BACKGROUND: Recovery of dialysis-independent renal function in long-term dialysis patients has not been studied extensively. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of dialysis modality on the likelihood, timing and durability of recovery of dialysis-independent renal function. METHODS: The study reviewed all patients in Australia and New Zealand who commenced dialysis for treatment of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) between 1963 and 2006. Dialysis modality was assigned at 90 days. A supplementary analysis was also conducted using a contemporary cohort that included data on comorbidities, smoking and eGFR at dialysis onset. RESULTS: During the study period, 15 912 individuals received peritoneal dialysis (PD) and 23 658 received haemodialysis (HD). Renal recovery occurred in 176 (1.1%) PD and 244 (1.0%) HD patients. Using multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression analyses, dialysis modality was not independently predictive of time to renal recovery (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.76-1.13, P = 0.4). Recovery was significantly more likely in patients with higher baseline eGFR, with no hypertension or peripheral vascular disease, and with certain causes of kidney failure (autoimmune renal disease, haemolytic uraemic syndrome, interstitial nephritis, obstructive uropathy, paraproteinaemia and renovascular nephrosclerosis). Recovery was less likely in Maori/Pacific Islanders and polycystic kidney disease. Among patients who recovered, 328 (78%) subsequently experienced renal death, mostly within the first year. The duration of renal recovery was not associated with initial dialysis modality (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.50- 1.32). CONCLUSIONS: Dialysis modality is not associated with the likelihood, timing or durability of spontaneous recovery of dialysis-independent renal function in patients thought to have ESRD.
BACKGROUND: Recovery of dialysis-independent renal function in long-term dialysis patients has not been studied extensively. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of dialysis modality on the likelihood, timing and durability of recovery of dialysis-independent renal function. METHODS: The study reviewed all patients in Australia and New Zealand who commenced dialysis for treatment of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) between 1963 and 2006. Dialysis modality was assigned at 90 days. A supplementary analysis was also conducted using a contemporary cohort that included data on comorbidities, smoking and eGFR at dialysis onset. RESULTS: During the study period, 15 912 individuals received peritoneal dialysis (PD) and 23 658 received haemodialysis (HD). Renal recovery occurred in 176 (1.1%) PD and 244 (1.0%) HDpatients. Using multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression analyses, dialysis modality was not independently predictive of time to renal recovery (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.76-1.13, P = 0.4). Recovery was significantly more likely in patients with higher baseline eGFR, with no hypertension or peripheral vascular disease, and with certain causes of kidney failure (autoimmune renal disease, haemolytic uraemic syndrome, interstitial nephritis, obstructive uropathy, paraproteinaemia and renovascular nephrosclerosis). Recovery was less likely in Maori/Pacific Islanders and polycystic kidney disease. Among patients who recovered, 328 (78%) subsequently experienced renal death, mostly within the first year. The duration of renal recovery was not associated with initial dialysis modality (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.50- 1.32). CONCLUSIONS: Dialysis modality is not associated with the likelihood, timing or durability of spontaneous recovery of dialysis-independent renal function in patients thought to have ESRD.
Authors: Marjolein Bonthuis; Jérôme Harambat; Etienne Bérard; Karlien Cransberg; Ali Duzova; Liliana Garneata; Maria Herthelius; Adrian C Lungu; Timo Jahnukainen; Lukas Kaltenegger; Gema Ariceta; Elisabeth Maurer; Runolfur Palsson; Manish D Sinha; Sara Testa; Jaap W Groothoff; Kitty J Jager Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2018-09-20 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Jorge Cerdá; Kathleen D Liu; Dinna N Cruz; Bertrand L Jaber; Jay L Koyner; Michael Heung; Mark D Okusa; Sarah Faubel Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2015-07-02 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: LaTonya J Hickson; Sanjay Chaudhary; Amy W Williams; John J Dillon; Suzanne M Norby; James R Gregoire; Robert C Albright; James T McCarthy; Bjorg Thorsteinsdottir; Andrew D Rule Journal: Am J Kidney Dis Date: 2014-11-05 Impact factor: 8.860
Authors: Elaine Ku; Raymond K Hsu; Kirsten L Johansen; Charles E McCulloch; Mark Mitsnefes; Barbara A Grimes; Kathleen D Liu Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2021-02-19 Impact factor: 11.069
Authors: Wen-Ling Yang; Bhadran Bose; Lei Zhang; Megan Mcstea; Yeoungjee Cho; Magid Fahim; Carmel M Hawley; Elaine M Pascoe; David W Johnson Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-08-23 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Elizabeth C Lorenz; John C Lieske; Barbara M Seide; Julie B Olson; Ramila Mehta; Dawn S Milliner Journal: Am J Kidney Dis Date: 2020-09-04 Impact factor: 8.860
Authors: Wen Tang; Janaki Mohandas; Stephen P McDonald; Carmel M Hawley; Sunil V Badve; Neil Boudville; Fiona G Brown; Philip A Clayton; Kathryn J Wiggins; Kym M Bannister; Scott B Campbell; David W Johnson Journal: BMC Nephrol Date: 2012-12-03 Impact factor: 2.388