Yeoungjee Cho

Encapsulating peritoneal sclerosis: incidence, predictors, and outcomes.

Encapsulating peritoneal sclerosis is a complication of peritoneal dialysis characterized by persistent, intermittent, or recurrent adhesive bowel obstruction. Here we examined the incidence, predictors, and outcomes of encapsulating peritoneal sclerosis (peritoneal fibrosis) by multivariate logistic regression in incident peritoneal dialysis patients in Australia and New Zealand. Matched case-control analysis compared the survival of patients with controls equivalent for age, gender, diabetes, and time on peritoneal dialysis. Of 7618 patients measured over a 13-year period, encapsulating peritoneal sclerosis was diagnosed in 33, giving an incidence rate of 1.8/1000 patient-years. The respective cumulative incidences of peritoneal sclerosis at 3, 5, and 8 years were 0.3, 0.8, and 3.9%. This condition was independently predicted by younger age and the duration of peritoneal dialysis, but not the rate of peritonitis. Twenty-six patients were diagnosed while still on peritoneal dialysis. Median survival following diagnosis was 4 years and not statistically different from that of 132 matched controls. Of the 18 patients who died, only 7 were attributed directly to peritoneal sclerosis. Our study shows that encapsulating peritoneal sclerosis is a rare condition, predicted by younger age and the duration of peritoneal dialysis. The risk of death is relatively low and not appreciably different from that of competing risks for mortality in matched dialysis control patients.

Peritoneal Dialysis–Related Peritonitis: Towards Improving Evidence, Practices, and Outcomes

Peritonitis is a common serious complication of peritoneal dialysis that results in considerable morbidity, mortality, and health care costs. It also significantly limits the use of this important dialysis modality. Despite its importance as a patient safety issue, peritonitis practices and outcomes vary markedly and unacceptably among different centers, regions, and countries. This article reviews peritonitis risk factors, diagnosis, treatment, and prevention, particularly focusing on potential drivers of variable practices and outcomes, controversial or unresolved areas, and promising avenues warranting further research. Potential strategies for augmenting the existing limited evidence base and reducing the gap between evidence-based best practice and actual practice also are discussed.

The impact of neutral-pH peritoneal dialysates with reduced glucose degradation products on clinical outcomes in peritoneal dialysis patients

Neutral-pH peritoneal dialysates, with reduced glucose degradation products (GDPs), have been developed to reduce peritoneal membrane damage. Here our review evaluated the impact of these solutions on clinical outcomes using data from The Cochrane CENTRAL Registry, MEDLINE, Embase, and reference lists for randomized trials of biocompatible solutions. Summary estimates of effect were obtained using a random-effects model of 20 eligible trials encompassing 1383 patients. The quality of studies was generally poor, such that 13 studies had greater than a 20% loss to follow-up and only 3 trials reported adequate concealment of allocation. Use of neutral-pH dialysates with reduced GDPs resulted in larger urine volumes (7 trials; 520 patients; mean difference 126 ml/day, 95% CI 27-226), improved residual renal function after 12 months (6 trials; 360 patients; standardized mean difference 0.31, 95% confidence interval 0.10-0.52), and a trend to reduced inflow pain (1 trial; 58 patients; relative risk 0.51, 95% CI 0.24-1.08). However, there was no significant effect on body weight, hospitalization, peritoneal solute transport rate, peritoneal small-solute clearance, peritonitis, technique failure, patient survival, or adverse events. No significant harms were identified. Thus, based on generally poor quality trials, the use of neutral-pH peritoneal dialysates with reduced GDPs resulted in greater urine volumes and residual renal function after 12 months, but without other clinical benefits. Larger, better-quality studies are needed for accurate evaluation of the impact of these newer dialysates on patient-level hard outcomes.

Impact of icodextrin on clinical outcomes in peritoneal dialysis: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND Although icodextrin has been shown to augment peritoneal ultrafiltration in peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients, its impact upon other clinical end points, such as technique survival, remains uncertain. This systematic review evaluated the effect of icodextrin use on patient level clinical outcomes. METHODS The Cochrane CENTRAL Registry, MEDLINE, Embase and reference lists were searched (last search 13 September 2012) for randomized controlled trials of icodextrin versus glucose in the long dwell exchange. Summary estimates of effect were obtained using a random effects model. RESULTS Eleven eligible trials (1222 patients) were identified. There was a significant reduction in episodes of uncontrolled fluid overload [two trials; 100 patients; relative risk (RR) 0.30, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.15-0.59] and improvement in peritoneal ultrafiltration [four trials; 102 patients; mean difference (MD) 448.54 mL/day, 95% CI 289.28-607.80] without compromising residual renal function [four trials; 114 patients; standardized MD (SMD) 0.12, 95% CI -0.26 to 0.49] or urine output (three trials; 69 patients; MD -88.88, 95% CI -356.88 to 179.12) with icodextrin use for up to 2 years. There was no significant effect on peritonitis incidence (five trials; 607 patients; RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.76-1.23), peritoneal creatinine clearance (three trials; 237 patients; SMD 0.36, 95% CI -0.24 to 0.96), technique failure (three trials; 290 patients; RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.28-1.20), patient survival (six trials; 816 patients; RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.32-2.13) or adverse events. CONCLUSIONS Icodextrin prescription improved peritoneal ultrafiltration, mitigated uncontrolled fluid overload and was not associated with increased risk of adverse events. No effects of icodextrin on technique or patient survival were observed, although trial sample sizes and follow-up durations were limited.

Recent Clinical Trials of Pharmacologic Cardiovascular Interventions in Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease: An Update.

As a consequence of both traditional and non-traditional risk factors, cardiovascular disease is over-represented, and the leading cause of mortality, among patients with Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD). Whilst recommendations for reducing cardiovascular risk in the general population exist, their applicability to the CKD population is questionable due to the exclusion of CKD patients from the majority of contemporary cardiovascular interventional studies. The aim of this review is to critically evaluate the literature regarding pharmacologic cardiovascular interventions in patients with CKD, with an emphasis on studies published since our 2008 review. Interventions discussed include erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (TREAT, U.S. Normal Hematocrit, CHOIR, CREATE, Palmer meta-analysis); statins (SHARP, AURORA, PPP, 4D, ALERT); Fibrates (VA-HIT); Folic Acid (ASFAST, US FOLIC acid trial, HOST); Antihypertensive Agents, Including Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors, angiotensin-receptor blockers, Beta-blockers and Combination therapy (Cice et al, FOSDIAL, Agarwal et al, ONTARGET); sevelamer (DCOR); Cinacalcet (ADVANCE, EVOLVE, Cunningham meta-analysis); Anti-oxidants (SPACE, HOPE, ATIC); Aspirin (HOT study re-analysis); vitamin D analogues (PRIMO); and multidisciplinary intervention (LANDMARK). Unfortunately, there remains a paucity of evidence in this area and a large number of methodologically poor quality studies with negative results. It is possible that these interventions do not have the same positive effect in CKD patients due to differences in the pathogenesis driving cardiovascular disease burden, such as altered bone metabolism and calcific vascular disease. Further well-designed studies with appropriately selected study populations and patient level outcomes are required. Until such time, physicians must consider on an individual patient basis the appropriateness of these interventions.

Seasonal variation in peritoneal dialysis-associated peritonitis: a multi-centre registry study

BACKGROUND The role of seasonal variation in peritoneal dialysis (PD)-related peritonitis has been limited to a few small single-centre studies. METHODS Using all 6610 Australian patients receiving PD between 1 October 2003 and 31 December 2008, we evaluated the influence of seasons on peritonitis rates (Poisson regression) and outcomes (multivariable logistic regression). RESULTS The overall rate of peritonitis was 0.59 episodes per patient-year of treatment. Using winter as the reference season, the peritonitis incidence rate ratios (95% confidence interval) for summer, autumn and spring were 1.02 (0.95-1.09), 1.01 (0.94-1.08) and 0.99 (0.92-1.06), respectively. Significant seasonal variations were observed in the rates of peritonitis caused by coagulase-negative Staphylococci (spring and summer peaks), corynebacteria (winter peak) and Gram-negative organisms (summer and autumn peaks). There were trends to seasonal variations in fungal peritonitis (summer and autumn peaks) and pseudomonas peritonitis (summer peak). No significant seasonal variations were observed for other organisms. Peritonitis outcomes did not significantly vary according to season. CONCLUSIONS Seasonal variation has no appreciable influence on overall PD peritonitis rates or clinical outcomes. Nevertheless, significant seasonal variations were observed in the rates of peritonitis due to specific microorganisms, which may allow institutions to more precisely target infection control strategies prior to higher risk seasons.

Clinical Causes of Inflammation in Peritoneal Dialysis Patients

Inflammation at both systemic and local intraperitoneal levels commonly affects peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients. Interest in inflammatory markers as targets of therapeutic intervention has been considerable as they are recognised as predictors of poor clinical outcomes. However, prior to embarking on strategies to reduce inflammatory burden, it is of paramount importance to define the underlying processes that drive the chronic active inflammatory status. The present review aims to comprehensively describe clinical causes of inflammation in PD patients to which potential future strategies may be targeted.

Association of Biocompatible Peritoneal Dialysis Solutions with Peritonitis Risk, Treatment, and Outcomes

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES The effect of biocompatible peritoneal dialysis (PD) solutions on PD-related peritonitis is unclear. This study sought to evaluate the relationship between use of biocompatible solutions and the probability of occurrence or clinical outcomes of peritonitis. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS The study included all incident Australian patients receiving PD between January 1, 2007, and December 31, 2010, using Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry data. All multicompartment PD solutions of neutral pH were categorized as biocompatible solutions. The independent predictors of peritonitis and the use of biocompatible solutions were determined by multivariable, multilevel mixed-effects Poisson and logistic regression analysis, respectively. Sensitivity analyses, including propensity score matching, were performed. RESULTS Use of biocompatible solutions gradually declined (from 7.5% in 2007 to 4.2% in 2010), with preferential use among smaller units and among younger patients without diabetes mellitus. Treatment with biocompatible solution was associated with significantly greater overall rate of peritonitis (0.67 versus 0.47 episode per patient-year; incidence rate ratio, 1.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.19 to 1.89) and with shorter time to first peritonitis (hazard ratio [HR], 1.48; 95% CI, 1.17 to 1.87), a finding replicated in propensity score-matched cohorts (HR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.09 to 1.71). CONCLUSIONS In an observational registry study, use of biocompatible PD solutions was associated with higher overall peritonitis rates and shorter time to first peritonitis. Further randomized studies adequately powered for a primary peritonitis outcome are warranted.

The effects of living distantly from peritoneal dialysis units on peritonitis risk, microbiology, treatment and outcomes: a multi-centre registry study

BackgroundThe aim of the study was to determine whether distance between residence and peritoneal dialysis (PD) unit influenced peritonitis occurrence, microbiology, treatment and outcomes.MethodsThe study included all patients receiving PD between 1/10/2003 and 31/12/2008, using ANZDATA Registry data.Results365 (6%) patients lived ≥100 km from their nearest PD unit (distant group), while 6183 (94%) lived <100 km (local group). Median time to first peritonitis in distant patients (1.34 years, 95% CI 1.07-1.61) was significantly shorter than in local patients (1.68 years, 95% CI 1.59-1.77, p = 0.001), whilst overall peritonitis rates were higher in distant patients (incidence rate ratio 1.32, 95% CI 1.20-1.46). Living ≥100 km away from a PD unit was independently associated with a higher risk of S. aureus peritonitis (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.64, 95% CI 1.09-2.47). Distant patients with first peritonitis episodes were less likely to be hospitalised (64% vs 73%, p = 0.008) and receive antifungal prophylaxis (4% vs 10%, p = 0.01), but more likely to receive vancomycin-based antibiotic regimens (52% vs 42%, p < 0.001). Using multivariable logistic regression analysis of peritonitis outcomes, distant patients were more likely to be cured with antibiotics alone (OR 1.55, 95% CI 1.03-2.24). All other outcomes were comparable between the two groups.ConclusionsLiving ≥100 km away from a PD unit was associated with increased risk of S. aureus peritonitis, modified approaches to peritonitis treatment and peritonitis outcomes that were comparable to, or better than patients living closer to a PD unit. Staphylococcal decolonisation should receive particular consideration in remote living patients.

Baseline Serum Interleukin-6 Predicts Cardiovascular Events in Incident Peritoneal Dialysis Patients

♦ Background: The utility of local and systemic interleukin 6 (IL-6) as a prognostic marker in incident peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients remains to be fully defined. The present study aimed to explore the capacity of systemic IL-6 concentrations to predict cardiovascular events (CVEs) and mortality in PD patients, and to evaluate the influence of neutral-pH PD solutions low in glucose degradation products (GDPs) on systemic IL-6. ♦ Methods: The study included 175 incident participants from the balANZ trial with at least one stored serum sample. A composite CVE score was used as the primary clinical outcome measure. Multilevel linear regression and Poisson regression models were fitted to describe, respectively, the trend of serum IL-6 over time and its ability to predict composite CVE. ♦ Results: A significant increase in serum IL-6 from baseline to 24 months was observed in the study population (mean difference: 1.68 pg/mL; p = 0.006). The type of PD solution received by patients exerted no significant effect on serum IL-6 (p = 0.12). Composite CVE was significantly and independently associated with baseline serum IL-6 (incidence rate ratio per picogram per milliliter: 1.06; 95% confidence interval: 1.02 to 1.10; p = 0.003). ♦ Conclusions: Baseline serum IL-6 was a significant independent predictor of composite CVE. Serum IL-6 concentrations increased with increasing PD duration and were not significantly modified with the use of biocompatible fluid over the study period. The present study is the first to link systemic IL-6 concentrations with CVE outcomes in incident PD patients.