Patterns of peritoneal dialysis catheter practices and technique failure in peritoneal dialysis: A nationwide cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Our objective was to assess whether clusters of centers with similar peritoneal dialysis (PD) catheter related practices were associated with differences in the risk of technique failure. METHODS: Patients on incident PD in French centers contributing to the French Language PD Registry from 2012 to 2016 were included in a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data. Centers with similar catheter cares practices were gathered in clusters in a hierarchical analysis. Clusters of centers associated with technique failure were evaluated using Cox and Fine and Gray models. A mixed effect Cox model was used to assess the influence of a center effect, as explained by the clusters. RESULTS: Data from 2727 catheters placed in 64 centers in France were analyzed. Five clusters of centers were identified. After adjustment for patient-level characteristics, the fourth cluster was associated with a lower risk of technique failure (cause specific-HR 0.70, 95%CI 0.54-0.90. The variance of the center effect decreased by 5% after adjusting for patient characteristics and by 26% after adjusting for patient characteristics and clusters of centers in the mixed effect Cox model. Favorable outcomes were observed in clusters with a greater proportion of community hospitals, where catheters were placed via open surgery, first dressing done 6 to 15 days after catheter placement, and local prophylactic antibiotics was applied on exit-site. CONCLUSION: Several patterns of PD catheter related practices have been identified in France, associated with differences in the risk of technique failure. Combinations of favorable practices are suggested in this study.

Clusters of Practice in Peritoneal Dialysis in France: Data from the Catheter Section of the RDPLF.

BACKGROUND: Peritonitis is a major cause of peritoneal dialysis (PD) failure. Recommendations for the prevention of peritonitis are available, but wide variations exist in the peritonitis rate among countries and PD units. The objective of this study was to describe the different pattern of practices in France. METHODS: This was a retrospective, multicenter study based on data from the French Language Peritoneal Dialysis Registry. Center practices were described and mapped. Clusters of practices were sought in a hierarchical analysis and centers belonging to the same clusters of practices were mapped. RESULTS: Data from 2,770 catheters placed in 64 centers in France between 1 February 2012 and 31 December 2016 were considered. A median of 34 (ranging from 5 to 133) catheters was reported in each center. Twenty-eight (43.8%) centers routinely administered a prophylactic antibiotic prior to catheter placement, and 8 (12.5%) centers applied a local prophylactic antibiotic at the exit site, as recommended by International guidelines. The presence of a PD nurse specialized in PD or PD referent nephrologist was not associated with better adherence to guidelines. Practices were heterogeneous across centers. We identified 5 clusters of centers according to practice. Geographical proximity was not associated with homogeneity in practices. CONCLUSION: Peritoneal dialysis practices are heterogeneous in France, even those that are subject to International guidelines. Studies to identify associations between center-specific practices and PD patient outcomes remain mandatory. Efforts should be made to standardize the PD standards of care in France.

Efficacy of Prophylactic Antibiotics at Peritoneal Catheter Insertion on Early Peritonitis: Data from the Catheter Section of the French Language Peritoneal Dialysis Registry.

BACKGROUND: International guidelines recommend the use of a prophylactic antibiotic before the peritoneal dialysis (PD) catheter can be inserted. The main objective of this study was to assess whether this practice is associated with a lower risk of early peritonitis and to estimate the magnitude of the centre effect. METHODS: A retrospective, multi-centric study was conducted, in which data from the French Language Peritoneal Dialysis Registry was analysed. Patients were separated into 2 groups based on whether or not prophylactic antibiotics were used prior to catheter placement. RESULTS: Out of the 2,014 patients who had a PD catheter placed between February 1, 2012 and December 31, 2014, 1,105 were given a prophylactic antibiotic. In a classical logit model, the use of prophylactic antibiotics was found to protect the individual against the risk of early peritonitis (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.49-0.92). However, this association lost significance in a mixed logistic regression model with centre as a random effect: OR 0.73 (95% CI 0.48-1.09). Covariates associated with the risk of developing early peritonitis were age over 65: OR 0.73 (95% CI 0.39-0.85), body mass index over 35 kg/m2: OR 1.99 (95% CI 1.13-3.47), transfer to PD due to graft failure: OR 2.24 (95% CI 1.22-4.11), assisted PD: OR 1.96 (95% CI 1.31-2.93), and the use of the Moncrief technique: OR 3.07 (95% CI 1.85-5.11). CONCLUSION: There is a beneficial effect of prophylactic antibiotic used prior to peritoneal catheter placement, on the occurence of early peritonitis. However, the beneficial effect could be masked by a centre effect.

Outcome of the sub-optimal dialysis starter on peritoneal dialysis. Report from the French Language Peritoneal Dialysis Registry (RDPLF).

BACKGROUND: This study was carried out to examine the association of sub-optimal dialysis initiation of peritoneal dialysis (PD) with all the possible outcomes on PD using survival analysis in the presence of competing risks. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study based on the data of the French Language Peritoneal Dialysis Registry. We analysed 8527 incident patients starting PD between January 2002 and December 2010. The end of the observation period was 01 June 2011. Times from the start of PD to death, transplantation, transfer to haemodialysis (HD) and first peritonitis episode were calculated. The sub-optimal dialysis initiation was defined by a period of <30 days on HD before PD initiation. RESULTS: Among 8527 patients, there were 568 patients who started PD after <30 days on HD. There were 6562 events: 3078 deaths, 2136 transfers to HD, 1348 renal transplantations. When using a Fine and Gray model, sub-optimal dialysis start, early peritonitis and transplant failure were associated with a higher sub-distribution relative hazard of technique failure. There was no association between the sub-optimal dialysis start and the sub-distribution hazard of death or transplantation. In the multivariate analysis using a Fine and Gray regression model, the sub-optimal dialysis start was not associated with a higher sub distribution relative hazard of peritonitis. CONCLUSIONS: Sub-optimal dialysis initiation is neither associated with a higher risk of death nor with a lower risk of renal transplantation. Sub-optimal PD patients had a higher risk of transfer to HD.

Is assisted peritoneal dialysis associated with technique survival when competing events are considered?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: This study assessed whether assisted peritoneal dialysis (PD) was associated with a lower risk for technique failure using methods developed for survival analysis in the presence of competing risks. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: This retrospective cohort study, based on data from the French Language Peritoneal Dialysis Registry, analyzed 9822 incident patients starting PD between January 2002 and December 2010. The observation period ended on June 1, 2011. Time to transfer to hemodialysis was compared between patients with assisted PD and those undergoing self-care PD. RESULTS: There were 5286 patients undergoing assisted PD; 4230 of these were assisted by a community nurse and 1056 by family. Assisted PD patients were older and had a higher Charlson comorbidity index than self-care PD patients. There were 7594 events: 3495 deaths, 2464 transfers to hemodialysis, 1489 renal transplantations, and 146 renal function recoveries. According to a Cox model, assistance and center size were associated with a lower risk for technique failure, whereas hemodialysis before PD, early peritonitis, and transplantation failure were associated with a higher risk for transfer to hemodialysis. A Fine and Gray regression model showed that assisted PD was associated with a lower risk for transfer to hemodialysis. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with patients undergoing self-care PD, those with assisted PD had a lower risk for transfer to hemodialysis, a higher risk for death, and a lower risk for transplantation.

Peritonitis-free survival in peritoneal dialysis: an update taking competing risks into account.

BACKGROUND: Peritonitis-free survival is commonly reported in the peritoneal dialysis (PD) literature. The Kaplan-Meier method appears to be the only technique used to date, although it has known limitations for cohorts with multiple outcomes, as in PD. In the presence of these 'competing risks' outcomes, the Kaplan-Meier estimate is interpretable only under restrictive assumptions. In contrast, methods which take competing risks into account provide unbiased estimates of probabilities of outcomes as actually experienced by patients. METHODS: We analysed peritonitis-free survival in a cohort of 8711 incident patients from the 'Registre de Dialyse Péritonéale de Langue Française' between 1 January 2000 and 31 December 2007 by calculating the cumulative incidence (CI) of the first episode of peritonitis using the Kaplan-Meier method and a method accounting for competing risks. We compared the CI in different patient groups by the log-rank test and a test developed for competing risk data, Gray's test. RESULTS: After 5 years of PD, the CI of at least one peritonitis episode was 0.4, and the probability of any outcome was 0.96. The Kaplan-Meier method overestimated the CI by a large amount. Compared with the log-rank test, Gray's test led to different conclusions in three out of seven comparisons. CONCLUSIONS: The competing risk approach shows that the CI of at least one peritonitis episode was lower than reported by the Kaplan-Meier method but that survival peritonitis-free and still on PD was overall low. The competing risk approach provides estimates which have a clearer interpretation than Kaplan-Meier methods and could be more widely used in PD research.

Peritoneal dialysis in elderly patients: report from the French Peritoneal Dialysis Registry (RDPLF).

BACKGROUND: The number of elderly patients starting dialysis is increasing in developed countries. Older age is frequently associated with contraindication of peritoneal dialysis (PD). The aim of this study was to report the outcome of elderly patients on PD in a country where assisted PD is available. METHODS: This was a retrospective study based on the data of the French Language Peritoneal Dialysis Registry (RDPLF). We retrospectively analysed 1613 patients older than 75 years who started PD between January 2000 and December 2005. The end of the observation period was 31 December 2007. RESULTS: The mean age at dialysis initiation was 81.9 years; 545 patients had a Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) >9. Of these 1613 patients, 1435 were treated by continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) and 1232 were on assisted PD. The median patient survival was 27.1 months. In the multivariate analysis, patient survival was associated with sex, age, modified CCI, method of assistance and underlying nephropathy. The median pure technique survival was 21.4 months. In the Cox model, technique survival was associated with the modified CCI, but the association did not remain significant after adjustment for the centre size. The median survival free of peritonitis was 32.1 months. Neither the modality of assistance nor the centre size was associated with peritonitis risk. CONCLUSION: PD is a suitable method for elderly patients. In order to increase the rate of PD utilization in elderly patients, the need for the funding of assisted peritoneal dialysis has to be taken into account.

Influence of autonomy and type of home assistance on the prevention of peritonitis in assisted automated peritoneal dialysis patients. An analysis of data from the French Language Peritoneal Dialysis Registry.

BACKGROUND: In France, 48% of home-based peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients require assistance to perform their exchange and manage their treatment. A total of 7% are aided by their family, and 41% by a private nurse. Of all the continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) patients, 61.7%, and among automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) patients 23%, are assisted at home for their bag exchanges and connections. Assisted APD patients (AAPD) are more comorbid and elderly so that a home helper is not always available: this explains why most helpers at home are private visiting nurses paid by the National Social Security. In addition to the home helper (nurse or family), 58% of centres make regular additional home visits to check the respect of procedures previously taught during the initial training of the nurse or the family helper. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether the type of home assistance received by dependent patients had an influence on peritonitis rates, and if home visits done by nurses of training centres may improve results. METHODS: Peritonitis rates and the probability of being peritonitis free were analysed for 1624 new APD patients recorded in the French PD Registry (RDPLF) between 2000 and 2004, and followed-up until early 2005. RESULTS: Nurse-assisted APD patients had a peritonitis rate of one episode every 36 months, and family-assisted patients one episode every 45 months; using Poisson analysis this trend was not significant (P=0.11). However, the probability of being peritonitis free was significantly higher for family-assisted (69.8% at 2 year) compared with home nurse-aided persons (54.4%) after adjustment for age, diabetes and the Charlson comorbidity index. This difference disappeared when nurses from the training centre regularly visited PD patients at their home in the presence of their helper, whichever type of assistance they received. In addition, when the nurses from the training centres visited private nurse-assisted patients, the probability of being peritonitis free was significantly improved in comparison with those persons who did not receive home visits, from 33.9% to 50.8% at 3 years (P=0.028). CONCLUSIONS: APD patients assisted at home by a private nurse have a higher risk of developing peritonitis than family-assisted patients, unless additional regular home visits are organized by the original training centre. Therefore, we recommend that home visits be regularly made for dependent PD patients to optimize the quality of care provided by the helper.