Literature DB >> 15211446

Compared time profiles of ultrafiltration, sodium removal, and renal function in incident CAPD and automated peritoneal dialysis patients.

Ana Rodriguez-Carmona1, Miguel Pérez-Fontán, Rafael Garca-Naveiro, Pedro Villaverde, Javier Peteiro.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Fluid and sodium removal rates may not be equivalent in patients undergoing automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) and continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD). This may influence compared cardiovascular outcomes in both groups.
METHODS: The authors compared prospectively the time courses of ultrafiltration, sodium removal, and residual renal function (RRF) in a group of incident patients treated with CAPD (n = 53) or APD (n = 51) for at least 1 year (mean follow-up, 28.9 months; range, 13 to 62). The authors analyzed potential effects of these factors on blood pressure (BP) control and cardiovascular morbidity and mortality.
RESULTS: Ultrafiltration and sodium removal rates were consistently lower in APD patients (mean differences, 236 mL/d; P = 0.012, and 36 mmol/d; P = 0.018, respectively, end of first year). Moreover, univariate and multivariate analysis indicated that APD therapy results in a moderate, but significantly faster decline of RRF than CAPD therapy. Analysis of clinical outcomes showed that CAPD (versus APD) therapy or higher ultrafiltration or sodium removal rates were associated with a better time course of systolic, but not diastolic, BP. We were unable to identify PD modality, ultrafiltration, or sodium removal rates as independent predictors of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality.
CONCLUSION: Ultrafiltration and sodium removal rates are consistently lower in incident APD patients than in their counterparts undergoing CAPD. Moreover, RRF declines faster during APD than during CAPD therapy, although this difference may be partially counteracted by a detrimental effect of ultrafiltration on RRF. Aside from a better control of systolic BP in CAPD patients, these differences do not portend significant cardiovascular consequences during the first years of PD therapy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15211446     DOI: 10.1053/j.ajkd.2004.03.035

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


  24 in total

1.  A case of posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome in a patient undergoing automated peritoneal dialysis.

Authors:  Shohei Kaneko; Keiji Hirai; Saori Minato; Katsunori Yanai; Yuko Mutsuyoshi; Hiroki Ishii; Taisuke Kitano; Mitsutoshi Shindo; Akinori Aomatsu; Haruhisa Miyazawa; Kiyonori Ito; Yuichirou Ueda; Taro Hoshino; Susumu Ookawara; Yoshiyuki Morishita
Journal:  CEN Case Rep       Date:  2019-03-04

2.  Time course of peritoneal function in automated and continuous peritoneal dialysis.

Authors:  Wieneke M Michels; Marion Verduijn; Alena Parikova; Elisabeth W Boeschoten; Dirk G Struijk; Friedo W Dekker; Raymond T Krediet
Journal:  Perit Dial Int       Date:  2012-04-02       Impact factor: 1.756

3.  Sodium removal by peritoneal dialysis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Silvio Borrelli; Vincenzo La Milia; Luca De Nicola; Gianfranca Cabiddu; Roberto Russo; Michele Provenzano; Roberto Minutolo; Giuseppe Conte; Carlo Garofalo
Journal:  J Nephrol       Date:  2018-07-05       Impact factor: 3.902

4.  Comparison of Blood Pressure Control and Left Ventricular Hypertrophy in Patients on Continuous Ambulatory Peritoneal Dialysis (CAPD) and Automated Peritoneal Dialysis (APD).

Authors:  Jong Soon Jang; Soon Kil Kwon; Hye-Young Kim
Journal:  Electrolyte Blood Press       Date:  2011-06-30

5.  Evaluation of enhanced peritoneum permeability in methylglyoxal-treated rats as a diagnostic method for peritoneal damage.

Authors:  Shintaro Fumoto; Yukiko Nakashima; Koyo Nishida; Yukinobu Kodama; Junya Nishi; Mikiro Nakashima; Hitoshi Sasaki; Noboru Otsuka; Junzo Nakamura
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2007-05-03       Impact factor: 4.200

6.  Similar survival on automated peritoneal dialysis and continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis in a large prospective cohort.

Authors:  Wieneke Marleen Michels; Marion Verduijn; Elisabeth Wilhelmina Boeschoten; Friedo Wilhelm Dekker; Raymond Theodorus Krediet
Journal:  Clin J Am Soc Nephrol       Date:  2009-04-08       Impact factor: 8.237

Review 7.  [Peritoneal dialysis from the beginnings up to today: which developments of the last decades were important?].

Authors:  Andreas Vychytil
Journal:  Wien Med Wochenschr       Date:  2013-04-17

Review 8.  Comparative outcomes between continuous ambulatory and automated peritoneal dialysis: a narrative review.

Authors:  Scott D Bieber; John Burkart; Thomas A Golper; Isaac Teitelbaum; Rajnish Mehrotra
Journal:  Am J Kidney Dis       Date:  2014-01-11       Impact factor: 8.860

9.  Comparison of volume overload with cycler-assisted versus continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis.

Authors:  Sara N Davison; Gian S Jhangri; Kailash Jindal; Neesh Pannu
Journal:  Clin J Am Soc Nephrol       Date:  2009-04-30       Impact factor: 8.237

Review 10.  Continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis versus automated peritoneal dialysis for end-stage renal disease.

Authors:  K S Rabindranath; J Adams; T Z Ali; A M MacLeod; L Vale; J Cody; S A Wallace; C Daly
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2007-04-18
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.