Literature DB >> 12776283

The relative importance of residual renal function compared with peritoneal clearance for patient survival and quality of life: an analysis of the Netherlands Cooperative Study on the Adequacy of Dialysis (NECOSAD )-2.

Fabian Termorshuizen1, Johanna C Korevaar, Friedo W Dekker, Jeannette G van Manen, Elisabeth W Boeschoten, Raymond T Krediet.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The guidelines from the US National Kidney Foundation Dialysis Outcomes Quality Initiative on peritoneal dialysis (PD) assume equivalence between the peritoneal and the renal solute clearance. The authors examined in a prospective cohort study of incident dialysis patients the relative contribution of residual renal function and peritoneal clearance to patient survival and quality of life (QoL).
METHODS: The authors analyzed the longitudinal data on residual renal function, clearance by dialysis, and QoL of those patients who were treated with PD 3 months after the start of dialysis and participated in a prospective multicenter study in the Netherlands (n = 413).
RESULTS: The mean age was 52 years, the mean residual glomerular filtration rate (rGFR) at 3 months was 4.1 mL/min/1.73 m2 (SD: 2.7), and the mean peritoneal creatinine clearance (pCrCl) at 3 months was 4.1 mL/min/1.73 m2 (SD: 1.1). The 2-year survival was 84%. For each mL/min/1.73 m2 increase in rGFR, a 12% reduction in mortality rate was found (relative risk of death [RR] = 0.88, P = 0.039). In contrast, no significant effect of pCrCl on patient survival was established (RR = 0.91, P = 0.47). The differential impact of rGFR and pCrCl was confirmed in an analysis on combined patient and technique survival and in an analysis on a number of generic and disease-specific dimensions of QoL.
CONCLUSION: The beneficial effect of renal clearance and the absence of an effect of peritoneal clearance in the range of values common in current practice on patient outcome indicate that the 2 components of total solute clearance should not be regarded as equivalent. Higher peritoneal clearance targets do not necessarily improve patient outcome.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12776283     DOI: 10.1016/s0272-6386(03)00362-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Kidney Dis        ISSN: 0272-6386            Impact factor:   8.860


  86 in total

1.  Gastrointestinal symptoms in patients undergoing peritoneal dialysis: multivariate analysis of correlated factors.

Authors:  Rui Dong; Zhi-Yong Guo
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2010-06-14       Impact factor: 5.742

2.  No difference in meeting hemoglobin and albumin targets for dialyzed children with urologic disorders.

Authors:  Rachel M Lestz; Meredith Atkinson; Barbara Fivush; Susan L Furth
Journal:  Pediatr Nephrol       Date:  2011-03-20       Impact factor: 3.714

3.  Contribution of residual function to removal of protein-bound solutes in hemodialysis.

Authors:  Ilian O Marquez; Shouieb Tambra; Frank Y Luo; You Li; Natalie S Plummer; Thomas H Hostetter; Timothy W Meyer
Journal:  Clin J Am Soc Nephrol       Date:  2010-10-28       Impact factor: 8.237

Review 4.  Incremental dialysis for preserving residual kidney function-Does one size fit all when initiating dialysis?

Authors:  Anna T Mathew; Yoshitsugu Obi; Connie M Rhee; Jason A Chou; Kamyar Kalantar-Zadeh
Journal:  Semin Dial       Date:  2018-05-07       Impact factor: 3.455

5.  Longitudinal changes in health-related quality of life scores in Brazilian incident peritoneal dialysis patients (BRAZPD): socio-economic status not a barrier.

Authors:  Fabiane Rossi dos Santos Grincenkov; Natália Fernandes; Alfredo Chaoubah; Neimar da Silva Fernandes; Kleyton Bastos; Antonio Alberto Lopes; Abdul Rashid Qureshi; Fredric O Finkelstein; Roberto Pecoits-Filho; José Carolino Divino-Filho; Marcus Gomes Bastos
Journal:  Perit Dial Int       Date:  2013 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 1.756

6.  Serum concentrations of p-cresyl sulfate and indoxyl sulfate, but not inflammatory markers, increase in incident peritoneal dialysis patients in parallel with loss of residual renal function.

Authors:  Liesbeth Viaene; Björn K I Meijers; Bert Bammens; Yves Vanrenterghem; Pieter Evenepoel
Journal:  Perit Dial Int       Date:  2013-10-31       Impact factor: 1.756

Review 7.  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.

Authors:  Seychelle Yohanna; Ali M A Alkatheeri; Scott K Brimble; Brendan McCormick; Arthur Iansavitchous; Peter G Blake; Arsh K Jain
Journal:  Clin J Am Soc Nephrol       Date:  2015-06-05       Impact factor: 8.237

8.  Preservation of Residual Kidney Function and Urine Volume in Patients on Dialysis.

Authors:  Raymond T Krediet
Journal:  Clin J Am Soc Nephrol       Date:  2017-02-22       Impact factor: 8.237

9.  Estimating residual kidney function in dialysis patients without urine collection.

Authors:  Tariq Shafi; Wieneke M Michels; Andrew S Levey; Lesley A Inker; Friedo W Dekker; Raymond T Krediet; Tiny Hoekstra; George J Schwartz; John H Eckfeldt; Josef Coresh
Journal:  Kidney Int       Date:  2016-01-21       Impact factor: 10.612

10.  Extracellular volume expansion and the preservation of residual renal function in Korean peritoneal dialysis patients: a long-term follow up study.

Authors:  Harin Rhee; Min Ja Baek; Hyun Chul Chung; Jong Man Park; Woo Jin Jung; Soo Min Park; Jang Won Lee; Min Ji Shin; Il Young Kim; Sang Heon Song; Dong Won Lee; Soo Bong Lee; Ihm Soo Kwak; Eun Young Seong
Journal:  Clin Exp Nephrol       Date:  2015-11-26       Impact factor: 2.801

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.