Rui Dong1, Zhi-Yong Guo1, Jia-Rong Ding1, Yang-Yang Zhou1, Hao Wu1. 1. Rui Dong, Zhi-Yong Guo, Jia-Rong Ding, Yang-Yang Zhou, Hao Wu, Department of Nephrology, Changhai Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai 200433, China.
Abstract
AIM: To compare the prevalence and diversity of gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms in patients undergoing peritoneal dialysis (PD) and hemodialysis (HD). METHODS: Two hundred and ninety-four end-stage renal disease patients participated in the study, including 182 HD and 112 PD patients. Dimension scores were calculated from a modified gastrointestinal symptom rating scale (GSRS) 18-item questionnaire, including items concerning eating dysfunction, and were used for measuring GI symptoms. Information on patient age, condition contributing to end-stage renal disease and the most recent dialysis adequacy assessment (serum Kt/V urea value) was obtained from the follow-up database and by interviewing patients and/or reviewing the medical records. Differences between the HD and PD groups were evaluated using Student's t, Pearson's χ(2) or Fisher's exact tests. RESULTS: The overall prevalence of GI symptoms, defined by a GSRS > 1, in end-stage renal disease patients was 70.7% (208/294), which differed between HD and PD patients (76.4% vs 61.6%, P < 0.01). HD patients had a higher prevalence of constipation, abdominal pain and diarrhea compared to PD patients (36.3% vs 17.9%, 32.4% vs 5.4%, 17.6% vs 4.5%, respectively, P < 0.05). PD patients had a higher prevalence of reflux compared to HD patients (32.1% vs 24.2%, P < 0.05). Additionally, reflux and eating dysfunction were more severe in PD patients (GSRS: 1.71 ± 1.15 vs 1.30 ± 0.67, 1.57 ± 0.84 vs 1.39 ± 0.61, respectively, P < 0.05), whereas HD patients had greater abdominal pain, diarrhea and constipation (GSRS: 1.22 ± 0.39 vs 1.04 ± 0.19, 1.19 ± 0.53 vs 1.07 ± 0.35, 1.51 ± 0.83 vs 1.23 ± 0.58, respectively, P < 0.05). Finally, 14.8% (27/182) of HD patients presented with more than three GI symptoms, compared to 7.2% (8/112) of PD patients (P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: HD and PD patients differ in prevalence, severity and diversity of GI symptoms.
AIM: To compare the prevalence and diversity of gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms in patients undergoing peritoneal dialysis (PD) and hemodialysis (HD). METHODS: Two hundred and ninety-four end-stage renal diseasepatients participated in the study, including 182 HD and 112 PDpatients. Dimension scores were calculated from a modified gastrointestinal symptom rating scale (GSRS) 18-item questionnaire, including items concerning eating dysfunction, and were used for measuring GI symptoms. Information on patient age, condition contributing to end-stage renal disease and the most recent dialysis adequacy assessment (serum Kt/V urea value) was obtained from the follow-up database and by interviewing patients and/or reviewing the medical records. Differences between the HD and PD groups were evaluated using Student's t, Pearson's χ(2) or Fisher's exact tests. RESULTS: The overall prevalence of GI symptoms, defined by a GSRS > 1, in end-stage renal diseasepatients was 70.7% (208/294), which differed between HD and PDpatients (76.4% vs 61.6%, P < 0.01). HDpatients had a higher prevalence of constipation, abdominal pain and diarrhea compared to PDpatients (36.3% vs 17.9%, 32.4% vs 5.4%, 17.6% vs 4.5%, respectively, P < 0.05). PDpatients had a higher prevalence of reflux compared to HDpatients (32.1% vs 24.2%, P < 0.05). Additionally, reflux and eating dysfunction were more severe in PDpatients (GSRS: 1.71 ± 1.15 vs 1.30 ± 0.67, 1.57 ± 0.84 vs 1.39 ± 0.61, respectively, P < 0.05), whereas HDpatients had greater abdominal pain, diarrhea and constipation (GSRS: 1.22 ± 0.39 vs 1.04 ± 0.19, 1.19 ± 0.53 vs 1.07 ± 0.35, 1.51 ± 0.83 vs 1.23 ± 0.58, respectively, P < 0.05). Finally, 14.8% (27/182) of HDpatients presented with more than three GI symptoms, compared to 7.2% (8/112) of PDpatients (P < 0.01). CONCLUSION:HD and PDpatients differ in prevalence, severity and diversity of GI symptoms.
Authors: R Schoonjans; Vlem B Van; W Vandamme; Heddeghem N Van; H Verdievel; R Vanholder; N Lameire; Vos M De Journal: Clin Nephrol Date: 2002-03 Impact factor: 0.975
Authors: VlemBrunoA Van; Renaat S Schoonjans; Dirk G Struijk; Johan J Verbanck; Raymond C Vanholder; BiesenWimV Van; Romain A Lefebvre; VosMartineP De; Norbert H Lameire Journal: Perit Dial Int Date: 2002 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 1.756
Authors: Alicia E Cano; Ailsa K Neil; Jin-Yong Kang; Ashley Barnabas; John B Eastwood; Stephen R Nelson; Ian Hartley; Douglas Maxwell Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2007-05-19 Impact factor: 10.864