Hatem Ali1, Karim Soliman2, Mahmoud M Mohamed3, Ahmed Daoud4, Taimoor Shafiq1, Tibor Fülöp2,5, Jyoti Baharani6. 1. Renal Department, University Hospitals of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK. 2. Department of Medicine, Division of Nephrology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA. 3. University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN, USA. 4. Department of Renal Medicine, Cairo University Hospitals, Cairo, Egypt. 5. Medicine Services, Ralph H. Johnson VA Medical Center, Charleston, SC, USA. 6. Renal Department, University Hospitals of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK. Jyoti.baharani@heartofengland.nhs.uk.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Cognitive dysfunction is a major consequence of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and has further detrimental effects on both functionality and the quality of life for patients. While peritoneal dialysis is generally advocated in ESRD, there is a substantial knowledge gap about the differential effects of chronic dialysis modalities on cognitive dysfunction and decline. The aim of this meta-analysis is to evaluate cognitive function in peritoneal dialysis versus hemodialysis patients. METHODS: We performed a systematic review in different databases to identify studies that assessed the effect of different dialysis modalities on cognitive functions. Inclusion criteria for our meta-analysis were all studies that compared the effects of peritoneal dialysis on cognitive functions compared to intermittent hemodialysis. The data collected were the name of the first author, journal title, year of publication, country where the study was conducted, number of patients in the peritoneal dialysis and hemodialysis arms and methods of assessment of cognitive functions. RESULTS: Out of 2769 abstracts reviewed in different databases, 11 papers were included in our meta-analysis. Altogether, 195,774 patients were included in the final analysis. The forest plot analysis of the rate of cognitive impairment in different dialysis modalities showed decreased risk of cognitive impairment in the peritoneal dialysis population compared to hemodialysis patients (relative risk = 0.634, confidence interval ranges from 0.508 to 0.790). There was evidence of significant heterogeneity among studies with p < 0.0001 and I2 = 85.5%. The sensitivity analysis limited to studies on patients younger than 65 years of age showed similar results (relative risk = 0.516; 95% confidence intervals: 0.379-0.704). CONCLUSION: Patients on peritoneal dialysis demonstrated a lower odd of cognitive dysfunction compared to those on hemodialysis. Future prospective studies should assess cognitive decline as a meaningful outcome in dialysis patients.
INTRODUCTION:Cognitive dysfunction is a major consequence of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and has further detrimental effects on both functionality and the quality of life for patients. While peritoneal dialysis is generally advocated in ESRD, there is a substantial knowledge gap about the differential effects of chronic dialysis modalities on cognitive dysfunction and decline. The aim of this meta-analysis is to evaluate cognitive function in peritoneal dialysis versus hemodialysis patients. METHODS: We performed a systematic review in different databases to identify studies that assessed the effect of different dialysis modalities on cognitive functions. Inclusion criteria for our meta-analysis were all studies that compared the effects of peritoneal dialysis on cognitive functions compared to intermittent hemodialysis. The data collected were the name of the first author, journal title, year of publication, country where the study was conducted, number of patients in the peritoneal dialysis and hemodialysis arms and methods of assessment of cognitive functions. RESULTS: Out of 2769 abstracts reviewed in different databases, 11 papers were included in our meta-analysis. Altogether, 195,774 patients were included in the final analysis. The forest plot analysis of the rate of cognitive impairment in different dialysis modalities showed decreased risk of cognitive impairment in the peritoneal dialysis population compared to hemodialysis patients (relative risk = 0.634, confidence interval ranges from 0.508 to 0.790). There was evidence of significant heterogeneity among studies with p < 0.0001 and I2 = 85.5%. The sensitivity analysis limited to studies on patients younger than 65 years of age showed similar results (relative risk = 0.516; 95% confidence intervals: 0.379-0.704). CONCLUSION:Patients on peritoneal dialysis demonstrated a lower odd of cognitive dysfunction compared to those on hemodialysis. Future prospective studies should assess cognitive decline as a meaningful outcome in dialysis patients.
Authors: Mark J Sarnak; Hocine Tighiouart; Tammy M Scott; Kristina V Lou; Eric P Sorensen; Lena M Giang; David A Drew; Kamran Shaffi; James A Strom; Ajay K Singh; Daniel E Weiner Journal: Neurology Date: 2013-01-09 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Manjula Kurella Tamura; Brett Larive; Mark L Unruh; John B Stokes; Allen Nissenson; Ravindra L Mehta; Glenn M Chertow Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2010-06-24 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: H Ozcan; A Yucel; U Z Avşar; E Cankaya; N Yucel; H Gözübüyük; F Eren; M Keles; B Aydınlı Journal: Transplant Proc Date: 2015-06 Impact factor: 1.066
Authors: Robert Perneczky; Corina Pohl; Christian Sorg; Julia Hartmann; Katja Komossa; Panagiotis Alexopoulos; Stefan Wagenpfeil; Alexander Kurz Journal: Age Ageing Date: 2006-03-02 Impact factor: 10.668
Authors: D L Bachman; P A Wolf; R Linn; J E Knoefel; J Cobb; A Belanger; R B D'Agostino; L R White Journal: Neurology Date: 1992-01 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Frances E Tiffin-Richards; Ana S Costa; Bernhard Holschbach; Rolf D Frank; Athina Vassiliadou; Thilo Krüger; Karl Kuckuck; Theresa Gross; Frank Eitner; Jürgen Floege; Jörg B Schulz; Kathrin Reetz Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-10-27 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Ahmed Fayed; Ayman Tarek; Mohamed I Refaat; Sameh Abouzeid; Sohail Abdul Salim; Lajos Zsom; Tibor Fülöp; Karim M Soliman; Mohamed A Elmallawany Journal: Ren Fail Date: 2021-12 Impact factor: 2.606