Peritoneal dialysis after failed kidney allograft: Comparing patients with and without pd before transplant.

BACKGROUND: The result of published studies on the clinical outcome of peritoneal dialysis (PD) after kidney allograft failure is conflicting. There are also few published data on the outcome of patients who had PD before kidney transplant and then return to PD after allograft failure. METHODS: We reviewed 100 patients who were started on PD after kidney allograft failure between 2001 and 2020 (failed transplant group); 50 of them received PD before transplant. We compared the clinical outcome to 200 new PD patients matched for age, sex, and diabetic status (control group). RESULTS: The patients were followed for 45.8 ± 40.5 months. the 2-year patient survival rate was 83.3% and 87.8% for the failed transplant and control groups, respectively (log rank test, p = 0.2). The corresponding 2-year technique survival rate 66.5% and 71.7% (p = 0.5). The failed transplant and control groups also had similar hospitalization rate and peritonitis rate. In the failed transplant group, there was also no difference in patient survival, technique survival, hospitalization, or peritonitis rate between those with and without PD before transplant. In the failed transplant group, patients who had PD before transplant and then returned to PD after allograft failure had substantial increase in D/P4 (0.585 ± 0.130 to 0.659 ± 0.111, paired t-test, p = 0.032) and MTAC creatinine (7.74 ± 3.68 to 9.73 ± 3.00 ml/min/1.73m2, p = 0.047) from the time before the transplant to the time after PD was resumed after failed allograft. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical outcome of PD patients with a failed kidney allograft is similar to other PD patients. However, patients who have a history of PD before kidney transplant and then return to PD after allograft failure have increased peritoneal transport parameters.

The Effect of Neutral Peritoneal Dialysis Solution with Low Glucose-Degradation-Product on the Fluid Status and Body Composition--A Randomized Control Trial.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies report conflicting results on the benefit of peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients treated with low glucose degradation product (GDP) solution. The effects of low GDP solution on body fluid status and arterial pulse wave velocity (PWV) have not been studied. METHODS: We randomly assigned 68 incident PD patients to low GDP (Intervention Group) or conventional solutions (Control Group); 4 dropped off before they received the assigned treatment. Patients were followed for 52 weeks for changes in ultrafiltration, residual renal function, body fluid status and arterial PWV. RESULT: After 52 weeks, Intervention Group had higher overhydration (3.1 ± 2.6 vs 1.9 ± 2.2 L, p = 0.045) and extracellular water volume (17.7 ± 3.9 vs 15.8 ± 3.1 L, p = 0.034) than Control Group. There was no significant difference in PWV between groups. There was no significant difference in residual renal function between the Groups. Intervention Group had lower ultrafiltration volume than Control Group at 4 weeks (0.45 ± .0.61 vs 0.90 ± 0.79 L/day, p = 0.013), but the difference became insignificant at later time points. Intervention Group had lower serum CRP levels than Control Group (4.17 ± 0.77 vs 4.91 ± 0.95 mg/dL, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Incident PD patients treated with low GDP solution have less severe systemic inflammation but trends of less ultrafiltration, and more fluid accumulation. However, the effects on ultrafiltration and fluid accumulation disappear with time. The long term effect of low GDP solution requires further study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00966615.