RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Unplanned peritoneal dialysis (PD) is an important option for chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients requiring kidney replacement therapy urgently as it offers the convenience of home-based therapy. The objective of this study was to assess the Brazilian urgent-start PD program in three different dialysis centers where there is shortage of hemodialysis (HD) beds. METHODS: This prospective, multicentric cohort study included incident patients with stage 5 CKD and no permanent vascular access established who started urgent PD between July 2014 and July 2020 in three different hospitals. Urgent-start PD was defined as initiation of treatment up to 72 h after catheter placement. Patients were followed up from catheter insertion and assessed according to mechanical and infectious complications related to PD, patients, and technique survival. RESULTS: Over 6 years, 370 patients were included in all three study centers. Mean patient age was 57.8 ± 16.32 years. Diabetic kidney disease was the main underlying condition (35.1%) and uremia was the main cause for dialysis indication (81.1%). Concerning complications related to PD, 24.3% had mechanical complications, 27.3% had peritonitis, 28.01% had technique failure, and 17.8% died. On logistic regression, hospitalization (p = 0.003) and exit site infection (p = 0.002) were identified as predictors of peritonitis, while mechanical complications (p = 0.004) and peritonitis (p < 0.001) were identified as predictors of technique failure and switching to HD. Age (p < 0.001), hospitalization (p = 0.012), and bacteremia (p = 0.021) were observed to predict death. The number of patients on PD increased at least 140% in all three participating centers. CONCLUSION: PD is a feasible option for patients starting dialysis in an unplanned manner and may be a useful tool for reducing shortage of HD beds.

Assuntos

RESUMO

Background: Patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) who start unplanned dialysis therapy are more likely to be treated with hemodialysis (HD) using a central venous catheter, which has been associated with a greater risk of infections and other complications, as well as with a higher long-term risk of death. Urgent-start PD is an alternative that has been suggested as an option for starting dialysis in these cases, with potentially better patient outcomes. However, the definition of urgent-start PD is not homogeneous, and no study, to our knowledge, has compared clinical outcomes among urgent start, early start, and conventional start of PD. In this study, we aimed to compare these types of initiation of dialysis therapy in terms of a composite outcome of patient survival and technique failure. Methods: This is a retrospective, multicenter, cohort study, involving data from 122 PD clinics in Brazil. We used the following: Urgent-start groups refer to patients who initiated PD within 72 h after the PD catheter insertion; early-start groups are those starting PD from 72 h to 2 weeks after the catheter insertion; and conventional-start groups are those who used the PD catheter after 2 weeks from its insertion. We analyzed the composite endpoint of all causes of patient's mortality and technique failure (within the initial 90 days of PD therapy) using the following three different statistical models: multivariate Cox, Fine and Gay competing risk, and a multilevel model. Results: We included 509 patients with valid data across 68 PD clinics. There were 38 primary outcomes, comprising 25 deaths and 13 technique failures, with a total follow-up time of 1,393.3 months. Urgent-start PD had no association with the composite endpoint in all three models. Conclusion: Unplanned PD seems to be a safe and feasible option for treatment for patients with non-dialysis ESKD in urgent need of dialysis.

RESUMO

La diálisis peritoneal (DP), es una terapia costo efectiva, poco utilizada a nivel mundial. DP de inicio urgente es definido como el inicio de terapia en pacientes incidentes, inmediatamente después o antes de las dos semanas de haber sido colocado un catéter para DP crónica en pacientes con insuficiencia renal crónica con indicación de diálisis de urgencia, comparado con el inicio convencional después de dos semanas. El objetivo fue revisar la información actual sobre la DP de inicio urgente. Se realizó una búsqueda en PubMed, The Cochrane Library y SciELO. Se incluyeron 12 artículos publicados hasta el 31 de octubre de 2021. Se encontró una baja incidencia de pacientes que ingresan a DP, más aún la DP de inicio urgente. No se encontró diferencia significativa que justifique la espera para utilizar el catéter implantado, pudiendo evitar la hemodiálisis en urgencia dialítica. Un metaanálisis con 16 estudios (2953 pacientes) concluye que la DP de inicio urgente comparada con la de inicio convencional no aumentó la muerte de cualquier causa (1 ECA: RR 1,49, IC 95%: 0,87 a 2,53; 7 estudios de cohortes: RR 1,89, IC 95%: 1,07 a 3,3; 1 estudio de casos y controles: RR 0,90, IC 95%: 0,27 a 3,02). Otro metaanálisis con 6 estudios (1242 pacientes) reporta certeza muy baja en la mortalidad (RR: 1,25, IC 95%: 0,92 a 1,69; I2=0%, p=0,99), complicaciones mecánicas con mayor prevalencia de fugas (RR: 6,72, IC 95%: 2,11 a 21,32; I2=0%, p=0,60), y no hubo diferencia en complicaciones infecciosas entre los dos grupos. (RR: 1,36, IC 95%: 0,90 a 2,05, p=0,14). Se concluye que, no existe diferencia significativa entre la DP de inicio urgente y la de inicio convencional, en la sobrevida del paciente ni en la sobrevida de la técnica. La comunidad nefrológica debe considerar a la DP de inicio urgente como una opción de terapia en pacientes que requieran diálisis de urgencia.

SUMMARY Peritoneal dialysis (PD) is a cost-effective therapy, little used worldwide. Urgent start PD is defined as the start of therapy in incident patients, immediately after or before two weeks after having placed a catheter for chronic PD in patients with chronic renal failure with indication of urgency dialysis, compared with the conventional start after two weeks. The objective was to review the current information on urgent start PD. A search was performed in PubMed, The Cochrane Library and SciELO. A total of 12 articles published up to October 31, 2021, were included. A low incidence of patients admitted to PD was found, even more so in urgent start PD. No significant differences were found that justify waiting to use the implanted catheter, thus avoiding hemodialysis in dialysis urgency. A meta-analysis with 16 studies (2953 patients) concluded that urgent start PD compared with conventional start did not increase death from any cause (1 RCT: RR 1.49, CI 95%: 0.87 to 2.53; 7 cohort studies: RR 1.89, CI 95%: 1.07 to 3.3, 1 case control study: RR 0.90, CI 95%: 0.27 to 3.02). Another meta-analysis with 6 studies (1242 patients) reports very low certainty in mortality (RR: 1.25, CI 95%: 0.92 to 1.69; I2=0%, p=0.99), mechanical complications with higher prevalence of leaks (RR: 6.72, CI 95%: 2.11 to 21.32; I2=0%, p=0.60), and there was no difference in infectious complications between the two groups. (RR: 1.36, CI 95%: 0.90 to 2.05, p=0.14). It is concluded that there is no significant difference between urgent start PD and conventional start, in patient survival or in the survival of the technique. The nephrology community should consider urgent start PD as a therapy option in patients requiring urgency dialysis.

RESUMO

Incremental peritoneal dialysis (PD) is characterized as less than a "standard dose" PD prescription. Compared to standard treatment, it has many potential advantages, including better preservation of residual renal function, a lower risk of peritonitis, and a decreased care delivery burden while reducing the environmental impact and economic cost. Unplanned PD can be defined when treatment starts up to 14 days after catheter insertion and is recognized as a safe and feasible clinical approach. In this perspective paper, we briefly discuss both strategies and share our experience and clinical routine in managing incremental PD after unplanned initiation.

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Few studies have evaluated the viability and outcomes between peritoneal dialysis (PD) and haemodialysis (HD) in urgent-start renal replacement therapy (RRT). This study aimed to compare infectious and mechanical complications related to urgent-start PD and HD. Secondary outcomes were to identify risk factors for complications and mortality related to urgent-start dialysis. METHODS: A quasi-experimental study with incident patients receiving PD and HD in a Brazilian university hospital, between July 2014 and December 2017. Subjects included individuals with final-stage chronic kidney disease who required immediate RRT, that is, HD through central venous catheter or PD in which the catheter was implanted by a nephrologist and utilized for 72 h, without previous training. Patients with PD were subjected, initially, to high-volume PD for metabolic compensation. After hospital discharge, they remained in intermittent PD in the dialysis unit until training was completed. Mechanical and infectious complications were compared, as well as the recovery of renal function and survival. RESULTS: In total, 93 patients were included in PD and 91 in HD. PD and HD groups were similar regarding age (58 ± 17 vs. 60 ± 15 years; p = 0.49), frequency of diabetes mellitus (37.6% vs. 50.5%; p = 0.10), other comorbidities (74.1% vs. 71.4%; p = 0.67) and biochemical parameters at the beginning of RRT, that is, creatinine (9.1 ± 4.1 vs. 8.0 ± 2.8; p = 0.09), serum albumin (3.1 ± 0.6 vs. 3.3 ± 0.6; p = 0.06) and haemoglobin (9.5 ± 1.8 vs. 9.8 ± 2.0; p = 0.44). After a minimum follow-up period of 180 days and a maximum follow-up period of 2 years, there was no difference regarding mechanical complications (24.7% vs. 37.4%; p = 0.06) or bacteraemia (15.0% vs. 24.0%; p = 0.11); however, there was a difference regarding infection of the exit site (25.8% vs. 39.5%; p = 0.04) and diuresis maintenance [700 (0-1500) vs. 0 (0-500); p < 0.001], with better results in the PD group. There was better phosphorus control at 180 days in the PD group (62.4% vs. 41.8%; p = 0.008), with a lower requirement for phosphate binder usage (28% vs. 55%; p < 0.001), erythropoietin (18.3% vs. 49.5%; p < 0.001) and anti-hypertensives (11.8% vs. 30.8%; p = 0.003). Time to death was similar between groups. In the multivariate analysis, PD was a predictor of renal function recovery [odds ratio: 3.95 (1.01-15.4)]. CONCLUSION: PD is a viable and safe alternative to HD in a scenario of urgent-start RRT with complication rates and outcomes similar to those of HD, highlighting the results regarding renal function recovery.

Assuntos

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Urgent-start peritoneal dialysis (PD) in patients with newly diagnosed end-stage renal disease (ESRD) is a well-tolerated alternative to hemodialysis (HD). The primary aim of this study was to identify the demographic and clinical characteristics of ESRD patients, as well as the presurgical, surgical, and postsurgical factors associated with urgent-start PD complications. METHODS: A retrospective cross-sectional observational study was performed on 102 patients with ESRD who merited urgent-start PD from January 2015 to June 2019. The primary clinical outcome measures were catheter leakage, dysfunction, and peritonitis, whereas the secondary outcomes were catheter removal, repositioning, and death. Statistical inferences were made with the χ2 or Fisher's exact test and independent samples t tests. RESULTS: One hundred two subjects (65 men, 63.7%) 56.2 ± 15.1 years old were included in this study; 64 of the subjects had diabetes and hypertension (62.7%). Catheter leakage occurred in 8 patients (7.8%), catheter dysfunction in 27 patients (26.5%), and peritonitis in 14 patients (13.7%); meanwhile, catheter removal occurred in 6 patients (5.9%), catheter repositioning in 21 patients (20.6%), and death in 3 patients (2.9%). Peritonitis was associated with younger age (i.e., 47.0 ± 16.8 vs. 57.6 ± 14.4 years; P = 0.014; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.2-19.1; odds ratio [OR] 0.96; P = 0.018; 95% CI: 0.92-099), higher creatinine levels upon admission (i.e., 20.2 ± 9.8 vs. 14.1 ± 8.3; P = 0.014; 95% CI: -10.9 to -1.2), and heart failure (OR 4.79; P = 0.043; 95% CI: 1.05-21.88). Patients with abdominal hernia were 7.5 times more likely to have their catheter leak (OR 7.5; P = 0.036; 95% CI: 1.14-49.54). Catheter removal was associated with obesity (i.e., body mass index [BMI] of 31.6 ± 4.1 vs. 25.9 ± 4.9; P = 0.007; 95% CI: -9.8 to -1.6; OR 1.26; P = 0.013; 95% CI: 1.05-1.51) and Modification of Diet in Renal Disease glomerular filtration rate (MDRD-GFR) (i.e., 2.5 ± 0.6 vs. 3.7 ± 2.3; P = 0.003; 95% CI: 0.5-1.9). CONCLUSION: Peritonitis was associated with younger age, higher creatinine levels upon admission, and heart failure; meanwhile, catheter removal was linked to obesity and lower glomerular filtration rate. Compared with previous reports, our study included patients in which PD was initiated shortly after catheter insertion, making the intervention a true urgent-start PD. This study contributes to the existing urgent-start PD literature by providing evidence that urgent-start PD with catheter opening within 72 hours has limited complications, making it a relatively safe option.

RESUMO

Chronic kidney disease is a significant problem of public health worldwide, and up to 60% of patients start dialysis in an unplanned manner without a definitive dialysis access. Recently, peritoneal dialysis (PD) has emerged as an alternative to unplanned chronic dialytic method, and the world collective experience shows that PD can be an efficient, safe, and cost-effective alternative with comparable outcomes to the planned PD and urgent-start hemodialysis (HD). More importantly, as compared to urgent-start HD using a central venous catheter, urgent-start PD has significantly fewer incidences of catheter-related bloodstream infections, dialysis-related mechanical complications, and need for dialysis catheter reinsertions during the initial time of the therapy. An integrative review was conducted on PD urgent start compared to HD urgent start and to planned PD, identifying its potential advantages and limitations. Literature search was performed within multiple databases, and observational studies on clinical experience with urgent PD were reviewed and appraised.

Assuntos

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate mechanical and infectious complications associated with urgent-start peritoneal dialysis (PD) and patients and technique survival in the first 180 days. METHODS: It was a prospective study that evaluated chronic patients who started unplanned PD using high-volume PD (HVPD) right after (<72 h) PD catheter placement. After hospital discharge, patients were treated with intermittent PD on alternate days in a dialysis unit until family training was provided. RESULTS: Fifty-one patients fulfilling the following criteria were included: age was 62.1 ± 15 years, with diabetes as the main etiology of end-stage renal disease (39%), and uremia as the main dialysis indication (76%). Metabolic and fluid controls were achieved after 3 sessions of HVPD, and patients remained in intermittent PD for 23.2 ± 7.2 days. Mechanical complications occurred in 25.7% and peritonitis rate was 0.5 episode/patient-year. In the first 6 months, technique and patients survival rates were 86 and 82.4% respectively. CONCLUSION: The PD modality was a feasible and safe alternative to hemodialysis in the urgent-start dialysis.

Assuntos