5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Diferencias en la hospitalización por causas infecciosas entre pacientes con hemodiálisis y diálisis peritoneal Translated title: Differences in hospitalization due to infectious causes between patients with hemodialysis and those with peritoneal dialysis

      research-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

          Resumen Introducción: aproximadamente el 50% del gasto anual en salud de los pacientes con enfermedad renal crónica en diálisis está relacionada con hospitalizaciones; las causas infecciosas representan la segunda causa de consulta con una alta morbilidad y mortalidad. No existen estudios donde se compare el tiempo de hospitalización por causas infecciosas entre las diferentes opciones de diálisis. Objetivo: determinar las diferencias en tiempos de hospitalización que se deriva del manejo de patologías infecciosas en pacientes con enfermedad renal crónica en diálisis, comparando los pacientes que se encuentran en hemodiálisis vs diálisis peritoneal. Material y métodos: estudio de cohorte retrospectiva, dinámica, de pacientes en hemodiálisis y diálisis peritoneal que ingresan al servicio de urgencias del Hospital Universitario Mayor por patologías infecciosas. Los pacientes que ingresaron al estudio se incluyeron por métodos no probabilísticos. El cálculo de tamaño de muestra se realizó por comparación de medias. Para el análisis estadístico se incluyeron 172 pacientes en hemodiálisis y 85 en diálisis peritoneal. Resultados: el tiempo de hospitalización es mayor en pacientes con hemodiálisis en comparación con los pacientes en diálisis peritoneal, 12 (RIC 8-21) vs 10 (RIC 6.5-13) días respectivamente, p= 0.004. Conclusiones: el tiempo de hospitalización por causas infecciosas es mayor en los pacientes con hemodiálisis que los de diálisis peritoneal, adicionalmente la incidencia de infecciones asociadas a la terapia en nuestra población es menor que lo reportado a nivel mundial.(Acta Med Colomb 2020; 45. DOI:https://doi.org/10.36104/amc.2020.1222).

          Translated abstract

          Abstract Introduction: approximately 50% of the annual health care expenditure of patients with chronic kidney disease on dialysis is related to hospitalizations. Infections represent the second reason for consultation, with a high morbidity and mortality. There are no studies comparing hospitalization time due to infectious causes between the different dialysis options. Objective: to determine the difference in hospitalization time for treatment of infectious diseases in patients with chronic kidney disease on dialysis, comparing patients on hemodialysis vs. peritoneal dialysis. Materials and methods: a retrospective, dynamic cohort study of patients on hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis who were admitted to the emergency department at the Hospital Universitario Mayor due to infectious diseases. The study patients were included using nonprobabilistic methods. The sample size was calculated by comparison of means. A total of 172 hemodialysis patients and 85 peritoneal dialysis patients were included for statistical analysis. Results: hospitalization time is greater in patients on hemodialysis than in patients on peritoneal dialysis; 12 (IQR 8-21) vs. 10 (IQR 6.5-13) days, respectively, p= 0.004. Conclusions: hospitalization time due to infectious causes is greater in patients on hemodialysis than in patients on peritoneal dialysis. In addition, the incidence of treatment-related infections in our population is lower than the globally reported incidence.(Acta Med Colomb 2020; 45. DOI:https://doi.org/10.36104/amc.2020.1222).

          Related collections

          Most cited references26

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

          KDIGO 2012 clinical practice guideline for the evaluation and management of chronic kidney disease

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

            Infection risk with bolus versus maintenance iron supplementation in hemodialysis patients.

            Intravenous iron may promote bacterial growth and impair host defense, but the risk of infection associated with iron supplementation is not well defined. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of hemodialysis patients to compare the safety of bolus dosing, which provides a large amount of iron over a short period of time on an as-needed basis, with maintenance dosing, which provides smaller amounts of iron on a regular schedule to maintain iron repletion. Using clinical data from 117,050 patients of a large US dialysis provider merged with data from Medicare's ESRD program, we estimated the effects of iron dosing patterns during repeated 1-month exposure periods on risks of mortality and infection-related hospitalizations during the subsequent 3 months. Of 776,203 exposure/follow-up pairs, 13% involved bolus dosing, 49% involved maintenance dosing, and 38% did not include exposure to iron. Multivariable additive risk models found that patients receiving bolus versus maintenance iron were at increased risk of infection-related hospitalization (risk difference [RD], 25 additional events/1000 patient-years; 95% confidence interval [CI], 16 to 33) during follow-up. Risks were largest among patients with a catheter (RD, 73 events/1000 patient-years; 95% CI, 48 to 99) and a recent infection (RD, 57 events/1000 patient-years; 95% CI, 19 to 99). We also observed an association between bolus dosing and infection-related mortality. Compared with no iron, maintenance dosing did not associate with increased risks for adverse outcomes. These results suggest that maintenance iron supplementation may result in fewer infections than bolus dosing, particularly among patients with a catheter.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Renal replacement therapy in Europe: a summary of the 2012 ERA-EDTA Registry Annual Report.

              This article summarizes the 2012 European Renal Association-European Dialysis and Transplant Association Registry Annual Report (available at www.era-edta-reg.org) with a specific focus on older patients (defined as ≥65 years).
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                amc
                Acta Medica Colombiana
                Acta Med Colomb
                Asociacion Colombiana de Medicina Interna (Bogotá, Distrito Capital, Colombia )
                0120-2448
                March 2020
                : 45
                : 1
                : 19-24
                Affiliations
                [2] Bogotá D.C orgnameHospital Universitario Mayor Colombia
                [3] Bogotá D.C orgnameNefrólogos RTS-Baxter Colombia Colombia
                [1] Bogotá D.C orgnameUniversidad del Rosario orgdiv1Hospital Universitario Mayor Colombia
                Article
                S0120-24482020000100019 S0120-2448(20)04500100019
                10.36104/amc.2020.1222
                e517407f-9503-470f-820f-557a4b38e6b1

                This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

                History
                : 29 May 2018
                : 05 February 2020
                Page count
                Figures: 0, Tables: 0, Equations: 0, References: 35, Pages: 6
                Product

                SciELO Colombia

                Categories
                Trabajos originales

                internación hospitalaria,enfermedades infecciosas,kidney failure,chronic kidney disease,dialysis, infectious diseases,renal crónica,hospital admission. enfermedad renal crónica,enfermedad crónica renal,diálisis,enfermedad renal crónica

                Comments

                Comment on this article