Literature DB >> 11168959

Effect of cause and time of dropout on the residual GFR: a comparative analysis of the decline of GFR on dialysis.

M Misra1, E Vonesh, J C Van Stone, H L Moore, B Prowant, K D Nolph.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The decline of residual renal function (RRF) on dialysis has been reported to be slower in peritoneal dialysis (PD) then hemodialysis (HD). However, some clinicians have questioned whether this reported difference might not be caused by selection bias. In particular, if continuous ambulatory PD (CAPD) delivers only marginally adequate therapy as some clinicians speculate, then perhaps those patients on CAPD with low glomerular filtration rate (GFR) are purposefully switched to HD. If true, transferring CAPD patients with low GFR to HD could create a selection bias that very well may account for the differences in GFR between PD and HD. This is particularly problematic if one then censors patients at the time of transfer from PD to HD from analysis (that is, patients are no longer followed in the study once they have switched treatment modalities). When this occurs, the data are said to be informatively censored, a term used by statisticians to describe any kind of systematic bias associated with censored or incomplete data. In particular, informative censoring occurs when patients who die or transfer to another modality very early have an associated lower starting GFR or higher rate of decline of GFR than patients who either complete the study or who die or transfer much later. If patient dropout is indeed related to the rate of decline in GFR and if this relationship differs between PD and HD but is ignored in the analysis, then the results of such analysis may be biased.
METHODS: This article analyzes the decline in GFR among 141 incident dialysis patients (39 HD and 102 PD) undergoing either HD or PD at the University of Missouri-Columbia. The decline in GFR was modeled as a nonlinear function of time, taking into account the possibility that missing values of GFR may be associated with patient dropout (death, transfer to another modality, or transplantation). To safeguard against this possibility, we utilized a conditional nonlinear mixed-effects model. The model was used to fit and compare each patient's GFR data to time adjusting for the patient's treatment modality (HD vs. PD), cause of dropout (death, transfer, transplant, lost to follow-up/study ended), and time to dropout. The model allowed a comparison of the starting GFR and the rate of decline in GFR between PD and HD adjusting for these three factors. RESULTS AND
CONCLUSIONS: The results of our analysis suggest that such informative censoring is independent of treatment modality and that even after correcting for dropout caused by death or transfer to another modality, patients starting on PD have a lower rate of decline in GFR (that is, better preservation of GFR) than patients starting on HD.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11168959     DOI: 10.1046/j.1523-1755.2001.059002754.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Kidney Int        ISSN: 0085-2538            Impact factor:   10.612


  29 in total

1.  Mortality associated with dose response of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents in hemodialysis versus peritoneal dialysis patients.

Authors:  Uyen Duong; Kamyar Kalantar-Zadeh; Miklos Z Molnar; Joshua J Zaritsky; Isaac Teitelbaum; Csaba P Kovesdy; Rajnish Mehrotra
Journal:  Am J Nephrol       Date:  2012-01-26       Impact factor: 3.754

2.  The importance of residual renal function in peritoneal dialysis.

Authors:  Dorota Sikorska; Krzysztof Pawlaczyk; Anna Olewicz-Gawlik; Natasza Czepulis; Bartlomiej Posnik; Ewa Baum; Maria Wanic-Kossowska; Bengt Lindholm; Andrzej Oko
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2016-10-12       Impact factor: 2.370

3.  Effects of biocompatible versus standard fluid on peritoneal dialysis outcomes.

Authors:  David W Johnson; Fiona G Brown; Margaret Clarke; Neil Boudville; Tony J Elias; Marjorie W Y Foo; Bernard Jones; Hemant Kulkarni; Robyn Langham; Dwarakanathan Ranganathan; John Schollum; Michael Suranyi; Seng H Tan; David Voss
Journal:  J Am Soc Nephrol       Date:  2012-03-22       Impact factor: 10.121

4.  Rate of Decline of Residual Kidney Function Before and After the Start of Peritoneal Dialysis.

Authors:  Lian He; Xihui Liu; Zi Li; Zita Abreu; Tushar Malavade; Charmaine E Lok; Joanne M Bargman
Journal:  Perit Dial Int       Date:  2016-04-04       Impact factor: 1.756

5.  New-Onset Diabetes in Peritoneal Dialysis Patients - Which Predictors Really Matter?

Authors:  Matthew B Rivara; Rajnish Mehrotra
Journal:  Perit Dial Int       Date:  2016 May-Jun       Impact factor: 1.756

6.  Introduction to the Critical Balance - Residual Kidney Function and Incremental Transition to Dialysis.

Authors:  Yoshitsugu Obi; Jason Chou; Kamyar Kalantar-Zadeh
Journal:  Semin Dial       Date:  2017-03-23       Impact factor: 3.455

7.  Comparison and causes of transfer from one dialysis modality to another.

Authors:  Aydin Unal; Ismail Kocyigit; Murat Hayri Sipahioglu; Bulent Tokgoz; Oktay Oymak; Cengiz Utas
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2010-09-10       Impact factor: 2.370

8.  Dialysis modality and outcomes in kidney transplant recipients.

Authors:  Miklos Z Molnar; Rajnish Mehrotra; Uyen Duong; Suphamai Bunnapradist; Lilia R Lukowsky; Mahesh Krishnan; Csaba P Kovesdy; Kamyar Kalantar-Zadeh
Journal:  Clin J Am Soc Nephrol       Date:  2011-12-08       Impact factor: 8.237

9.  A Pilot Study Examining the Effects of Tolvaptan on Residual Renal Function in Peritoneal Dialysis for Diabetics.

Authors:  Takeyuki Hiramatsu; Akinori Hobo; Takahiro Hayasaki; Koki Kabu; Shinji Furuta
Journal:  Perit Dial Int       Date:  2014-07-31       Impact factor: 1.756

Review 10.  Preservation of residual kidney function in hemodialysis patients: reviving an old concept.

Authors:  Anna T Mathew; Steven Fishbane; Yoshitsugu Obi; Kamyar Kalantar-Zadeh
Journal:  Kidney Int       Date:  2016-05-12       Impact factor: 10.612

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.