Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
País/Região como assunto
Tipo de documento
País de afiliação
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Kidney Int ; 100(1): 182-195, 2021 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33359055

RESUMO

The aims of this study were to determine the frequency of dialysis and kidney transplantation and to estimate the regularity of comprehensive conservative management (CCM) for patients with kidney failure in Europe. This study uses data from the ERA-EDTA Registry. Additionally, our study included supplemental data from Armenia, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Kosovo, Luxembourg, Malta, Moldova, Montenegro, Slovenia and additional data from Israel, Italy, Slovakia using other information sources. Through an online survey, responding nephrologists estimated the frequency of CCM (i.e. planned holistic care instead of kidney replacement therapy) in 33 countries. In 2016, the overall incidence of replacement therapy for kidney failure was 132 per million population (pmp), varying from 29 (Ukraine) to 251 pmp (Greece). On 31 December 2016, the overall prevalence of kidney replacement therapy was 985 pmp, ranging from 188 (Ukraine) to 1906 pmp (Portugal). The prevalence of peritoneal dialysis (114 pmp) and home hemodialysis (28 pmp) was highest in Cyprus and Denmark respectively. The kidney transplantation rate was nearly zero in some countries and highest in Spain (64 pmp). In 28 countries with five or more responding nephrologists, the median percentage of candidates for kidney replacement therapy who were offered CCM in 2018 varied between none (Slovakia and Slovenia) and 20% (Finland) whereas the median prevalence of CCM varied between none (Slovenia) and 15% (Hungary). Thus, the substantial differences across Europe in the frequency of kidney replacement therapy and CCM indicate the need for improvement in access to various treatment options for patients with kidney failure.


Assuntos
Falência Renal Crônica , Transplante de Rim , Insuficiência Renal , Tratamento Conservador , Ácido Edético , Europa (Continente) , Alemanha , Grécia , Humanos , Irlanda , Itália , Falência Renal Crônica/epidemiologia , Falência Renal Crônica/terapia , Transplante de Rim/efeitos adversos , Portugal , Sistema de Registros , Diálise Renal/efeitos adversos , Espanha
2.
Clin Kidney J ; 12(5): 702-720, 2019 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31583095

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: This article summarizes the ERA-EDTA Registry's 2016 Annual Report, by describing the epidemiology of renal replacement therapy (RRT) for end-stage renal disease (ESRD) in 2016 within 36 countries. METHODS: In 2017 and 2018, the ERA-EDTA Registry received data on patients undergoing RRT for ESRD in 2016 from 52 national or regional renal registries. In all, 32 registries provided individual patient data and 20 provided aggregated data. The incidence and prevalence of RRT and the survival probabilities of these patients were determined. RESULTS: In 2016, the incidence of RRT for ESRD was 121 per million population (pmp), ranging from 29 pmp in Ukraine to 251 pmp in Greece. Almost two-thirds of patients were men, over half were aged ≥65 years and almost a quarter had diabetes mellitus as their primary renal diagnosis. Treatment modality at the start of RRT was haemodialysis for 84% of patients. On 31 December 2016, the prevalence of RRT was 823 pmp, ranging from 188 pmp in Ukraine to 1906 pmp in Portugal. In 2016, the transplant rate was 32 pmp, varying from 3 pmp in Ukraine to 94 pmp in the Spanish region of Catalonia. For patients commencing RRT during 2007-11, the 5-year unadjusted patient survival probability on all RRT modalities combined was 50.5%. For 2016, the incidence and prevalence of RRT were higher among men (187  and 1381 pmp) than women (101 and 827 pmp), and men had a higher rate of kidney transplantation (59 pmp) compared with women (33 pmp). For patients starting dialysis and for patients receiving a kidney transplant during 2007-11, the adjusted patient survival probabilities appeared to be higher for women than for men.

3.
Clin Kidney J ; 11(1): 108-122, 2018 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29423210

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: This article summarizes the European Renal Association - European Dialysis and Transplant Association (ERA-EDTA) Registry's 2015 Annual Report. It describes the epidemiology of renal replacement therapy (RRT) for end-stage renal disease (ESRD) in 2015 within 36 countries. METHODS: In 2016 and 2017, the ERA-EDTA Registry received data on patients who were undergoing RRT for ESRD in 2015, from 52 national or regional renal registries. Thirty-two registries provided individual patient-level data and 20 provided aggregated-level data. The incidence, prevalence and survival probabilities of these patients were determined. RESULTS: In 2015, 81 373 individuals commenced RRT for ESRD, equating to an overall unadjusted incidence rate of 119 per million population (pmp). The incidence ranged by 10-fold, from 24 pmp in Ukraine to 232 pmp in the Czech Republic. Of the patients commencing RRT, almost two-thirds were men, over half were aged ≥65 years and a quarter had diabetes mellitus as their primary renal diagnosis. Treatment modality at the start of RRT was haemodialysis for 85% of the patients, peritoneal dialysis for 11% and a kidney transplant for 4%. By Day 91 of commencing RRT, 82% of patients were receiving haemodialysis, 13% peritoneal dialysis and 5% had a kidney transplant. On 31 December 2015, 546 783 individuals were receiving RRT for ESRD, corresponding to an unadjusted prevalence of 801 pmp. This ranged throughout Europe by more than 10-fold, from 178 pmp in Ukraine to 1824 pmp in Portugal. In 2015, 21 056 kidney transplantations were performed, equating to an overall unadjusted transplant rate of 31 pmp. This varied from 2 pmp in Ukraine to 94 pmp in the Spanish region of Cantabria. For patients commencing RRT during 2006-10, the 5-year unadjusted patient survival probabilities on all RRT modalities combined was 50.0% (95% confidence interval 49.9-50.1).

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA