American journal of nephrology · 2018
Impact of Assisted Peritoneal Dialysis Modality on Outcomes: A Cohort Study of the French Language Peritoneal Dialysis Registry.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Guilloteau Solène, Lobbedez Thierry, Guillouët Sonia, Verger Christian, Ficheux Maxence, Lanot Antoine, Béchade Clémence
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Patients on peritoneal dialysis (PD) can be assisted by a nurse or a family member and treated either by automated PD (APD) or continuous ambulatory PD (CAPD). The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of PD modality and type of assistance on the risk of transfer to haemodialysis (HD) and on the peritonitis risk in assisted PD patients.
METHOD: This was a retrospective study based on data from the French Language PD Registry. All adults starting assisted PD in France between 2006 and 2015 were included. Events of interest were transfer to HD, peritonitis and death. Cox regression models were used for statistical analysis.
RESULTS: Among the 12,144 incident patients who started PD in France during the study period, 6,167 were assisted. There were 5,060 nurse-assisted and 1,095 family-assisted PD patients. Overall, 5,171 were treated by CAPD and 996 by APD. In multivariate analysis, CAPD, compared to APD, was not associated with the risk of transfer to HD (cause specific hazard ratios [cs-HR] 0.96 [95% CI 0.84-1.09]). Patients on nurse-assisted PD had a lower risk of transfer to HD than family assisted PD patients (cs-HR 0.85 [95% CI 0.75-0.97]). Neither PD modality nor type of assistance were associated with peritonitis risk.
CONCLUSIONS: In assisted PD, technique survival was not associated with PD modality. Nurse-assisted patients had a lower risk of transfer to HD than family assisted patients. Peritonitis risk was not influenced either by PD modality, or by type of assistance. Both APD and CAPD should be offered to assisted-PD patients.
METHOD: This was a retrospective study based on data from the French Language PD Registry. All adults starting assisted PD in France between 2006 and 2015 were included. Events of interest were transfer to HD, peritonitis and death. Cox regression models were used for statistical analysis.
RESULTS: Among the 12,144 incident patients who started PD in France during the study period, 6,167 were assisted. There were 5,060 nurse-assisted and 1,095 family-assisted PD patients. Overall, 5,171 were treated by CAPD and 996 by APD. In multivariate analysis, CAPD, compared to APD, was not associated with the risk of transfer to HD (cause specific hazard ratios [cs-HR] 0.96 [95% CI 0.84-1.09]). Patients on nurse-assisted PD had a lower risk of transfer to HD than family assisted PD patients (cs-HR 0.85 [95% CI 0.75-0.97]). Neither PD modality nor type of assistance were associated with peritonitis risk.
CONCLUSIONS: In assisted PD, technique survival was not associated with PD modality. Nurse-assisted patients had a lower risk of transfer to HD than family assisted patients. Peritonitis risk was not influenced either by PD modality, or by type of assistance. Both APD and CAPD should be offered to assisted-PD patients.