Eun-Young Seo1, Sook Hee An1, Jang-Hee Cho1, Hae Sun Suh1, Sun-Hee Park1, Hyesun Gwak1, Yong-Lim Kim1, Hunjoo Ha1. 1. Graduate School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, College of Pharmacy, Ewha Global Top5 Program, Ewha Womans University, Seoul, Korea; Department of Pharmacy, Wonkwang University, Iksan City, Jeonbuk, Korea; Division of Nephrology and Department of Internal Medicine, Kyungpook National University Hospital, Daegu, Korea; and College of Pharmacy, Pusan National University, Korea.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Residual renal function (RRF) plays an important role in outcome of peritoneal dialysis (PD) including mortality. It is, therefore, important to provide a strategy for the preservation of RRF. The objective of this study was to evaluate relative protective effects of new glucose-based multicompartmental PD solution (PDS), which is well known to be more biocompatible than glucose-based conventional PDS, on RRF compared to conventional PDS by performing a systematic review (SR) of randomized controlled trials. METHODS: We searched studies presented up to January 2014 in MEDLINE, EMBASE, the COCHRANE library, and local databases. Three independent reviewers reviewed and extracted prespecified data from each study. The random effects model, a more conservative analysis model, was used to combine trials and to perform stratified analyses based on the duration of follow-up. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane Handbook for risk of bias. Eleven articles with 1,034 patients were identified for the SR. RESULTS: The heterogeneity of the studies under 12 months was very high, and the heterogeneity decreased substantially when we stratified studies by the duration of follow-up. The mean difference of the studies after 12 months was 0.46 mL/min/1.73 m(2) (95% confidence interval = 0.25 to + 0.67). CONCLUSION: New PDS showed the effect to preserve and improve RRF for long-term use compared to conventional PDS, even though it did not show a significant difference to preserve RRF for short-term use.
INTRODUCTION: Residual renal function (RRF) plays an important role in outcome of peritoneal dialysis (PD) including mortality. It is, therefore, important to provide a strategy for the preservation of RRF. The objective of this study was to evaluate relative protective effects of new glucose-based multicompartmental PD solution (PDS), which is well known to be more biocompatible than glucose-based conventional PDS, on RRF compared to conventional PDS by performing a systematic review (SR) of randomized controlled trials. METHODS: We searched studies presented up to January 2014 in MEDLINE, EMBASE, the COCHRANE library, and local databases. Three independent reviewers reviewed and extracted prespecified data from each study. The random effects model, a more conservative analysis model, was used to combine trials and to perform stratified analyses based on the duration of follow-up. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane Handbook for risk of bias. Eleven articles with 1,034 patients were identified for the SR. RESULTS: The heterogeneity of the studies under 12 months was very high, and the heterogeneity decreased substantially when we stratified studies by the duration of follow-up. The mean difference of the studies after 12 months was 0.46 mL/min/1.73 m(2) (95% confidence interval = 0.25 to + 0.67). CONCLUSION: New PDS showed the effect to preserve and improve RRF for long-term use compared to conventional PDS, even though it did not show a significant difference to preserve RRF for short-term use.
Authors: S Jones; C J Holmes; R T Krediet; R Mackenzie; D Faict; A Tranaeus; J D Williams; G A Coles; N Topley Journal: Kidney Int Date: 2001-04 Impact factor: 10.612
Authors: Janusz Witowski; Katarzyna Korybalska; Justyna Wisniewska; Andrzej Breborowicz; Gerhard M Gahl; Ulrich Frei; Jutta Passlick-Deetjen; Achim Jörres Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2000-04 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: Sergei V Chetyrkin; Wenhui Zhang; Billy G Hudson; Anthony S Serianni; Paul A Voziyan Journal: Biochemistry Date: 2007-12-28 Impact factor: 3.162
Authors: Seychelle Yohanna; Ali M A Alkatheeri; Scott K Brimble; Brendan McCormick; Arthur Iansavitchous; Peter G Blake; Arsh K Jain Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2015-06-05 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Monika Lichodziejewska-Niemierko; Michał Chmielewski; Maria Dudziak; Alicja Ryta; Bolesław Rutkowski Journal: Perit Dial Int Date: 2015-10-16 Impact factor: 1.756
Authors: Mario Bonomini; Sara Di Silvestre; Pamela Di Tomo; Natalia Di Pietro; Domitilla Mandatori; Lorenzo Di Liberato; Vittorio Sirolli; Francesco Chiarelli; Cesare Indiveri; Assunta Pandolfi; Arduino Arduini Journal: Drug Des Devel Ther Date: 2016-11-28 Impact factor: 4.162