We Use Bioincompatible Peritoneal Dialysis Solutions.

Despite advances in peritoneal dialysis (PD) technique and therapy over the last 40 years, PD therapy for end-stage renal disease (ESRD) in the United States remains underutilized. One of the major factors contributing to this underutilization involves concerns about technique failure. More physiologic PD solutions, with a lower concentration of glucose degradation products and a neutral pH, exist and are readily available in Europe, Asia, and Australia. Several benefits of these biocompatible solutions exist over the conventional solutions including a slower decline in residual renal function and better maintenance of urine volumes. There may also be a beneficial effect of the biocompatible solutions in limiting the increase in peritoneal transport that is characteristic of patients maintained on conventional solutions. It should be of concern to the US nephrology community that biocompatible PD solutions are unavailable in the United States.

Factors influencing dialysis modality for end-stage renal disease in developing countries: a survey of Filipino nephrologists.

BACKGROUND: In the Philippines, 86% of incident dialysis patients are started on hemodialysis (HD) and 14% are treated with peritoneal dialysis (PD), representing a decline over a 2-year period. One important factor which affects patients' choice of dialysis modality is the input of their physicians. Our objective was to identify the factors affecting attitudes and recommendations of Filipino nephrologists regarding HD and PD. METHODS: Attendees of the annual national nephrology meeting completed an anonymous self-administered questionnaire. RESULTS: Respondents were heavily involved in clinical dialysis work, and 86.7% had most/all of their patients on HD. Recommendations about dialysis modality were based most strongly on overall cost to patient (4.4 on a scale of 1 [not important] to 5 [most important], residual renal function (RRF) preservation (4.4), patient preference (4.3) availability of dialysis support staff (4.3), and comparative quality of life data (4.3). Least important was physician reimbursement (2.8). Patient-related factors favoring HD were: poor personal hygiene, impaired vision and manual dexterity; while favoring PD were: age <10 years, living far from HD unit, and the availability of trainable family members. When asked which modality they would recommend to an equally eligible patient, 49.2% responded they would not recommend either modality and would allow the patient to choose, while 40.7% would recommend HD and 10.2% would recommend PD. CONCLUSION: Respondents consider overall cost and RRF preservation as the most important factors in dialysis modality selection, yet only 10.2% would recommend PD as first choice. It is likely that factors other than those addressed in the survey are stronger determinants of the patient's final choice of modality.

Trends in chronic peritoneal dialysis utilization in New England.

Utilization of chronic peritoneal dialysis (CPD) continues to decline in the United States. Technique failure remains a key factor in this decline. Center size has been associated with technique failure. Afolalu et al. observed that technique failure rates were higher in units with fewer than 25 patients. We wondered if declining CPD utilization rates are reflective of changes in small or large units. Using the 2000 overall census of individual CPD units in Network #1, New England, between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2008, we divided the units by size: units with fewer than 25 patients, and units with 25 patients or more. The CPD patient population increased to 1264 patients in 2008 from 1238 patients in 2000 (a 2% increase). A total of 85 units provided CPD therapy in 2000, increasing to 95 units in 2008. Of the 85 units in 2000, 11 managed 25 patients or more. By 2008, 8 of those 11 units had experienced a drop in CPD census. In 2000, larger units had been caring for 547 patients in total; in 2008, larger units were caring for a total of 546 patients. In 2000, 74 units had fewer than 25 patients, and smaller units were caring for a total of 691 patients. By 2008, smaller units were caring for 718 patients in total. Our finding that larger units with 25 patients or more experienced an average decline of 34% in CPD census is a major concern. Growth in the total number of smaller units was not associated with overall CPD growth. Further studies are needed to describe the reasons for decline in CPD census noted in most of the larger units.

Technique failure and center size in a large cohort of peritoneal dialysis patients in a defined geographic area.

BACKGROUND: Hemodialysis (HD) and peritoneal dialysis (PD) are both viable options for renal replacement therapy. Technique failure has been shown to be a major problem in PD therapy. OBJECTIVE: To examine the relationship between center size and PD technique failure. SETTING: ESRD Network #1 (NW1). DESIGN: Retrospective review of NW1 database. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 5003 incident PD patients between 2001 and 2005 in 105 PD units were included. Patients were grouped into 2 based on center size: group A, patients in units with 25 patients. Outcome measures were analyzed for the first and second years of PD therapy. Patients were censored at transplantation, transfer to HD, or death. OUTCOME MEASURES: Technique failure and mortality reported as death in Standard Information Management Systems (SIMS) database (NW1 data system). RESULTS: Technique failure rates were significantly higher in group A for year 1 (odds ratio: 1.36, p = 0.005) and for year 2 (odds ratio: 1.35, p = 0.03). Mortality rates were not statistically different between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION: Technique failure was higher in units with 25 patients. There was no difference in mortality between the 2 groups. The majority of patients in NW1 receive care in small units.

Taking home dialysis--in-center. Part 1. Managing a successful in-center nocturnal program.

We received an enthusiastic response from patients interested in the nocturnal program at our clinic, and staff willing to work at night. It is a good idea to offer in-center nocturnal dialysis to prevalent patients versus incident patients, because they are used to the therapy. While that may help your program succeed, some patients may still decide that the long hours on dialysis are not comfortable, and may return to standard HD therapy.

Depression and end-stage renal disease: a therapeutic challenge.

Hedayati et al. document a 26.5% incidence of clinical depression and a strong association between depression and hospitalizations and mortality in hemodialysis patients. We can no longer ignore the impact of depression on end-stage renal disease patients. Appropriate therapeutic regimens and trials need to be explored.

Complications associated with the development of bacteremia with Staphylococcus aureus.

Access-related infections are a leading cause of morbidity and mortality among hemodialysis patients. Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia accounts for 25% of these episodes. Nissenson et al., found that 20.7% of the patients developing S. aureus bacteremia had infectious complications as well as hospital readmissions related to the S. aureus bacteremia. This retrospective analysis did not determine whether the S. aureus bacteremia was access related, nor how each episode was treated. We have prospectively collected a database of all access-related S. aureus bacteremia developing in our unit between 1/1/03 and 8/31/05, including the management of the access. Episodes of S. aureus bacteremia with an identifiable source other than the vascular access were excluded. Seventy-two episodes of S. aureus bacteremia were identified; 54 developed in patients using a catheter and 18 developed in patients using an arteriovenous graft/fistula. The mean age was 64+/-15 years, and 56% of the patients were Caucasian. All patients were treated with 4 weeks of antibiotics. A total of 6 (8%) deaths and 15 (20.8%) infectious complications related to the S. aureus bacteremia were identified. Infectious complications included endocarditis (4), metastatic infection (7), discitis (3), and a myocardial abscess (1). Seventeen (23.6%) of the patients were readmitted within 30 days of the episode of S. aureus bacteremia; 4 readmissions were related to the S. aureus bacteremia. Five of the 54 catheter patients who developed S. aureus bacteremia expired and 14 developed infectious complications despite the catheter being removed/exchanged in all but one patient. One of the arteriovenous graft patients who developed S. aureus bacteremia expired. We conclude that infectious complications from S. aureus bacteremia are common, as 23.6% of the patients in our study developed an infectious complication. Eight percent of the patients who developed S. aureus bacteremia expired. Strategies to avoid S. aureus bacteremia are needed.

Treatment and outcome of CPD-associated peritonitis.

CPD-associated peritonitis is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality for ESRD patients maintained on CPD therapy. The percentage of ESRD patients maintained on CPD therapy is declining. The reasons are unclear, but may be due to concerns about CPD-associated peritonitis. The incidence of CPD-associated peritonitis has decreased largely attributed to technical advances and the identification of risk factors including exit-site infection, colonization with Staphylococcus aureus and depression. The typical spectrum of organisms causing peritonitis include gram-positive organisms (67%), gram-negative organisms (28%), fungi (2.5%) or anaerobic organisms (2.5%). Culture-negative episodes do occur: up to 20% of the episodes of peritonitis in some series are culture-negative. The treatment of CPD associated peritonitis is rather standardized with current recommendations by the International Society of Peritoneal Dialysis universally adopted. Approximately 80% of the patients developing peritonitis will respond to antimicrobial therapy and remain on CPD therapy, while 10 to 15% of the patients require catheter removal and transfer to hemodialysis. Approximately 6% of the patients expire as a result of peritonitis. The outcome is different based on organism with gram-negative and fungal episodes having a worse outcome than gram-positive episodes. The development of CPD-associated peritonitis can be linked to traditional risk factors such as exit-site infection and poor technique. Bacterial biofilm has also been suggested as a cause of peritonitis. Our current antimicrobial protocols may not permit adequate dosing to penetrate the biofilm and be a reason for recurrent or repeat episodes of peritonitis. It is important that we improve our understanding of factors responsible for the development and outcome of CPD-associated peritonitis in order for this renal replacement therapy to remain a viable option for patients with ESRD.

Barriers to utilization of chronic peritoneal dialysis in network #1, New England.

OBJECTIVE: The percentage of prevalent end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients maintained on chronic peritoneal dialysis (CPD) therapy in the United States declined from 15% in 1991 to 8.1% in 2002. Previous studies indicate that nephrologists in the United States feel 32.6% of prevalent ESRD patients should be on CPD therapy. The present study was designed to better understand the reasons for the discrepancy in actual versus desired prevalence of CPD utilization. METHODS: The medical directors of all dialysis centers in New England were mailed a questionnaire about the nephrologists' opinions concerning the percentage of patients that should be maintained on CPD therapy, reasons that limited patients' selection of CPD as initial therapy, and concerns about the current status of CPD therapy. The nephrologists were also invited to free text any other comments or concerns. RESULTS: A total of 117 questionnaires were sent; 59 (50.4%) were returned. These medical directors cared for a median of 10 (range 1 - 100) patients on CPD therapy, meaning 15% of dialysis patients in New England are maintained on CPD therapy. The medical directors felt that 29% (range 10% - 50%) of prevalent ESRD patients should be maintained on CPD therapy. The most common reasons cited by the nephrologists as barriers to CPD therapy included patient preference (54%), contraindications to performing CPD therapy (32%), poor social support (31%), significant comorbid disease (20%), late referrals and acute hospital starts (19%), problems with education re chronic kidney disease (12%), and problems with the structure and organization of CPD facilities (12%). These same medical directors stated that concerns about technique failure (25%), long-term viability of CPD therapy (25%), and mortality rates of CPD patients (17%) impacted on their use of CPD therapy as renal replacement therapy for patients with ESRD. CONCLUSION: Nephrologists in New England felt that 29% of prevalent ESRD patients should be maintained on CPD therapy, yet the actual incidence of CPD utilization in New England is 15%. A variety of factors were cited by the nephrologists as important reasons limiting CPD utilization. These nephrologists were also concerned about technique failure and long-term viability of CPD therapy. It is necessary that we look closely at each domain cited by the nephrologists if CPD therapy is to remain a viable option for patients with ESRD in the United States.

Outcome of patients on chronic peritoneal dialysis undergoing peritoneal catheter removal because of peritonitis.

Peritoneal catheter removal may be clinically indicated in the management of peritonitis. The data on the course of patients undergoing peritoneal catheter reinsertion after removal for peritonitis are limited. The present study was designed to examine what happens to patients on chronic peritoneal dialysis (CPD) after peritoneal catheter removal for peritonitis. We retrospectively reviewed the charts of patients who developed peritonitis between January 1, 1990, and September 1, 2002. We identified 1146 episodes of peritonitis; in 189 of the episodes (16%), the peritoneal catheter was removed. Catheters were reinserted in 88 of those patients (47%). Reasons for peritoneal catheter removal among the 88 patients who underwent peritoneal catheter reinsertion included unit protocol (51%), poor response to antibiotics (46%), and exit-site or tunnel infection (3%). Reasons for peritoneal catheter removal among the 101 patients in whom the peritoneal catheter was not reinserted included unit protocol (62%), poor response to antibiotics (20%), and extensive history of peritonitis (18%). After reinsertion, the new peritoneal catheter remained in place for a mean of 15.4 +/- 15.4 months (range: 1-75 months). In 37 of the 88 patients with reinserted peritoneal catheters (42%), the catheters remained in place for longer than 1 year. The remaining 6 patients underwent transplantation or were transferred to another facility. Of the remaining 51 patients whose new peritoneal catheters lastedfor less than I year, 13 (25.5%) died, and 32 (63%) were transferred permanently to hemodialysis. Of the 101 patients who did not have a peritoneal catheter reinserted, 23 (23%) died within the 2-week period following the onset of peritonitis. The rest were transferred to hemodialysis. The reasons noted for not reinserting the peritoneal catheter included frequent episodes of peritonitis, patient unwillingness to retry CPD therapy, psychosocial reasons, bowel perforation, or transfer to an institution unable to perform CPD therapy. We conclude that, among patients who medically require peritoneal catheter removal because of peritonitis, few will successfully return to long-term CPD therapy. Of the patients who required peritoneal catheter removal in our study, 23% died within the first 2 weeks after the onset of peritonitis, before catheter reinsertion could be considered. Only 47% of the patients underwent a successful catheter reinsertion; and, of those, only 34% remained on CPD therapy I year later Thus, only 20% of patients undergoing PD catheter removal remain on CPD therapy 1 year after catheter removal.

Patterns of infection in patients maintained on long-term peritoneal dialysis therapy with multiple episodes of peritonitis.

The causes of peritonitis in patients with end-stage renal disease maintained on long-term peritoneal dialysis (PD) are unclear. One possible explanation for peritonitis, particularly in patients with multiple episodes of infection, is the release of planktonic bacteria from biofilm on the walls of catheters. Bacteria form biofilm on the walls of catheters within 48 hours of their placement. If this explanation were correct, one would expect there to be reappearance of organisms causing infection in patients with multiple episodes of peritonitis. The charts of all patients starting long-term PD at New Haven CAPD from January 1, 1990, through July 31, 2000, were reviewed. Patients were included in the study if they had experienced more than one episode of culture-positive peritonitis and complete data were available concerning cultured organisms and antibiotic sensitivity patterns. Episodes of infection, organisms, and sensitivities and catheter changes were reviewed. Of 630 patients, 198 were identified as meeting these criteria. There were 114 men; 104 patients were white. Of 198 patients, 157 (80%) had at least one repeat infection with the same organism. In 124 (79%) patients, more than 50% of the peritonitis episodes were caused by the same organism. Of 90 patients who had more than four episodes of infection in their history, 59 (65%) had at least half or more of their episodes caused by the same organism. Sequential analyses for independence revealed that for Staphylococcus epidermidis and for Staphylococcus aureus, there was a significantly increased likelihood for these organisms to follow themselves as causative organisms of peritonitis. When the data were analyzed using the Spearman correlation test, the results indicated that the likelihood of repeat infections occurring was significantly greater than by chance alone. Of 67 patients with catheter changes and subsequent peritonitis, only 10 (15%) developed repeat infections with the same organism after the catheter change. Eight of these were due to yeast. These data support the hypothesis that bacterial biofilm on the walls of peritoneal catheters may be associated with peritonitis in patients maintained on long-term PD and may contribute to at least some of these episodes of infection.

Depression and its association with peritonitis in long-term peritoneal dialysis patients.

BACKGROUND: Depression is the most common psychological disorder among patients with end-stage renal disease and has been associated with mortality in patients maintained on hemodialysis therapy. Peritonitis is the leading cause of technique failure among long-term peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients. This prospective study is designed to examine the relationship between depression and peritonitis. METHODS: All patients on long-term PD therapy in our unit between January 1, 1997, and January 31, 2002, completed a Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) assessment at 6-month intervals. BDI scores were analyzed 2 ways. First, patients were placed into either group I (BDI score < 10) or group II (BDI score > or = 11) and were reclassified based on subsequent scores. Second, multivariable analysis was performed looking at initial BDI score as a risk factor for peritonitis, adjusting for age older than 65 years, diabetes, coronary artery disease, and race. RESULTS: One hundred sixty-two patients were enrolled, and 281 individual BDI assessments were completed. There was a significantly greater incidence of diabetes and coronary artery disease in group II. Rates for overall and gram-positive peritonitis were significantly greater in group II patients compared with group I patients. Using Cox regression, only BDI score of 11 or greater was associated with the development of peritonitis (hazard ratio, 2.7; 95% confidence interval, 1.2 to 6.0). CONCLUSION: There is an association between BDI score of 11 or greater and the development of peritonitis. Whether treatment of depression can impact on the rate of peritonitis remains to be examined.

The BDI and the SF36: which tool to use to screen for depression?

Recent studies have suggested a relationship between depression--as assessed by the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI)--and mortality in end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients. A recent study from the Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (DOPPS) indicated an association between mortality in a large cohort of hemodialysis patients and the patients' responses in the preceding 4 weeks to two questions on the Kidney Disease Quality of Life, Short Form (KDQOL-SF36): "Have you felt downhearted and blue?" and "Have you felt so down in the dumps that nothing could cheer you?" A BDI score > or = 11 and a score < or = 3 for the two questions on the SF36 were considered to suggest the presence of depressive symptoms; both scores have been associated with increased mortality in hemodialysis patients. We aimed to examine the relationship of the two SF36 questions with depressive symptoms as assessed by the BDI. All patients on chronic peritoneal dialysis (CPD) therapy and daily hemodialysis therapy in our units between June 2000 and January 2002 were asked to complete a BDI and an SF36. We recorded 135 tests in 80 CPD patients, and 76 tests in 17 daily hemodialysis patients. Correlation coefficients (r2 values) of the responses to the two questions on the SF36 and the BDI scores demonstrated a significant relationship between the scores. The r2 values for the CPD patients' two SF36 responses and the BDI scores were -0.622 and -0.506; the r2 values for the daily hemodialysis patients were -0.363 and -0.317. The sensitivity and specificity for each SF36 response to be < or = 3 when the BDI was > or = 11 were 82.4% and 68.6% for the "downhearted and blue" question and 65% and 67% for the "down in the dumps" question. Whether the two questions on the SF36 that suggest depression can replace the BDI as a screening tool requires further study. Furthermore, it is unclear if the two questions on the SF36 are predictive of mortality because of their association with clinical depression or because of other issues.

Racial differences and peritonitis in an urban peritoneal dialysis center.

Racial differences have been reported among various groups with end-stage renal disease maintained on dialysis. In particular, patient survival on dialysis has been reported to be better in African-American patients than in Caucasian patients. Peritonitis rates and dropout from chronic peritoneal dialysis (CPD) have been reported to be higher in African-American patients. We decided to review our experience with peritonitis rates in African-American and Caucasian patients. From 1994 to 2000, 403 patients were maintained on CPD in the New Haven continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) unit. Peritonitis rates were 1 episode in 14 patient-months in Caucasian patients and 1 episode in 13.6 patient-months in African-American patients. Mean ages at the start of dialysis were 52.4 +/- 16.2 years in the Caucasian patients and 62.6 +/- 14.9 years in the African-American patients. African-American patients were older. African-American and Caucasian patients had similar peritonitis rates. Time of first episode of peritonitis was not different in the two groups.

The chronic kidney disease patient in the acute hospital environment.

CKD is common, affecting more than 10% of the adult US population. Hospital admissions are common among these patients and present challenges for their caregivers. In the acute hospital setting, there is often a lack of awareness of the CKD patient and the best practices developed to help this population. This can place the CKD patient at risk for medication errors such as incorrect dosage or administration of a potentially harmful or unhelpful medication. CKD patients may need procedures during a hospital stay that increase their risk of adverse events. Also, common admission practices such as placing intravenous access needs to be thoughtfully considered in this population.

Patient-specific phosphorus mobilization clearance during nocturnal and short daily hemodialysis.

The kinetics of plasma phosphorus during different hemodialysis (HD) modalities are incompletely understood. We recently demonstrated that a pseudo one-compartment kinetic model including phosphorus mobilization from various body compartments into extracellular fluids can describe intradialytic and postdialytic rebound kinetics of plasma phosphorus during conventional and short 2-hour HD treatments. In this model, individual patient differences in phosphorus kinetics were characterized by a single parameter, the phosphorus mobilization clearance (K(M)). In this report we determined K(M) in patients treated by in-center nocturnal HD (ICNHD) and short daily HD (SDHD) with low dialyzer phosphate clearance. In the ICNHD study, eight patients underwent 8-hour HD treatments where intradialytic and postdialytic plasma samples were collected; K(M) values were determined by nonlinear regression of plasma concentration as a function of time. In the SDHD study, five patients were studied during 28 treatments for approximately 3 hours. Here, K(M) was calculated using only predialytic and postdialytic plasma phosphorus concentrations. Dialyzer phosphate clearances were 134 ± 20 (mean ± SD) and 95 ± 16 mL/min during ICNHD and SDHD, respectively. K(M) values for the respective therapies were 124 ± 83 and 103 ± 33 mL/min, comparable to those determined previously during conventional and short HD treatments of 98 ± 44 mL/min. When results from ICNHD, SDHD, and previous HD modalities were combined, K(M) was directly correlated with postdialytic body weight (r = 0.38, P = 0.025) and inversely correlated with predialytic phosphorus concentration (r = -0.47, P = 0.005). These findings suggest that phosphorus kinetics during various HD modalities can be described by a pseudo one-compartment model.