Literature DB >> 17443624

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

K S Rabindranath1, J Adams, T Z Ali, A M MacLeod, L Vale, J Cody, S A Wallace, C Daly.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Peritoneal dialysis (PD) can be performed either manually as in continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) or using mechanical devices as in automated PD (APD). APD has been considered to have several advantages over CAPD such as reduced incidence of peritonitis, mechanical complications and greater psychosocial acceptability.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the comparative efficacy of CAPD and APD in patients who are dialysed for end-stage renal disease (ESRD). SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Cochrane Renal Group's specialised register and CINAHL. Authors of included studies were contacted, reference lists of identified RCTs and relevant narrative reviews were screened. Date of most recent search: May 2006 SELECTION CRITERIA: RCTs comparing CAPD with APD in patients with ESRD. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data were abstracted independently by two authors onto a standard form. Relative risk (RR) for dichotomous data and a mean difference (MD) for continuous data were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CI). MAIN
RESULTS: Three trials (139 patients) were included. APD did not differ from CAPD with respect to mortality (RR 1.49, 95% CI 0.51 to 4.37), risk of peritonitis (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.50 to 1.11), switching from original PD modality to a different dialysis modality (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.25 to 1.02), hernias (RR 1.26, 95% interval 0.32 to 5.01), PD fluid leaks (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.11 to 9.83), PD catheter removal (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.48) or hospital admissions (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.43 to 2.17). There was no difference between either PD modality with respect to residual renal function (MD -0.17, 95% CI -1.66 to 1.32). One study found that peritonitis rates and hospitalisation were significantly less in patients on APD when results were expressed as episodes/patient-year. Another study found that patients on APD had significantly more time for work, family and social activities. AUTHORS'
CONCLUSIONS: APD has not been shown to have significant advantages over CAPD in terms of important clinical outcomes. APD may however be considered advantageous in select group of patients such as in the younger PD population and those in employment or education due to its psychosocial advantages. There is a need for a RCT comparing CAPD with APD with sufficiently large patient numbers looking at important clinical outcomes including residual renal function, accompanied by an economic evaluation to clarify the relative clinical and cost-effectiveness of both modalities.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17443624      PMCID: PMC6669246          DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006515

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev        ISSN: 1361-6137


  39 in total

1.  Advantages and disadvantages of automated peritoneal dialysis compared to continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis.

Authors:  P G Blake
Journal:  Perit Dial Int       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 1.756

2.  Comparative evaluation of CAPD and PD-plus effectiveness.

Authors:  H Iles-Smith; J Curwell; R Gokal
Journal:  EDTNA ERCA J       Date:  1999 Jul-Sep

3.  Rate of decline in residual renal fuction is equal in CAPD and automated peritoneal dialysis patients.

Authors:  P Gallar; O Ortega; A Carreno; A Vigil
Journal:  Perit Dial Int       Date:  2000 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 1.756

Review 4.  Statistics notes. Treatment allocation in controlled trials: why randomise?

Authors:  D G Altman; J M Bland
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1999-05-01

5.  Predictors of loss of residual renal function among new dialysis patients.

Authors:  Louise M Moist; Friedrich K Port; Sean M Orzol; Eric W Young; Truls Ostbye; Robert A Wolfe; Tempie Hulbert-Shearon; Camille A Jones; Wendy E Bloembergen
Journal:  J Am Soc Nephrol       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 10.121

6.  Continuous cycler therapy, manual peritoneal dialysis therapy, and peritonitis.

Authors:  L K Troidle; N Gorban-Brennan; A S Kliger; F O Finkelstein
Journal:  Adv Perit Dial       Date:  1998

7.  A prospective, randomized multicenter study comparing APD and CAPD treatment.

Authors:  S Bro; J B Bjorner; P Tofte-Jensen; S Klem; B Almtoft; H Danielsen; M Meincke; M Friedberg; B Feldt-Rasmussen
Journal:  Perit Dial Int       Date:  1999 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 1.756

8.  The influence of demographic factors and modality on loss of residual renal function in incident peritoneal dialysis patients.

Authors:  J L Holley; N Aslam; J Bernardini; L Fried; B Piraino
Journal:  Perit Dial Int       Date:  2001 May-Jun       Impact factor: 1.756

9.  A comparative analysis on the incidence of peritonitis and exit-site infection in CAPD and automated peritoneal dialysis.

Authors:  A Rodríguez-Carmona; M Pérez Fontán; T García Falcón; C Fernández Rivera; F Valdés
Journal:  Perit Dial Int       Date:  1999 May-Jun       Impact factor: 1.756

10.  The influence of automated peritoneal dialysis on the decrease in residual renal function.

Authors:  G Hufnagel; C Michel; G Queffeulou; H Skhiri; H Damieri; F Mignon
Journal:  Nephrol Dial Transplant       Date:  1999-05       Impact factor: 5.992

View more
  9 in total

1.  Cost-effectiveness analysis of the Spanish renal replacement therapy program.

Authors:  Guillermo Villa; Lucía Fernández-Ortiz; Jesús Cuervo; Pablo Rebollo; Rafael Selgas; Teresa González; Javier Arrieta
Journal:  Perit Dial Int       Date:  2011-09-30       Impact factor: 1.756

2.  Chronic peritoneal dialysis in children: a single-centre experience in Jordan.

Authors:  Mahdi Qasem Farah Frehat; Ghazi Mohammad Al-Salaita; Jwaher Thiab Al-Bderat; Aghadir Mohammad Alhadidi; Samera Adnan Mohammad; Ahmad Mohammad Shaaban; Reham Al Mardini
Journal:  Sudan J Paediatr       Date:  2020

3.  An Incident Cohort Study Comparing Survival on Home Hemodialysis and Peritoneal Dialysis (Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplantation Registry).

Authors:  Annie-Claire Nadeau-Fredette; Carmel M Hawley; Elaine M Pascoe; Christopher T Chan; Philip A Clayton; Kevan R Polkinghorne; Neil Boudville; Martine Leblanc; David W Johnson
Journal:  Clin J Am Soc Nephrol       Date:  2015-06-11       Impact factor: 8.237

4.  Manifold exchange: a delivery option in managing patients on peritoneal dialysis.

Authors:  Sandeep Mallipattu; Marcia Duffoo; Arzhang Fallahi; Jaime Uribarri
Journal:  Perit Dial Int       Date:  2014 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 1.756

5.  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

6.  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

7.  Peritoneal dialysis care during the COVID-19 pandemic, Thailand.

Authors:  Talerngsak Kanjanabuch; Krit Pongpirul
Journal:  Bull World Health Organ       Date:  2021-11-04       Impact factor: 9.408

Review 8.  ISPD Peritonitis Recommendations: 2016 Update on Prevention and Treatment.

Authors:  Philip Kam-Tao Li; Cheuk Chun Szeto; Beth Piraino; Javier de Arteaga; Stanley Fan; Ana E Figueiredo; Douglas N Fish; Eric Goffin; Yong-Lim Kim; William Salzer; Dirk G Struijk; Isaac Teitelbaum; David W Johnson
Journal:  Perit Dial Int       Date:  2016-06-09       Impact factor: 1.756

9.  Continuation of Peritoneal Dialysis in Adult Kidney Transplant Recipients With Delayed Graft Function.

Authors:  Ali I Gardezi; Brenda Muth; Adil Ghaffar; Fahad Aziz; Neetika Garg; Maha Mohamed; David Foley; Dixon Kaufman; Arjang Djamali; Didier Mandelbrot; Sandesh Parajuli
Journal:  Kidney Int Rep       Date:  2021-04-17
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.