Seung Seok Han1, Jae Yoon Park1, Soohee Kang2, Kyoung Hoon Kim3, Dong-Ryeol Ryu4, Hyunwook Kim5, Kwon Wook Joo6, Chun Soo Lim7, Yon Su Kim6, Dong Ki Kim8. 1. Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea; 2. Medical Research Collaborating Center and. 3. Department of Public Health, Graduate School, Korea University, Seoul, Korea; 4. Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, Ewha Womans University, Seoul, Korea; 5. Department of Internal Medicine, Wonkwang University College of Medicine, Sanbon Hospital, Gyeonggi-do, Korea; and. 6. Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea; Kidney Research Institute, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Korea; 7. Kidney Research Institute, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Korea; Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University Boramae Medical Center, Seoul, Korea. 8. Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea; Kidney Research Institute, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Korea; dkkim73@gmail.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Identifying the appropriate choice between hemodialysis (HD) and peritoneal dialysis (PD) is an unresolved issue in elderly patients with ESRD, who are at high risk for death but have a low chance of receiving kidney transplantation. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: Data on 13,065 incident dialysis Korean patients (age≥65 years) receiving HD (n=10,675) or PD (n=2390) were obtained from the Korean Health Insurance dataset. Multiple statistical approaches, including the multivariate Cox model, were used to compare mortality between Korean patients receiving PD and those receiving HD. Subsequently, meta-analysis of previous comparison studies (published since the year 2000; population-based studies) and the Korean dataset was performed. RESULTS: During a mean duration of 1.8±1.3 years (maximum of 5 years), the Korean PD group had a higher mortality rate than the Korean HD group (hazard ratio [HR], 1.20 [95% confidence interval (95% CI), 1.13 to 1.28]; P<0.001 by multivariate Cox model). The discrepancy between the two modalities was greater in the presence of certain conditions, such as diabetes mellitus or longer dialysis duration. In the meta-analysis, 15 studies involving >631,421 elderly patients were reviewed. Compared with HD, the pooled HR with PD was 1.10 (95% CI, 1.01 to 1.20). When the meta-analysis was stratified by confounding factors, the survival benefit from HD was particularly strong in subgroups that had diabetes mellitus, had long dialysis duration (>1 year), or contained cohorts starting dialysis in the 1990s. CONCLUSIONS: A meta-analysis that included results in Korean patients suggests a higher risk for death in elderly patients receiving PD than in those receiving HD.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Identifying the appropriate choice between hemodialysis (HD) and peritoneal dialysis (PD) is an unresolved issue in elderly patients with ESRD, who are at high risk for death but have a low chance of receiving kidney transplantation. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: Data on 13,065 incident dialysis Korean patients (age≥65 years) receiving HD (n=10,675) or PD (n=2390) were obtained from the Korean Health Insurance dataset. Multiple statistical approaches, including the multivariate Cox model, were used to compare mortality between Korean patients receiving PD and those receiving HD. Subsequently, meta-analysis of previous comparison studies (published since the year 2000; population-based studies) and the Korean dataset was performed. RESULTS: During a mean duration of 1.8±1.3 years (maximum of 5 years), the Korean PD group had a higher mortality rate than the Korean HD group (hazard ratio [HR], 1.20 [95% confidence interval (95% CI), 1.13 to 1.28]; P<0.001 by multivariate Cox model). The discrepancy between the two modalities was greater in the presence of certain conditions, such as diabetes mellitus or longer dialysis duration. In the meta-analysis, 15 studies involving >631,421 elderly patients were reviewed. Compared with HD, the pooled HR with PD was 1.10 (95% CI, 1.01 to 1.20). When the meta-analysis was stratified by confounding factors, the survival benefit from HD was particularly strong in subgroups that had diabetes mellitus, had long dialysis duration (>1 year), or contained cohorts starting dialysis in the 1990s. CONCLUSIONS: A meta-analysis that included results in Korean patients suggests a higher risk for death in elderly patients receiving PD than in those receiving HD.
Authors: Wolfgang C Winkelmayer; Robert J Glynn; Murray A Mittleman; Raisa Levin; Joseph S Pliskin; Jerry Avorn Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2002-09 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: Bernard G Jaar; Josef Coresh; Laura C Plantinga; Nancy E Fink; Michael J Klag; Andrew S Levey; Nathan W Levin; John H Sadler; Alan Kliger; Neil R Powe Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2005-08-02 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Fabian Termorshuizen; Johanna C Korevaar; Friedo W Dekker; Jeannette G Van Manen; Elisabeth W Boeschoten; Raymond T Krediet Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2003-11 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: Johanna C Korevaar; G W Feith; Friedo W Dekker; Jeannette G van Manen; Elisabeth W Boeschoten; Patrick M M Bossuyt; Raymond T Krediet Journal: Kidney Int Date: 2003-12 Impact factor: 10.612
Authors: Bernard Canaud; Stefano Stuard; Frank Laukhuf; Grace Yan; Maria Ines Gomez Canabal; Paik Seong Lim; Michael A Kraus Journal: Clin Kidney J Date: 2021-12-27
Authors: Seung Seok Han; Dong Ryeol Ryu; Kwon Wook Joo; Chun Soo Lim; Yong Lim Kim; Shin Wook Kang; Yon Su Kim; Dong Ki Kim Journal: J Korean Med Sci Date: 2017-09 Impact factor: 2.153