Long-term survival of patients receiving home hemodialysis with self-punctured arteriovenous access.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the long-term survival of patients receiving home hemodialysis (HHD) through self-punctured arteriovenous access. METHODS: We conducted an observational study of all patients receiving HHD at our facility between 2001 and 2020. The primary outcome was treatment survival, and it was defined as the duration from HHD initiation to the first event of death or technique failure. The secondary outcomes were the cumulative incidence of technique failure and mortality. Cox proportional hazard models were used to identify the predictive factors for treatment survival. RESULTS: A total of 77 patients (mean age, 50.7 years; 84.4% male; 23.4% with diabetes) were included. The median dialysis duration was 18 hours per week, and all patients self-punctured their arteriovenous fistula. During a median follow-up of 116 months, 30 treatment failures (11 deaths and 19 technique failures) were observed. The treatment survival was 100% at 1 year, 83.5% at 5 years, 67.2% at 10 years, and 34.6% at 15 years. Age (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.07) and diabetes (aHR, 2.45) were significantly associated with treatment survival. Cardiovascular disease was the leading cause of death, and vascular access-related issues were the primary causes of technique failure, which occurred predominantly after 100 months from HHD initiation. CONCLUSION: This study showed a favorable long-term prognosis of patients receiving HHD. HHD can be a sustainable form of long-term kidney replacement therapy. However, access-related technique failures occur more frequently in patients receiving it over the long term. Therefore, careful management of vascular access is crucial to enhance technique survival.

Home Dialysis Is Associated with Lower Costs and Better Survival than Other Modalities: A Population-Based Study in Ontario, Canada.

Background:How and where to initiate dialysis are policy challenges with enormous economic and health consequences. Initiating with home hemodialysis (HD) or peritoneal dialysis (PD) may reduce costs and improve outcomes but evidence is conflicting.Methods:We conducted a population-based study in patients aged ≥ 18 years who initiated chronic dialysis in the province of Ontario, Canada from 2006 to 2014 (N = 12,691) using linked administrative data. Patients were grouped by initial modality: facility HD, facility short daily or slow nocturnal (SD/SN) HD, PD, home HD. We estimated publicly-paid healthcare costs (2015 Canadian dollars; 1 = 0.947 US dollar) and survival, from dialysis initiation to March 2015.Results:By 5 years after dialysis initiation, mean 30-day costs (as-treated) for patients receiving PD and home HD were 50% and 64% lower, respectively, than for facility HD patients ($11,011). Approximately 50% of costs were unrelated to dialysis, reflecting high comorbidity in these patients. With covariate adjustment, mean 5-year cumulative costs were similar for initiators of home HD and PD ($304,178 and $349,338) and higher for facility HD initiators ($410,981). The highest 5-year unadjusted survival was for home HD patients (80%), followed by PD (52%), SD/SN HD (50%), and facility HD (42%).Conclusions:This study in a large cohort over 9 years provides new population-based evidence suggesting that initiating dialysis at home is cost-effective, with lower costs and better survival, than starting with facility HD. Survival differences persisted after adjustment for baseline characteristics but we could not adjust for functional status or severity of comorbidities.

A comparison of technique survival in Canadian peritoneal dialysis and home hemodialysis patients.

BACKGROUND: High discontinuation rates remain a challenge for home hemodialysis (HHD) and peritoneal dialysis (PD). We compared technique failure risks among Canadian patients receiving HHD and PD. METHODS: Using the Canadian Organ Replacement Register, we studied adult patients who initiated HHD or PD within 1 year of beginning dialysis between 2000 and 2012, with follow-up until 31 December 2013. Technique failure was defined as a transfer to any alternative modality for a period of ≥60 days. Technique survival between HHD and PD was compared using a Fine and Gray competing risk model. We also examined the time dependence of technique survival, the association of patient characteristics with technique failure and causes of technique failure. RESULTS: Between 2000 and 2012, 15 314 patients were treated with a home dialysis modality within 1 year of dialysis initiation: 14 461 on PD and 853 on HHD. Crude technique failure rates were highest during the first year of therapy for both home modalities. During the entire period of follow-up, technique failure was lower with HHD compared with PD (adjusted hazard ratio = 0.79; 95% confidence interval 0.69-0.90). However, the relative technique failure risk was not proportional over time and the beneficial association with HHD was only apparent after the first year of dialysis. Comparisons also varied among subgroups and the superior technique survival associated with HHD relative to PD was less pronounced in more recent years and among older patients. Predictors of technique failure also differed between modalities. While obesity, smoking and small facility size were associated with higher technique failure in both PD and HHD, the association with age and gender differed. Furthermore, the majority of discontinuation occurred for medical reasons in PD (38%), while the majority of HHD patients experienced technique failure due to social reasons or inadequate resources (50%). CONCLUSIONS: In this Canadian study of home dialysis patients, HHD was associated with better technique survival compared with PD. However, patterns of technique failure differed significantly among these modalities. Strategies to improve patient retention across all home dialysis modalities are needed.

A Perspective on the Current Status of Home Hemodialysis.

Most hemodialysis (HD) in Japan is based on the central dialysis fluid delivery system (CDDS). With CDDS, there is an improvement in work efficiency, reduction in cost, and a reduction in regional and institutional differences in dialysis conditions. This has resulted in an improvement in the survival rate throughout Japan. However, as the number of cases with various complications increases, it is necessary to select the optimal dialysis prescription (including hours and frequency) for each individual in order to further improve survival rates. To perform intensive HD, home HD is essential, and various prescriptions have been tried. However, several challenges remain before widespread implementation of home HD can occur.

Short daily-, nocturnal- and conventional-home hemodialysis have similar patient and treatment survival.

Home hemodialysis (HHD) has many benefits, but less is known about relative outcomes when comparing different home-based hemodialysis modalities. Here, we compare patient and treatment survival for patients receiving short daily HHD (2-3 hours/5 plus sessions per week), nocturnal HHD (6-8 hours/5 plus sessions per week) and conventional HHD (3-6 hours/2-4 sessions per week). A nationally representative cohort of Canadian HHD patients from 1996-2012 was studied. The primary outcome was death or treatment failure (defined as a permanent return to in-center hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis) using an intention to treat analysis and death-censored treatment failure as a secondary outcome. The cohort consisted of 600, 508 and 202 patients receiving conventional, nocturnal, and short daily HHD, respectively. Conventional-HHD patients were more likely to use dialysis catheter access (43%) versus nocturnal or short daily HHD (32% and 31%, respectively). Although point estimates were in favor of both therapies, after multivariable adjustment for patient and center factors, there was no statistically significant reduction in the relative hazard for the death/treatment failure composite comparing nocturnal to conventional HHD (hazard ratio 0.83 [95% confidence interval 0.66-1.03]) or short daily to conventional HHD (0.84, 0.63-1.12). Among those with information on vascular access, patients receiving nocturnal HHD had a relative improvement in death-censored treatment survival (0.75, 0.57-0.98). Thus, in this national cohort of HHD patients, those receiving short daily and nocturnal HHD had similar patient/treatment survival compared with patients receiving conventional HHD.

Racial Differences in Home Dialysis Utilization and Outcomes in Canada.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Data on racial disparities in home dialysis utilization and outcomes are lacking in Canada, where health care is universally available. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: We studied patients starting maintenance dialysis between 1996 and 2012 in the Canadian Organ Replacement Register, stratified by race: white, Asian, black, Aboriginal, Indian subcontinent, and other. The association between race and treatment with home dialysis was examined using generalized linear models. Secondary outcomes assessed racial differences in all-cause mortality and technique failure using a Fine and Gray competing risk model. RESULTS: 66,600 patients initiated chronic dialysis between 1996 and 2012. Compared with whites (n=46,092), treatment with home dialysis was lower among Aboriginals (n=3866; adjusted relative risk, RR, 0.71; 95% confidence interval, CI, 0.66 to 0.76) and higher in Asians (n=4157; adjusted RR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.22 to 1.35) and others (n=2170; adjusted RR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.20) but similar in blacks (n=2143) and subcontinent Indians (n=2809). Black (adjusted hazard ratio, HR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.16 to 1.48) and Aboriginal (adjusted HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.06 to 1.33) patients treated with peritoneal dialysis had a significantly higher adjusted risk of technique failure compared with whites, whereas Asians had a lower risk (adjusted HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.82 to 0.99). In patients on peritoneal dialysis, the risk of death was significantly lower in Asians (adjusted HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.75 to 0.92), blacks (adjusted HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.59 to 0.85), and others (adjusted HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.68 to 0.92) but higher in Aboriginals (adjusted HR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.32) compared with whites. Among patients on home hemodialysis, no significant racial differences in patient and technique survival were observed, which may be limited by the low number of events among each subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: With the exception of Aboriginals, all racial minority groups in Canada were as likely to be treated with home dialysis compared with whites. However, significant racial differences exist in outcomes.

The Rise, Fall, and Resurgence of Home Hemodialysis.

Home hemodialysis (HD) was first introduced in the 1960s with a rapid increase in its use due to inability of dialysis units to accommodate patient demand. A sharp decline was subsequently seen with expanding outpatient dialysis facilities and changes in reimbursement policies. In the last decade, with emerging reports of benefits with home HD and more user-friendly equipment, there has been resurgence in home HD. However, home HD remains underutilized with considerable variations between and within countries. This paper will review the history of home HD, elaborate on its established benefits, identify some of the barriers in uptake of this modality and expand on potential strategies to overcome these barriers.

Recent Trends in Home Hemodialysis Therapy in Japan.

BACKGROUND: Home hemodialysis (HHD) is rapidly becoming more widespread because HHD programs enable patients to receive a sufficient dialysis dose to improve their quality of life and survival rate without compromising their lifestyle. SUMMARY: Although HHD in Japan has a long history, the 529 dialysis patients being treated with HHD as of the end of 2014 account for only 0.17% of all dialysis patients. HHD is well indicated for patients who are younger, male, and nondiabetic. The major HHD dialysis programs were provided 4-6 times per week for 3-5 h per session, and 79.3% of HDD patients showed treatment adequacy with a hemodialysis product >72. Key Messages: To expand HHD in Japan, several challenges must be overcome. First, the government should clearly state that home medicine is the way forward and incentivize facilities to provide, and patients to receive, HHD. Second, we need to establish a typical business model for HHD to include the supply of medical devices, collection of disposals, and development of a special machine for HHD.

Survival of Elderly Adults Undergoing Incident Home Hemodialysis and Kidney Transplantation.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the mortality of elderly adults with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) treated with home hemodialysis (HD) with that of those receiving a kidney transplant (KTx). DESIGN: Prospective cohort. SETTING: Pertinent data for the two groups were obtained from electronic medical records from a large dialysis provider and the U.S. Renal Data System. PARTICIPANTS: Using data from elderly adults (aged ≥65) who started home HD and underwent KTx in the US between 2007 and 2011, a 1:1 propensity score (PS)-matched cohort of 960 elderly adults was created, and the association between treatment modality and all-cause mortality was examined using Cox proportional hazards and competing risk regression survival models using modality failure as a competing event. MEASUREMENTS: Modality of renal replacement therapy. RESULTS: The baseline mean age ± standard deviation of the PS-matched individuals undergoing home HD was 71 ± 6, and that of KTx recipients was 71 ± 5, 69% of both groups were male, 81% of those undergoing home HD and 79% of KTx recipients were white, and 11% and 12%, respectively, were African American. Median follow-up time was 205 days (interquartile range (IQR) 78-364 days) for those undergoing home HD and 795 days (IQR 366-1,221 days) for KTx recipients. There were 97 deaths (20%, 253/1,000 patient-years, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 207-309/1,000 patient-years) in the home HD group and 48 deaths (10%, 45/1,000 patient-years, 95% CI = 34-60/1,000 patient-years) in the KTx group. Elderly adults undergoing home HD had a risk of mortality that was almost five times as high as that of KTx recipients (hazard ratio = 4.74, 95% CI = 3.25-6.91). Similar results were seen in competing risk regression analyses (subhazard ratio = 4.71, 95% CI = 3.27-6.79). Results were consistent across different types of kidney donors and subgroups divided according to various recipient characteristics. CONCLUSION: Elderly adults with ESRD who receive a KTx have greater survival than those who undergo home HD. Further studies are needed to assess whether KTx receipt is associated with other benefits such as better quality of life and lower hospitalization rates.

Home- or Institutional Hemodialysis? - a Matched Pair-Cohort Study Comparing Survival and Some Modifiable Factors Related to Survival.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Survival for dialysis patients is poor. Earlier studies have shown better survival in home-hemodialysis (HHD). The aims of this study are to compare survival for matched patients with HHD and institutional hemodialysis (IHD) and to elucidate the effect on factors related to survival such as hyperphosphatemia, fluid overload and anemia. METHODS: In this retrospective, observational study, incident patients starting HHD and IHD were matched according to sex, age, comorbidity and date of start. Survival analysis was performed both as "intention to treat" including renal transplantation and "on treatment" with censoring at the date of transplantation. Dialysis doses, laboratory parameters and prescriptions of medications were compared. RESULTS: After matching, 41 pairs of patients, with HHD and IHD, were included. Survival among HHD patients was longer compared with IHD, median survival being 17.3 and 13.0 years (p=0.016), respectively. The "on treatment" analysis, also favoured HHD (p=0.015). HHD patients had lower phosphate, 1.5 mmol/L compared with 2.1 mmol/L (p<0.001) and no antihypertensives and diuretics compared with 2 for IHD patients at 6 (p=0.001) and 18 months (p=0.014). There were no differences in hemoglobin or albumin. CONCLUSION: HHD shows better survival compared with IHD, also after controlling for patient selection. This could be caused by better phosphate and/or fluid balance associated with higher dialysis doses.

Association of Vascular Access Type with Mortality, Hospitalization, and Transfer to In-Center Hemodialysis in Patients Undergoing Home Hemodialysis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: In individuals undergoing in-center hemodialysis (HD), use of central venous catheters (CVCs) is associated with worse clinical outcomes compared with use of arteriovenous access. However, it is unclear whether a similar difference in risk by vascular access type is present in patients undergoing home HD. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: Our study examined the associations of vascular access type with all-cause mortality, hospitalization, and transfer to in-center HD in patients who initiated home HD from 2007 to 2011 in 464 facilities in 43 states in the United States. Patients were followed through December 31, 2011. Data were analyzed using competing risks hazards regression, with vascular access type at the start of home HD as the primary exposure in a propensity score-matched cohort (1052 patients; 526 with CVC and 526 with arteriovenous access). RESULTS: Over a median follow-up of 312 days, 110 patients died, 604 had at least one hospitalization, and 202 transferred to in-center hemodialysis. Compared with arteriovenous access use, CVC use was associated with higher risk for mortality (hazard ratio, 1.73; 95% confidence interval, 1.18 to 2.54) and hospitalization (hazard ratio, 1.19; 95% confidence interval, 1.02 to 1.39). CVC use was not associated with increased risk for transfer to in-center HD. The results of analyses in the entire unmatched cohort (2481 patients), with vascular access type modeled as a baseline exposure at start of home HD or a time-varying exposure, were similar. Analyses among a propensity score-matched cohort of patients undergoing in-center HD also showed similar risks for death and hospitalization with use of CVCs. CONCLUSIONS: In a large cohort of patients on home HD, CVC use was associated with higher risk for mortality and hospitalization. Additional studies are needed to identify interventions which may reduce risk associated with use of CVCs among patients undergoing home HD.

Predictors of Transfer to Home Hemodialysis after Peritoneal Dialysis Completion.

UNLABELLED: ♦ BACKGROUND: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the predictors of transfer to home hemodialysis (HHD) after peritoneal dialysis (PD) completion. ♦ METHODS: All Australian and New Zealand patients treated with PD on day 90 after initiation of renal replacement therapy between 2000 and 2012 were included. Completion of PD was defined by death, transplantation, or hemodialysis (HD) for 180 days or more. Patients were categorized as "transferred to HHD" if they initiated HHD fewer than 180 days after PD had ended. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate predictors of transfer to HHD in a restricted cohort experiencing PD technique failure; a competing-risks analysis was used in the unrestricted cohort. ♦ RESULTS: Of 10 710 incident PD patients, 3752 died, 1549 underwent transplantation, and 2915 transferred to HD, among whom 156 (5.4%) started HHD. The positive predictors of transfer to HHD in the restricted cohort were male sex [odds ratio (OR): 2.81], obesity (OR: 2.20), and PD therapy duration (OR: 1.10 per year). Negative predictors included age (OR: 0.95 per year), infectious cause of technique failure (OR: 0.48), underweight (OR: 0.50), kidney disease resulting from hypertension (OR: 0.38) or diabetes (OR: 0.32), race being Maori (OR: 0.65) or Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (OR: 0.30). Comparable results were obtained with a competing-risks model. ♦ CONCLUSIONS: Transfer to HHD after completion of PD is rare and predicted by patient characteristics at baseline and at the time of PD end. Transition to HHD should be considered more often in patients using PD, especially when they fulfill the identified characteristics.

Racial Differences in Survival of Incident Home Hemodialysis and Kidney Transplant Patients.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have indicated that patients on maintenance hemodialysis have worse survival compared with kidney transplant (KTx) recipients. However, none of these studies have compared mortality of the US patients using alternative dialysis modalities such as home hemodialysis (HHD) with KTx recipients. METHODS: Comparing patients who started HHD with those who received kidney transplantation in the United States between 2007 and 2011, we created a 1:1 propensity score-matched cohort of 4000 patients and examined the association between treatment modality and all-cause mortality using Cox proportional hazard models. RESULTS: The mean ± SD age of the propensity score-matched HHD and KTx patients at baseline were 54 ± 15 years and 54 ± 14 years, 65% were men (both groups), 70% and 72% of patients were whites, and 19% were African American (both groups), respectively. Over 5 years of follow-up, HHD patients had 4 times higher mortality risk compared with KTx recipients in the entire patient population (hazard ratio [HR], 4.06; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 3.27-5.04); total event number, 411), and similar difference was found across each race stratum. However, during the first year of therapy, although the white HHD patients had higher mortality risk (HR, 4.21; 95% CI, 3.10-5.73; total event number, 332) compared with their KTx counterparts, there was no significant difference in mortality risk between African American HHD and KTx patients (HR, 1.62; 95% CI, 0.77-3.39; total event number, 55). This result was consistent across different types of kidney donors. CONCLUSIONS: The HHD patients appear to have 4 times higher mortality compared with KTx recipients regardless of the type of kidney donor. Further studies are needed to understand the reasons underlying racial differenes during the first year of therapy.

Vascular Access Type and Patient and Technique Survival in Home Hemodialysis Patients: The Canadian Organ Replacement Register.

BACKGROUND: While central venous catheter (CVC) use has expanded home hemodialysis (HHD) eligibility to many patients who may be unable to self-cannulate an arteriovenous (AV) access, the association between CVC use and mortality has not been directly examined among HHD patients. STUDY DESIGN: Registry-based retrospective observational cohort study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Incident HHD patients in The Canadian Organ Replacement Register who had information for vascular access type (CVC vs AV access) within the first year of HHD therapy initiation. PREDICTOR: Use of a CVC versus an AV access (AV fistula or graft) within the first year of HHD therapy initiation. OUTCOME: The composite of all-cause mortality and technique failure (long-term transfer to an alternate dialysis modality). A Cox proportional hazards model was used to evaluate the adjusted composite outcome and each outcome separately. RESULTS: 1,869 patients initiated HHD therapy in Canada in 1996 to 2012, of whom 1,217 had an access type recorded within the first year of HHD therapy initiation. Compared to CVC use (n=523) and during a median follow-up of 513 and 427 days for AV access and CVC patients, respectively, AV access use (n=694) was associated with lower risk for the composite event of death and technique failure (490 events; adjusted HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.64-0.94) and lower adjusted all-cause mortality (129 deaths; adjusted HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.43-0.91); the risk for technique failure was nominally lower, but this result was not statistically significant (361 events; adjusted HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.67-1.05). Results were robust to sensitivity analyses and after missing data imputation. LIMITATIONS: Missing information for vascular access type (n=659[35% of patients]) and lack of information for longitudinal changes in vascular access type. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to CVC use, AV access use was associated with superior survival. Minimizing CVC use and maximizing AV access use while addressing barriers to their placement and self-cannulation may improve HHD outcomes.

Mortality, Hospitalization, and Technique Failure in Daily Home Hemodialysis and Matched Peritoneal Dialysis Patients: A Matched Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Use of home dialysis is growing in the United States, but few direct comparisons of major clinical outcomes on daily home hemodialysis (HHD) versus peritoneal dialysis (PD) exist. STUDY DESIGN: Matched cohort study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: We matched 4,201 new HHD patients in 2007 to 2010 with 4,201 new PD patients from the US Renal Data System database. PREDICTOR: Daily HHD versus PD. OUTCOMES: Relative mortality, hospitalization, and technique failure. RESULTS: Mean time from end-stage renal disease onset to home dialysis therapy initiation was 44.6 months for HHD and 44.3 months for PD patients. In intention-to-treat analysis, HHD was associated with 20% lower risk for all-cause mortality (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.73-0.87), 8% lower risk for all-cause hospitalization (HR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.89-0.95), and 37% lower risk for technique failure (HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.58-0.68), all relative to PD. In the subset of 1,368 patients who initiated home dialysis therapy within 6 months of end-stage renal disease onset, HHD was associated with similar risk for all-cause mortality (HR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.80-1.13), similar risk for all-cause hospitalization (HR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.88-1.05), and 30% lower risk for technique failure (HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.60-0.82). Regarding hospitalization, risk comparisons favored HHD for cardiovascular disease and dialysis access infection and PD for bloodstream infection. LIMITATIONS: Matching unlikely to reduce confounding attributable to unmeasured factors, including residual kidney function; lack of data regarding dialysis frequency, duration, and dose in daily HHD patients and frequency and solution in PD patients; diagnosis codes used to classify admissions. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that relative to PD, daily HHD is associated with decreased mortality, hospitalization, and technique failure. However, risks for mortality and hospitalization were similar with these modalities in new dialysis patients. The interaction between modality and end-stage renal disease duration at home dialysis therapy initiation should be investigated further.

Dialysis modality, vascular access and mortality in end-stage kidney disease: A bi-national registry-based cohort study.

AIM: There remains debate on which dialysis modality offers better survival outcomes for patients. We compare the survival of patients undergoing home haemodialysis (HD) with a permanent vascular access, facility HD with a permanent vascular access, facility HD with a central venous catheter or peritoneal dialysis. METHODS: We considered adult patients from the Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry who commenced dialysis between 1 October 2003 and 31 December 2011. Patients were followed until death, transplant, loss to follow-up or 31 December 2011. Marginal structural models for mortality were used to account for time-varying treatment, comorbidities and baseline covariates. Unmeasured differences between treatment groups may remain even after adjustment for measured differences, so the potential effects of unmeasured confounding were explicitly modelled. RESULTS: There were 20,191 patients who underwent ≥90 days of dialysis (median 2.25 years, interquartile range 1-3.75 years). There were significant differences in age, gender, comorbidities and other variables between treatment groups at baseline. Thirty per cent of patients had at least one treatment change. Relative to facility HD with permanent access, the risk of death for home HD patients with a permanent access was lower in the first year (at 9 months: hazard ratio 0.41, 95% CI 0.25-0.67, adjusted for all baseline covariates). Findings were robust to unmeasured confounding within plausible ranges. CONCLUSION: Relative to facility HD with permanent vascular access, home HD conferred better survival prospects, while peritoneal dialysis was associated with a higher risk and facility HD with a catheter the highest risk, especially within the first year of dialysis.