outcomes were bleeding, exit-site infection (ESI), clinical sepsis, and all-cause mortality. Seventeen RCTs met the inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis showed that antimicrobial-containing and citrate-alone lock solutions were superior to heparin for preventing CRB (both P < 0.01). Although antimicrobial-containing lock solutions significantly affected clinical sepsis (P < 0.01), they did not affect ESI, bleeding, or all-cause mortality. Incidence of CM episodes was lower in patients receiving antibiotics + heparin and gentamicin + citrate (both P < 0.05), while other antimicrobial-containing and citrate-alone lock solutions showed no difference. Only citrate-alone lock solutions significantly decreased bleeding and ESI episodes (both P < 0.05). Compared with heparin, antimicrobial-containing lock solutions more effectively prevent CRB and clinical sepsis. Antibiotics + heparin and gentamicin + citrate solutions showing better prevention of CM. Citrate-alone lock solutions result in fewer CRB, bleeding and ESI episodes.
PubMed: 26550111
DOI: No ID Found -
Clinical Journal of the American... Aug 2015Neutral-pH, low-glucose degradation products solutions were developed in an attempt to lessen the adverse effects of conventional peritoneal dialysis solutions. A... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Effect of Neutral-pH, Low-Glucose Degradation Product Peritoneal Dialysis Solutions on Residual Renal Function, Urine Volume, and Ultrafiltration: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES
Neutral-pH, low-glucose degradation products solutions were developed in an attempt to lessen the adverse effects of conventional peritoneal dialysis solutions. A systematic review was performed evaluating the effect of these solutions on residual renal function, urine volume, peritoneal ultrafiltration, and peritoneal small-solute transport (dialysate to plasma creatinine ratio) over time.
DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS
Multiple electronic databases were searched from January of 1995 to January of 2013. Randomized trials reporting on any of four prespecified outcomes were selected by consensus among multiple reviewers.
RESULTS
Eleven trials of 643 patients were included. Trials were generally of poor quality. The meta-analysis was performed using a random effects model. The use of neutral-pH, low-glucose degradation products solutions resulted in better preserved residual renal function at various study durations, including >1 year (combined analysis: 11 studies; 643 patients; standardized mean difference =0.17 ml/min; 95% confidence interval, 0.01 to 0.32), and greater urine volumes (eight studies; 598 patients; mean difference =128 ml/d; 95% confidence interval, 58 to 198). There was no significant difference in peritoneal ultrafiltration (seven studies; 571 patients; mean difference =-110; 95% confidence interval, -312 to 91) or dialysate to plasma creatinine ratio (six studies; 432 patients; mean difference =0.03; 95% confidence interval, 0.00 to 0.06).
CONCLUSIONS
The use of neutral-pH, low-glucose degradation products solutions results in better preservation of residual renal function and greater urine volumes. The effect on residual renal function occurred early and persisted beyond 12 months. Additional studies are required to evaluate the use of neutral-pH, low-glucose degradation products solutions on hard clinical outcomes.
Topics: Biomarkers; Chi-Square Distribution; Creatinine; Dialysis Solutions; Glucose; Humans; Hydrogen-Ion Concentration; Kidney; Kidney Diseases; Peritoneal Dialysis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risk Factors; Treatment Outcome; Urination; Urodynamics
PubMed: 26048890
DOI: 10.2215/CJN.05410514 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2015Achilles tendinopathy is a common condition, often with significant functional consequences. As a wide range of injection treatments are available, a review of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Achilles tendinopathy is a common condition, often with significant functional consequences. As a wide range of injection treatments are available, a review of randomised trials evaluating injection therapies to help inform treatment decisions is warranted.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects (benefits and harms) of injection therapies for people with Achilles tendinopathy.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following databases up to 20 April 2015: the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, CINAHL and SPORTDiscus. We also searched trial registers (29 May 2014) and reference lists of articles to identify additional studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials evaluating injection therapies in adults with an investigator-reported diagnosis of Achilles tendinopathy. We accepted comparison arms of placebo (sham) or no injection control, or other active treatment (such as physiotherapy, pharmaceuticals or surgery). Our primary outcomes were function, using measures such as the VISA-A (Victorian Institute of Sport Assessment-Achilles questionnaire), and adverse events.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently extracted data from the included studies. We assessed treatment effects using mean differences (MDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for continuous variables and risk ratios (RRs) and 95% CIs for dichotomous variables. For follow-up data, we defined short-term as up to six weeks, medium-term as up to three months and longer-term as data beyond three months. We performed meta-analysis where appropriate.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 18 studies (732 participants). Seven trials exclusively studied athletic populations. The mean ages of the participants in the individual trials ranged from 20 years to 50 years. Fifteen trials compared an injection therapy with a placebo injection or no injection control, four trials compared an injection therapy with active treatment, and one compared two different concentrations of the same injection. Thus no trials compared different injection therapies. Two studies had three trial arms and we included them twice in two different categories. Within these categories, we further subdivided injection therapies by mode of action (injury-causing versus direct repair agents).The risk of bias was unclear (due to poor reporting) or high in six trials published between 1987 and 1994. Improved methodology and reporting for the subsequent trials published between 2004 and 2013 meant that these were at less risk of bias.Given the very low quality evidence available from each of four small trials comparing different combinations of injection therapy versus active treatment and the single trial comparing two doses of one injection therapy, only the results of the first comparison (injection therapy versus control) are presented.There is low quality evidence of a lack of significant or clinically important differences in VISA-A scores (0 to 100: best function) between injection therapy and control groups at six weeks (MD 0.79, 95% CI -4.56 to 6.14; 200 participants, five trials), three months (MD -0.94, 95% CI -6.34 to 4.46; 189 participants, five trials) or between six and 12 months (MD 0.14, 95% CI -6.54 to 6.82; 132 participants, three trials). Very low quality evidence from 13 trials showed little difference between the two groups in adverse events (14/243 versus 12/206; RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.50 to 1.89), most of which were minor and short-lasting. The only major adverse event in the injection therapy group was an Achilles tendon rupture, which happened in a trial testing corticosteroid injections. There was very low quality evidence in favour of the injection therapy group in short-term (under three months) pain (219 participants, seven trials) and in the return to sports (335 participants, seven trials). There was very low quality evidence indicating little difference between groups in patient satisfaction with treatment (152 participants, four trials). There was insufficient evidence to conclude on subgroup differences based on mode of action given that only two trials tested injury-causing agents and the clear heterogeneity of the other 13 trials, which tested seven different therapies that act directly on the repair pathway.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is insufficient evidence from randomised controlled trials to draw conclusions on the use, or to support the routine use, of injection therapies for treating Achilles tendinopathy. This review has highlighted a need for definitive research in the area of injection therapies for Achilles tendinopathy, including in older non-athletic populations. This review has shown that there is a consensus in the literature that placebo-controlled trials are considered the most appropriate trial design.
Topics: Achilles Tendon; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Adult; Aprotinin; Athletes; Fibroblasts; Glycosaminoglycans; Hemodialysis Solutions; Humans; Injections, Intralesional; Middle Aged; Platelet Transfusion; Polidocanol; Polyethylene Glycols; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sodium Chloride; Tendinopathy; Young Adult
PubMed: 26009861
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010960.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2015Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a severe loss of kidney function that results in patients' inability to appropriately excrete nitrogenous wastes and creatinine. Continuous... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a severe loss of kidney function that results in patients' inability to appropriately excrete nitrogenous wastes and creatinine. Continuous haemodiafiltration (HDF) or haemofiltration (HF) are commonly used renal replacement therapies for people with AKI. Buffered dialysates and solutions used in HDF or HF have varying effects on acid-base physiology and several electrolytes. The benefits and harms of bicarbonate- versus lactate-buffered HDF or HF solutions for treating patients with AKI remain unclear.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the benefits and harms of bicarbonate- versus lactate-buffered solutions for HDF or HF for treating people with AKI.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Renal Group's Specialised Register to 6 January 2015 through contact with the Trials' Search Co-ordinator using search terms relevant to this review. We also searched the Chinese Biomedical Literature Database.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All randomised controlled trials (RCT) and quasi-RCTs that reported comparisons of bicarbonate-buffered solutions with lactate-buffered solutions for AKI were selected for inclusion irrespective of publication status or language.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently assessed titles and abstracts, and where necessary the full text of studies, to determine which satisfied our inclusion criteria. Data were extracted by two authors who independently assessed studies for eligibility and quality using a standardised data extraction form. Methodological quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Results were expressed as risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).
MAIN RESULTS
We identified four studies (171 patients) that met our inclusion criteria. Overall, study quality was suboptimal. There were significant reporting omissions related to methodological issues and potential harms. Outcome measures were not defined or reported adequately. The studies were small and lacked follow-up phases.Serum lactate levels were significantly lower in patients treated with bicarbonate-buffered solutions (4 studies, 171 participants: MD -1.09 mmol/L, 95% CI -1.30 to -0.87; I(2) = 0%). There were no differences in mortality (3 studies, 163 participants: RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.50 to 1.15; I(2) = 0%); serum bicarbonate levels (3 studies, 163 participants: MD 0.27 mmol/L, 95% CI -1.45 to 1.99; I(2) = 78%), serum creatinine (2 studies, 137 participants: MD -22.81 µmol/L, 95% CI -129.61 to 83.99; I(2) = 73%), serum base excess (3 studies, 145 participants: MD 0.80, 95% CI -0.91 to 2.50; I(2) = 38%), serum pH (4 studies, 171 participants: MD 0.01, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.03; I(2) = 70%) or carbon dioxide partial pressure (3 studies, 151 participants: MD -1.04, 95% CI -3.84 to 1.76; I(2) = 83%). A single study reported fewer cardiovascular events (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.79), higher mean arterial pressure (10.25 mm Hg, 95% CI 6.68 to 13.82) and less hypotensive events (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.75) in patients receiving bicarbonate-buffered solutions. One study reported no significant difference in central venous pressure (MD 2.00 cm H2O, 95% CI -0.7 to, 4.77). Total length of hospital and ICU stay and relapse were not reported by any of the included studies.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There were no significant different between bicarbonate- and lactate-buffered solutions for mortality, serum bicarbonate levels, serum creatinine, serum base excess, serum pH, carbon dioxide partial pressure, central venous pressure and serum electrolytes. Patients treated with bicarbonate-buffered solutions may experience fewer cardiovascular events, lower serum lactate levels, higher mean arterial pressure and less hypotensive events. With the exception of mortality, we were not able to assess the main primary outcomes of this review - length of time in ICU, total length of hospital stay and relapse.
Topics: Acute Kidney Injury; Adult; Bicarbonates; Blood Pressure; Buffers; Creatinine; Dialysis Solutions; Hemodiafiltration; Hemofiltration; Humans; Lactates; Lactic Acid; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 25740673
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006819.pub2 -
Peritoneal Dialysis International :... 2015Outcomes for peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients are affected by the characteristics of the peritoneal membrane, which may be determined by genetic variants. We carried... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Outcomes for peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients are affected by the characteristics of the peritoneal membrane, which may be determined by genetic variants. We carried out a systematic review of the literature to identify studies which assessed the association between genetic polymorphisms, peritoneal membrane solute transport, and clinical outcomes for PD patients.
METHODS
The National Library of Medicine was searched using a variety of strategies. Studies which met our inclusion criteria were reviewed and data abstracted. Our outcomes of interest included: high transport status peritoneal membrane, risk for peritonitis, encapsulating peritoneal sclerosis (EPS), patient and technique survival. We combined data from studies which evaluated the same genetic polymorphism and the same outcome.
RESULTS
We evaluated 18 relevant studies. All studies used a candidate gene approach. Gene polymorphisms in the interleukin (IL)-6 gene were associated with peritoneal membrane solute transport in several studies in different ethnic populations. Associations with solute transport and polymorphisms in endothelial nitric oxide synthase and receptor for advanced glycation end product genes were also identified. There was evidence of a genetic predisposition for peritonitis found in 2 studies, and for EPS in 1 study. Survival was found to be associated with a polymorphism in vascular endothelial growth factor and technique failure was associated with a polymorphism in the IL-1 receptor antagonist.
CONCLUSIONS
There is evidence that characteristics of the peritoneal membrane and clinical outcomes for PD patients have genetic determinants. The most consistent association was between IL-6 gene polymorphisms and peritoneal membrane solute transport.
Topics: Biological Transport; Carrier Proteins; Dialysis Solutions; Humans; Interleukin-6; Peritoneal Dialysis; Peritoneum; Polymorphism, Genetic
PubMed: 25395500
DOI: 10.3747/pdi.2014.00049 -
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 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2014The high mortality rate among critically ill patients with acute kidney injury (AKI) remains an unsolved problem in intensive care medicine, despite the use of renal... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The high mortality rate among critically ill patients with acute kidney injury (AKI) remains an unsolved problem in intensive care medicine, despite the use of renal replacement therapy (RRT). Increasing evidence from clinical studies in adults and children suggests that the new peritoneal dialysis (PD) fluids may allow for better long-term preservation of peritoneal morphology and function. Formation of glucose degradation products (GDPs) can be reduced and even avoided with the use of newer "biocompatible" solutions. However, it is still unclear if there are any differences in using conventional (lactate) solutions compared with low GDP (bicarbonate) solutions for acute PD.
OBJECTIVES
To look at the benefits and harms of bicarbonate versus lactate solutions in acute PD.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (from 1966), EMBASE (from 1980), Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature Database LILACS (from 1982), and reference lists of articles.Date of last search: 6 May 2014.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing bicarbonate to lactate solution for acute PD.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently assess the methodological quality of studies. One author abstracted data onto a standard form, and a second author checked data extraction. We used the random-effects model and expressed the results as relative risk (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes with 95% confidence intervals (CI).
MAIN RESULTS
We included one study (20 patients) in this review. In shock patients, bicarbonate did not differ from lactate with respect to mortality (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.06 to 3.91); however there were significant differences in blood lactate (MD -1.60 mmol/L, 95% CI -2.04 to -1.16), serum bicarbonate (MD 5.00 mmol/L, 95% CI 3.26 to 6.74) and blood pH (MD 0.12, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.18). In non-shock patients there was a significance difference in blood lactate (MD -0.60 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.85 to -0.35) but not in serum bicarbonate (MD 1.10 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.27 to 2.47) or blood pH (MD -0.02, 95% CI -0.02 to -0.06). Other outcomes could not be analysed because of the limited data available.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is no strong evidence that any clinical advantage for patients requiring acute PD for AKI when comparing conventional (lactate) with low GDP dialysis solutions (bicarbonate).
Topics: Acute Kidney Injury; Adult; Bicarbonates; Dialysis Solutions; Humans; Lactic Acid; Peritoneal Dialysis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 24992903
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007034.pub3