Clement Dequidt

The Personal Dialysis Capacity Test Is Superior to the Peritoneal Equilibration Test to Discriminate Inflammation as the Cause of Fast Transport Status in Peritoneal Dialysis Patients

This study evaluated the potential of the Personal Dialysis Capacity (PDC) test to discriminate fast transport status (FTS) as a consequence of inflammation versus FTS because of other causes. This distinction is important because new therapeutic options such as icodextrin and automated peritoneal dialysis can abolish the negative impact on outcome of FTS if fast transport is not caused by inflammation. A PDC test and a Peritoneal Equilibration Test (PET) were performed in 135 incident PD patients. Membrane characteristics were related with baseline biochemical parameters and C-reactive protein. After correction for other covariates, only large pore flux (J(v)L) but not surface area over diffusion distance (A0/dX) or dialysate over plasma concentration was related to C-reactive protein. Using the PDC test for detection of inflammation, positive and negative predictive values were 16/36 and 80/99, respectively, whereas with PET, positive predictive value was 5/20 and negative predictive value 92/115 (chi2 = 0.009). In a Cox regression for patient survival with correction for age, a J(v)L higher than expected by the surface area over diffusion distance, predicted outcome (P = 0.04). Patients with inflammation had a higher J(v)L (0.21 +/- 0.12 versus 0.17 +/- 0.09; P = 0.06) and a lower ultrafiltration (89 +/- 631 versus 386 +/- 601 ml/d; P = 0.06) and urine output (878.45 +/- 533.55 versus 1322 +/- 822 ml/d; P = 0.023) than patients without inflammation. There was no difference for surface area over diffusion distance (A0/dX) or dialysate over plasma concentration. A PDC test yields far more information about the peritoneal membrane characteristics than a PET. A J(v)L higher than expected by the A0/dX is an indicator of inflammation and is related to an increased mortality. The PET is not able to discriminate between FTS because of inflammation versus because of anatomic reasons, whereas the PDC test does.

REMOVAL OF DIFFERENT CLASSES OF UREMIC TOXINS IN APD VS CAPD: A RANDOMIZED CROSS-OVER STUDY

♦ Aim: In this study, we investigated, and this for the different classes of uremic toxins, whether increasing dialysate volume by shifting from continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) to higher volume automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) increases total solute clearance. ♦ Methods: Patients on peritoneal dialysis were randomized in a cross-over design to one 24-hour session of first a CAPD regimen (3*2 L of Physioneal 1.36% and 1*2 L of icodextrin) or APD (consisting of 5 cycles of 2 L Physioneal 1.36 and 1 cycle of 2 L Extraneal), and the other week the alternate regime, each patient serving as his/her own control. Dialysate, blood and urine samples were collected and frozen for later batch analysis of concentrations of urea, creatinine, phosphorus, uric acid, hippuric acid, 3-carboxy-4-methyl-5-propyl-2-furanpropionic acid, indoxyl sulfate, indole acetic acid, and p-cresyl sulfate. For the protein-bound solutes, total and free fractions were determined. Total, peritoneal and renal clearance (K) and mass removal (MR) of each solute were calculated, using validated models. ♦ Results: In 15 patients (11 male, 3 diabetics, 56 ± 16 years, 8 on CAPD, time on peritoneal dialysis 12 ± 14 months, and residual renal function of 9.9 ± 5.4 mL/min) dialysate over plasma ratio for creatinine (D/Pcrea) was 0.62 ± 0.10. Drained volume and obtained ultrafiltration were higher with APD vs CAPD (13.3 ± 0.5 L vs 8.5 ± 0.7 L and 1.3 ± 0.5 L vs 0.5 ± 0.7 L), whereas urine output was lower (1.0 ± 0.5 L vs 1.4 ± 0.6 L). Total clearance and MR tended to be higher for CAPD vs APD for all small and water soluble solutes, but mainly because of higher renal contribution, with no difference in the peritoneal contribution. For the protein-bound solutes, no differences in clearance or mass removal were observed. ♦ Conclusion: Although the drained dialysate volume nearly doubled, APD did not result in better peritoneal clearance or solute removal vs classic CAPD. APD resulted in better ultrafiltration, but at the expense of residual urinary output and clearance.

Acute central haemodynamic effects induced by intraperitoneal glucose instillation

BACKGROUND The supposed lack of a haemodynamic impact of peritoneal dialysis (PD) has been challenged recently by the finding of a mild increase of peripheral blood pressure (BP) during an acute dwell. It is not clear whether, besides the effect of changes in intraperitoneal (IP) volume and/or pressure, IP glucose instillation and absorption plays a role in this. Therefore, we tested the impact of IP instillation of glucose on the evolution of central haemodynamic parameters, using SphygmoCor, during an acute dwell with two different glucose concentrations. METHODS Stable, non-diabetic PD patients (N = 22) were treated consecutively in a randomized, cross-over design (A then B or B then A) with one 1.36% (A) and one 3.86% (B) physioneal dwell of 100 min. Central BP was measured with SphygmoCor and blood was sampled for serum glucose and insulin levels every 20 min. Insulin resistance was defined as a Homeostatic Model Assessment Index (HOMA-index) >1.4. RESULTS Serum glucose levels rose during both the 1.36% and the 3.86% dwell, whereas insulin levels rose only during the 3.86% dwell. The increase of both glucose and insulin levels was more pronounced in patients with insulin resistance (11/22 patients). There was, however, no accompanying change versus baseline in haemodynamic parameters (carotid systolic blood pressure, diastolic BP, heart rate or augmentation index). CONCLUSION Despite substantial increases in blood glucose and insulin levels, there was no accompanying change in central haemodynamic parameters during an acute PD dwell with low or high glucose concentrations.

The choice between deceased- vs living-donor renal transplantation in children: Analysis of data from a Belgian tertiary center

Pediatric renal transplantation with a living donor (LD) has superior outcome, but there is a paucity of studies analyzing the reasons for not undertaking living donation in West‐European countries. The aim of this study was to retrospectively review the choice of donor source in our center. We also aimed to identify factors which prevented transplantation with a LD. This retrospective study was performed including children aged 2‐19 years who underwent kidney transplantation (KT) at the Ghent University Hospital between 1996 and 2016. Relevant data were collected from medical files to identify the main medical, psychological, and socio‐economic factors influencing the choice of the donor source. There were 48 patients (boys n = 33) who underwent KT. Thirty‐nine patients received a deceased donor (DD) kidney and nine patients received a LD kidney. Sixteen of 48 transplantations were preemptive. The reasons for DD KT included socio‐economic factors such as single caregiver families, one or both parents with a criminal record or convictions and religious or cultural constraints (n = 15), medical considerations (n = 13), refusal of the close relatives/parents to donate (n = 7), and acceptance of an organ from a DD while prospective donor was undergoing medical screening (n = 4). The low incidence of living kidney donation can be explained by socio‐economic and medical factors. Refusal to donate is a potentially modifiable factor and strategies aimed at education and guidance of the families might contribute to a higher incidence of living donation in our setting.