12
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Choice of dialysis modality prior to kidney transplantation: Does it matter?

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The population of patients with end stage renal disease (ESRD) is increasing, lengthening waiting lists for kidney transplantation. Majority of the patients are not able to receive a kidney transplant in timely manner even though it is well established that patient survival and quality of life after kidney transplantation is far better when compared to being on dialysis. A large number of patients who desire a kidney transplant ultimately end up needing some form of dialysis therapy. Most of incident ESRD patients choose hemodialysis (HD) over peritoneal dialysis (PD) as the modality of choice in the United States, even though studies have favored PD as a better choice of pre-transplant dialysis modality than HD. PD is largely underutilized in the United States due to variety of reasons. As a part of the decision making process, patients are often educated how the choice regarding modality of dialysis would fit into their life but it is not clear and not usually discussed, how it can affect eventual kidney transplantation in the future. In this article we would like to discuss ESRD demographics and outcomes, modality of dialysis and kidney transplant related events. We have summarized the data comparing PD and HD as the modality of dialysis and its impact on allograft and recipient outcomes after kidney transplantation.

          Related collections

          Most cited references66

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Delayed graft function in the kidney transplant.

          Acute kidney injury occurs with kidney transplantation and too frequently progresses to the clinical diagnosis of delayed graft function (DGF). Poor kidney function in the first week of graft life is detrimental to the longevity of the allograft. Challenges to understand the root cause of DGF include several pathologic contributors derived from the donor (ischemic injury, inflammatory signaling) and recipient (reperfusion injury, the innate immune response and the adaptive immune response). Progressive demand for renal allografts has generated new organ categories that continue to carry high risk for DGF for deceased donor organ transplantation. New therapies seek to subdue the inflammatory response in organs with high likelihood to benefit from intervention. Future success in suppressing the development of DGF will require a concerted effort to anticipate and treat tissue injury throughout the arc of the transplantation process. ©2011 The Authors Journal compilation © 2011 The American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Effects of increased peritoneal clearances on mortality rates in peritoneal dialysis: ADEMEX, a prospective, randomized, controlled trial.

            Small-solute clearance targets for peritoneal dialysis (PD) have been based on the tacit assumption that peritoneal and renal clearances are equivalent and therefore additive. Although several studies have established that patient survival is directly correlated with renal clearances, there have been no randomized, controlled, interventional trials examining the effects of increases in peritoneal small-solute clearances on patient survival. A prospective, randomized, controlled, clinical trial was performed to study the effects of increased peritoneal small-solute clearances on clinical outcomes among patients with end-stage renal disease who were being treated with PD. A total of 965 subjects were randomly assigned to the intervention or control group (in a 1:1 ratio). Subjects in the control group continued to receive their preexisting PD prescriptions, which consisted of four daily exchanges with 2 L of standard PD solution. The subjects in the intervention group were treated with a modified prescription, to achieve a peritoneal creatinine clearance (pCrCl) of 60 L/wk per 1.73 m(2). The primary endpoint was death. The minimal follow-up period was 2 yr. The study groups were similar with respect to demographic characteristics, causes of renal disease, prevalence of coexisting conditions, residual renal function, peritoneal clearances before intervention, hematocrit values, and multiple indicators of nutritional status. In the control group, peritoneal creatinine clearance (pCrCl) and peritoneal urea clearance (Kt/V) values remained constant for the duration of the study. In the intervention group, pCrCl and peritoneal Kt/V values predictably increased and remained separated from the values for the control group for the entire duration of the study (P < 0.01). Patient survival was similar for the control and intervention groups in an intent-to-treat analysis, with a relative risk of death (intervention/control) of 1.00 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.80 to 1.24]. Overall, the control group exhibited a 1-yr survival of 85.5% (CI, 82.2 to 88.7%) and a 2-yr survival of 68.3% (CI, 64.2 to 72.9%). Similarly, the intervention group exhibited a 1-yr survival of 83.9% (CI, 80.6 to 87.2%) and a 2-yr survival of 69.3% (CI, 65.1 to 73.6%). An as-treated analysis revealed similar results (overall relative risk = 0.93; CI, 0.71 to 1.22; P = 0.6121). Mortality rates for the two groups remained similar even after adjustment for factors known to be associated with survival for patients undergoing PD (e.g., age, diabetes mellitus, serum albumin levels, normalized protein equivalent of total nitrogen appearance, and anuria). This study provides evidence that increases in peritoneal small-solute clearances within the range studied have a neutral effect on patient survival, even when the groups are stratified according to a variety of factors (age, diabetes mellitus, serum albumin levels, normalized protein equivalent of total nitrogen appearance, and anuria) known to affect survival. No clear survival advantage was obtained with increases in peritoneal small-solute clearances within the range achieved in this study.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Peritoneal dialysis first: rationale.

              The use of peritoneal dialysis (PD) has become wide spread since the introduction of continuous ambulatory PD more than 25 years ago. Over this time, many advances have been made and PD is an alternative to hemodialysis (HD), with excellent comparable survival, lower cost, and improved quality of life. The percentage of prevalent PD patients in the United States is approximately 7%, which is significantly lower compared with the 15% PD prevalence from the mid-1980s. Despite comparable survival of HD and PD and improved PD technique survival over the last few years, the percentage of patients performing PD in the United States has declined. The increased numbers of in-center HD units, physician comfort with the modality, perceived superiority of HD, and reimbursement incentives have all contributed to the underutilization of PD. In addition to a higher transplantation rate among patients treated with PD in the United States, an important reason for the low PD prevalence is the transfer to HD. There are various reasons for the transfer (e.g., episodes of peritonitis, membrane failure, patient fatigue, etc.). This review discusses the various factors that contribute to PD underutilization and the rationale and strategies to implement "PD first" and how to maintain it. The PD first concept implies that when feasible, PD should be offered as the first dialysis modality. This concept of PD first and HD second must not be seen as a competition between therapies, but rather that they are complementary, keeping in mind the long-term goals for the patient.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                World J Nephrol
                WJN
                World Journal of Nephrology
                Baishideng Publishing Group Inc
                2220-6124
                21 January 2019
                21 January 2019
                : 8
                : 1
                : 1-10
                Affiliations
                Nephrology and Internal Medicine, New Jersey Kidney Care, Jersey city, NJ 07305, United States. 26.deepika@ 123456gmail.com
                Nephrology and Internal Medicine, New Jersey Kidney Care, Jersey city, NJ 07305, United States
                Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Nephrology, RWJ-Jersey City Medical Center, Jersey city, NJ 07305, United States
                Nephrology and Internal Medicine, New Jersey Kidney Care, Jersey city, NJ 07305, United States
                Author notes

                Author contributions: All authors have contributed equally to the paper. Goel N and Haddad DB have reviewed literature over various topics discussed in this review paper.

                Corresponding author: Deepika Jain, MD, Attending Doctor, Department of Nephrology, New Jersey Kidney Care, 26 Greenville Avenue, suite 1, Jersey city, NJ 07305, United States. 26.deepika@ 123456gmail.com

                Telephone: +1-201-3338222 Fax: +1-201-3330095

                Article
                jWJN.v8.i1.pg1
                10.5527/wjn.v8.i1.1
                6354079
                30705867
                6b88aa84-a986-4997-94b0-8dec1c817a8a
                ©The Author(s) 2019. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.

                This article is an open-access article which was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial.

                History
                : 26 September 2018
                : 5 November 2018
                : 9 January 2019
                Categories
                Review

                dialysis,kidney transplant,outcomes,peritoneal dialysis,health literacy

                Comments

                Comment on this article