BACKGROUND: Patients with a failed kidney transplant represent a unique chronic kidney disease population that is increasing in number and is at high risk of morbidity and mortality. Among transplant-naïve patients, those treated with peritoneal dialysis (PD) show an early survival advantage compared with those treated with hemodialysis (HD). But any advantage of PD after allograft failure is unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical outcomes of patients with failed allografts according to the type of dialysis modality. METHOD: We reviewed medical records of patients who initiated dialysis after kidney transplant failure from November 1982 to May 2011. Demographics features, clinical data, and survival outcomes were compared between PD and HD patients who had experienced allograft failure. RESULTS: The 182 patients with failed allografts showed the most common cause to be chronic rejection. The median duration of function before allograft failure was 74.0 months. After allograft failure, 145 (79.7%) patients returned to HD and 37 (20.3%) to PD. Twenty-three patients (12.6%) died over the median 69.1 months duration of follow-up. During the observation period, 16 HD (11%) and 7 PD (8.9%) patients died. The survival rates of PD patients at 1 year were 91.2% and 84.4%, respectively, at 1 and 3 years, and those of HD patients 94.8% and 88.9%. There was no significant difference in the survivals of the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: The study suggests that the outcome of patients starting PD after kidney transplant failure was similar to those starting HD. Therefore, PD can be regarded to be a good treatment option for patients returning to dialysis after kidney transplant failure. Crown
BACKGROUND:Patients with a failed kidney transplant represent a unique chronic kidney disease population that is increasing in number and is at high risk of morbidity and mortality. Among transplant-naïve patients, those treated with peritoneal dialysis (PD) show an early survival advantage compared with those treated with hemodialysis (HD). But any advantage of PD after allograft failure is unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical outcomes of patients with failed allografts according to the type of dialysis modality. METHOD: We reviewed medical records of patients who initiated dialysis after kidney transplant failure from November 1982 to May 2011. Demographics features, clinical data, and survival outcomes were compared between PD and HDpatients who had experienced allograft failure. RESULTS: The 182 patients with failed allografts showed the most common cause to be chronic rejection. The median duration of function before allograft failure was 74.0 months. After allograft failure, 145 (79.7%) patients returned to HD and 37 (20.3%) to PD. Twenty-three patients (12.6%) died over the median 69.1 months duration of follow-up. During the observation period, 16 HD (11%) and 7 PD (8.9%) patients died. The survival rates of PDpatients at 1 year were 91.2% and 84.4%, respectively, at 1 and 3 years, and those of HDpatients 94.8% and 88.9%. There was no significant difference in the survivals of the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: The study suggests that the outcome of patients starting PD after kidney transplant failure was similar to those starting HD. Therefore, PD can be regarded to be a good treatment option for patients returning to dialysis after kidney transplant failure. Crown