BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Cycler-assisted peritoneal dialysis (CCPD) has been associated with decreased sodium removal compared with continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) as a result of peritoneal sodium sieving during the short dwells that are associated with CCPD. This may have adverse consequences for management of extracellular fluid volume (ECFV). This study compared ECFV in patients who received CAPD or CCPD; CCPD dwell times were maximized by limiting the number of exchanges, and the use of icodextrin for the long daytime dwells was widespread. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: This was an observational, cross-sectional study of 158 prevalent patients (90 CAPD, 68 CCPD). Demographic data, blood work, and 24-h dialysate and urine samples were collected from all participants between January 2004 and July 2006. They subsequently underwent assessment of ECFV by multifrequency bioimpedance spectroscopy analysis. Multivariate analysis was used to determine the relationship between peritoneal dialysis modality and ECFV. Potential cofounders including age, comorbidity, time on dialysis, residual renal function, and icodextrin use were identified a priori. RESULTS: There were no differences in BP, use of antihypertensive medications, or the presence of peripheral edema between CAPD and CCPD patients. Similarly, there was no difference in the ratio of ECFV to total body water between CAPD (51.8%) and CCPD (51.9%) patients (P = 0.929). CONCLUSIONS: There is no difference in BP, sodium removal, or volume control in patients who use a contemporary approach to CCPD that uses fewer night cycles and liberalizes the use of icodextrin when compared with CAPD.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Cycler-assisted peritoneal dialysis (CCPD) has been associated with decreased sodium removal compared with continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) as a result of peritoneal sodium sieving during the short dwells that are associated with CCPD. This may have adverse consequences for management of extracellular fluid volume (ECFV). This study compared ECFV in patients who received CAPD or CCPD; CCPD dwell times were maximized by limiting the number of exchanges, and the use of icodextrin for the long daytime dwells was widespread. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: This was an observational, cross-sectional study of 158 prevalent patients (90 CAPD, 68 CCPD). Demographic data, blood work, and 24-h dialysate and urine samples were collected from all participants between January 2004 and July 2006. They subsequently underwent assessment of ECFV by multifrequency bioimpedance spectroscopy analysis. Multivariate analysis was used to determine the relationship between peritoneal dialysis modality and ECFV. Potential cofounders including age, comorbidity, time on dialysis, residual renal function, and icodextrin use were identified a priori. RESULTS: There were no differences in BP, use of antihypertensive medications, or the presence of peripheral edema between CAPD and CCPD patients. Similarly, there was no difference in the ratio of ECFV to total body water between CAPD (51.8%) and CCPD (51.9%) patients (P = 0.929). CONCLUSIONS: There is no difference in BP, sodium removal, or volume control in patients who use a contemporary approach to CCPD that uses fewer night cycles and liberalizes the use of icodextrin when compared with CAPD.
Authors: Ana Rodriguez-Carmona; Miguel Pérez-Fontán; Rafael Garca-Naveiro; Pedro Villaverde; Javier Peteiro Journal: Am J Kidney Dis Date: 2004-07 Impact factor: 8.860
Authors: Jos van de Kerkhof; Marc Hermans; Charles Beerenhout; Constantijn Konings; Frank M van der Sande; Jeroen P Kooman Journal: Blood Purif Date: 2004 Impact factor: 2.614
Authors: C W de Fijter; L P Oe; J J Nauta; J van der Meulen; H A Verbrugh; J Verhoef; A J Donker Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 1994-02-15 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Jeannette G Van Manen; Johanna C Korevaar; Friedo W Dekker; Elisabeth W Boeschoten; Patrick M M Bossuyt; Raymond T Krediet Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2003-02 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: David W Johnson; David W Mudge; Joanna M Sturtevant; Carmel M Hawley; Scott B Campbell; Nicole M Isbel; Peter Hollett Journal: Perit Dial Int Date: 2003 May-Jun Impact factor: 1.756
Authors: Simon Paul Parmentier; Holger Schirutschke; Bertram Schmitt; Jens Schewe; Kay Herbrig; Frank Pistrosch; Jens Passauer Journal: Int Urol Nephrol Date: 2012-06-19 Impact factor: 2.370
Authors: Natascha J H Broers; Remy J H Martens; Tom Cornelis; Frank M van der Sande; Nanda M P Diederen; Marc M H Hermans; Joris J J M Wirtz; Frank Stifft; Constantijn J A M Konings; Tom Dejagere; Bernard Canaud; Peter Wabel; Karel M L Leunissen; Jeroen P Kooman Journal: Nephron Date: 2017-06-08 Impact factor: 2.847
Authors: David Arroyo; Nayara Panizo; Soraya Abad; Almudena Vega; Abraham Rincón; Ana Pérez de José; Juan M López-Gómez Journal: Perit Dial Int Date: 2014-03-01 Impact factor: 1.756
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