Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
1.
Perit Dial Int ; 36(2): 171-6, 2016.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26374834

RESUMEN

UNLABELLED: ♦ BACKGROUND: Many patients start renal replacement therapy urgently on in-center hemodialysis via a central venous catheter, which is considered suboptimal. An alternative approach to manage these patients is to start them on peritoneal dialysis (PD). In this report, we describe the first reported Canadian experience with an urgent-start PD program. Additionally we reviewed the literature in this area. ♦ METHODS: In this prospective observational study, we report on our experience in a single academic center. This program started in July 2010. We included patients who initiated PD urgently, that is within 2 weeks of catheter insertion. We followed all incident PD patients until October 2013 for mechanical and infectious complications. Peritoneal dialysis catheters were inserted either percutaneously or laparoscopically and dialysis was initiated in either an inpatient or outpatient setting. ♦ RESULTS: Thirty patients were started on urgent PD during our study period. Follow-up ranged from 28 to 1,050 days. Twenty insertions (66.7%) were done percutaneously and 10 (33.3%) were laparoscopic. Dialysis was initiated within 2 weeks (range: 0-13 days, median = 6 days). Twenty-four patients (80%) started PD in an outpatient setting and 6 patients (20%) required immediate inpatient PD start. Three patients (10%) developed a minor peri-catheter leak during the first week of training that was managed conservatively. There were no episodes of peritonitis or exit-site/tunnel infection during the first 4 weeks post-insertion. Four patients (13.3%) from the percutaneous insertion group and 2 patients (6.7%) from laparoscopic insertions developed catheter dysfunction due to migration, which was managed by repositioning, without need for catheter replacement or modality switch. ♦ CONCLUSIONS: Our results are consistent with other studies in this area and demonstrate that urgent-start PD is an acceptable and safe alternative to hemodialysis in patients who need to start dialysis urgently without established dialysis access.


Asunto(s)
Atención Ambulatoria/métodos , Fallo Renal Crónico/terapia , Diálisis Peritoneal/métodos , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Canadá , Estudios de Cohortes , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Diálisis Peritoneal/efectos adversos , Evaluación de Programas y Proyectos de Salud , Estudios Prospectivos , Garantía de la Calidad de Atención de Salud , Factores de Tiempo , Adulto Joven
2.
Clin J Am Soc Nephrol ; 10(8): 1380-8, 2015 Aug 07.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26048890

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Neutral-pH, low-glucose degradation products solutions were developed in an attempt to lessen the adverse effects of conventional peritoneal dialysis solutions. A systematic review was performed evaluating the effect of these solutions on residual renal function, urine volume, peritoneal ultrafiltration, and peritoneal small-solute transport (dialysate to plasma creatinine ratio) over time. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: Multiple electronic databases were searched from January of 1995 to January of 2013. Randomized trials reporting on any of four prespecified outcomes were selected by consensus among multiple reviewers. RESULTS: Eleven trials of 643 patients were included. Trials were generally of poor quality. The meta-analysis was performed using a random effects model. The use of neutral-pH, low-glucose degradation products solutions resulted in better preserved residual renal function at various study durations, including >1 year (combined analysis: 11 studies; 643 patients; standardized mean difference =0.17 ml/min; 95% confidence interval, 0.01 to 0.32), and greater urine volumes (eight studies; 598 patients; mean difference =128 ml/d; 95% confidence interval, 58 to 198). There was no significant difference in peritoneal ultrafiltration (seven studies; 571 patients; mean difference =-110; 95% confidence interval, -312 to 91) or dialysate to plasma creatinine ratio (six studies; 432 patients; mean difference =0.03; 95% confidence interval, 0.00 to 0.06). CONCLUSIONS: The use of neutral-pH, low-glucose degradation products solutions results in better preservation of residual renal function and greater urine volumes. The effect on residual renal function occurred early and persisted beyond 12 months. Additional studies are required to evaluate the use of neutral-pH, low-glucose degradation products solutions on hard clinical outcomes.


Asunto(s)
Soluciones para Diálisis/uso terapéutico , Glucosa/química , Enfermedades Renales/terapia , Riñón/fisiopatología , Diálisis Peritoneal/métodos , Biomarcadores/sangre , Distribución de Chi-Cuadrado , Creatinina/sangre , Soluciones para Diálisis/efectos adversos , Soluciones para Diálisis/química , Soluciones para Diálisis/metabolismo , Humanos , Concentración de Iones de Hidrógeno , Enfermedades Renales/sangre , Enfermedades Renales/diagnóstico , Enfermedades Renales/fisiopatología , Diálisis Peritoneal/efectos adversos , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Factores de Riesgo , Resultado del Tratamiento , Micción , Urodinámica
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA