Vitamin D supplementation and recombinant human erythropoietin utilization in vitamin D-deficient hemodialysis patients.

INTRODUCTION: We sought to examine the impact of ergocalciferol (ERGO) on recombinant human erythropoietin (EPO) use in a cohort of 25-OH vitamin D (25-D)-deficient hemodialysis (HD) patients. METHODS: Baseline 25-D levels were obtained for all patients who received HD >6 months in our unit. Patients with levels between 10 and 30 ng/mL received ERGO 50,000 IU x 4 doses and patients with levels <10 ng/mL received 50,000 IU x 6 doses over a 4-month period. Monthly dose of EPO was recorded at baseline and after ERGO supplementation. RESULTS: Baseline 25-D levels were <30 ng/mL in 89% of tested patients. Eighty-one patients were included in this study. Mean baseline 25-D level was 15.3 ± 7.1 ng/mL and increased to 28.5 ± 8.6 ng/mL after ERGO (p<0.0001), and median baseline EPO dose was 21,933 U/month (interquartile range [IQR] 13,867-35,967) and decreased to 18,400 U/month (IQR 11,050-33,000) after ERGO (p=0.17). Forty-six patients (57%) required less EPO after ERGO compared with baseline: 15,450 U/month (IQR 10,056-23,575) vs. 26,242 U/month (IQR 15,717-40,167), respectively (p<0.0001). Thirty-five patients (43%) required a higher dose of EPO after ERGO, 26,350 U/month (IQR 15,875-46,075) vs. 17,667 U/month (IQR 12,021-23,392), respectively (p=0.016). Mean age, sex, vintage, diabetes status, race and 25-D levels did not differ in these 2 groups of patients, either at baseline or after ERGO. Monthly hemoglobin, iron saturation, albumin, intact parathyroid hormone, calcium and phosphorus were unchanged after ERGO in these 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: ERGO use in 25-D-deficient HD patients may lessen the need for EPO. We recommend more aggressive supplementation with ERGO in future studies to achieve levels >30 ng/mL.

Comparison of outcomes of peritoneal dialysis catheters placed by the fluoroscopically guided percutaneous method versus directly visualized surgical method.

PURPOSE: To compare complications in catheters placed by the fluoroscopically guided percutaneous method versus directly visualized surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis was performed. Mechanical complication rate data, including catheter leakage, malfunction, malposition, and bleeding, were compared between the two groups over a 1-year follow-up period. Additionally, exit site infection rates, tunnel infection rates, and peritonitis episodes were evaluated based on the incidence within 30 days of insertion and 30 days to 1 year after insertion. RESULTS: A total of 101 patients were analyzed (52 in the fluoroscopic guidance group, 49 in the direct visualization group). Prevalence of diabetes was similar: 56% in the directly visualized surgery group and 47% in the fluoroscopically guided treatment group (P = .37). Although the difference was not significant, complication rates tended to be higher in the directly visualized surgery group compared with the percutaneous placement group. These included catheter leakage (13% vs 4%; P = .093), malfunction (11% vs 9%; P = .73), malposition (13% vs 6%; P = .20), and bleeding (8% vs 2%; P = .21). There were no differences in early and late exit site infections and tunnel infections. Late peritonitis rates were lower in the percutaneous placement group (20%) than in the direct visualization group (42%) (P = .018). Diabetic patients had approximately six times greater risk of catheter malfunction than nondiabetic patients regardless of method of catheter insertion. CONCLUSIONS: Placement of peritoneal dialysis catheters percutaneously with fluoroscopic guidance is as safe as placement with direct visualization techniques.