Treatment failure in automated peritoneal dialysis and double-bag continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis

Clinical guideline on adequacy and prescription of peritoneal dialysis

In recent years, the meaning of adequacy in peritoneal dialysis has changed. We have witnessed a transition from an exclusive achievement of specific objectives -namely solute clearances and ultrafiltration- to a more holistic approach more focused to on the quality of life of these patients. The purpose of this document is to provide recommendations, updated and oriented to social and health environment, for the adequacy and prescription of peritoneal dialysis. The document has been divided into three main sections: adequacy, residual kidney function and prescription of continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis and automated peritoneal dialysis. Recently, a guide on the same topic has been published by a Committee of Experts of the International Society of Peritoneal Dialysis (ISPD 2020). In consideration of the contributions of the group of experts and the quasi-simultaneity of the two projects, references are made to this guide in the relevant sections. We have used a systematic methodology (GRADE), which specifies the level of evidence and the strength of the proposed suggestions and recommendations, facilitating future updates of the document.

Impact of peritoneal dialysis modality on patient and PD survival: A systematic review

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the effect of the peritoneal dialysis (PD) modality, automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) or continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD), on all-cause mortality (ACM) and PD failure. Studies were identified in PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Weipu and Wanfang databases from database inception until April 1, 2021. The inclusion and exclusion criteria were based on the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, and Study (PICOS) design. Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used to pool outcome estimates. Seventeen studies (more than 230,000 patients) were included. Our meta-analysis showed that compared with CAPD, APD demonstrated a significantly lower ACM risk (HR 0.87 [95% CI 0.77–0.99], p = 0.04), especially in studies involving an as-treated analysis (HR 0.75 [95% CI, 0.63–0.90], p = 0.00), published in Asia (HR 0.76 [95% CI, 0.67–0.86], p < 0.001) or Europe (HR 0.81 [95% CI, 0.74–0.89], p < 0.00), or published after 2012 (HR 0.82 [95% CI, 0.68–0.99], p = 0.04). However, APD was as effective as CAPD for PD survival (HR, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.75 to 1.00], p = 0.05 or HR, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.60 to 1.35], p = 0.61). Our results demonstrate a significant survival benefit for APD and provide evidence for increasing the global use of APD, especially in developing nations, where APD use has been hampered by a lack of reimbursement for care.

APD or CAPD: one glove does not fit all

The use of Automated Peritoneal Dialysis (APD) in its various forms has increased over the past few years mainly in developed countries. This could be attributed to improved cycler design, apparent lifestyle benefits and the ability to achieve adequacy and ultrafiltration targets. However, the dilemma of choosing the superior modality between APD and Continuous Ambulatory Peritoneal Dialysis (CAPD) has not yet been resolved. When it comes to fast transporters and assisted PD, APD is certainly considered the most suitable Peritoneal Dialysis (PD) modality. Improved patients’ compliance, lower intraperitoneal pressure and possibly lower incidence of peritonitis have been also associated with APD. However, concerns regarding increased cost, a more rapid decline in residual renal function, inadequate sodium removal and disturbed sleep are APD’s setbacks. Besides APD superiority over CAPD in fast transporters, the other medical advantages of APD still remain controversial. In any case, APD should be readily available for all patients starting PD and the most important indication for its implementation remains patient’s choice.

Technique Failure in Peritoneal Dialysis: Etiologies and Risk Assessment

Technique failure (TF) is a well-recognized challenge encountered in patients undergoing peritoneal dialysis (PD). Identification of patients at risk for this complication is of utmost importance. Early detection of patients at risk and development of preventative strategies can improve technique survival that may lead to an increased utilization of PD. It will also promote a safe and planned transfer to hemodialysis once a patient identified with TF. The aim of this review is to summarize risk factors and scenarios associated with TF focusing on prevention of remediable factors at their earliest stage. Furthermore, integration of this knowledge into quality improvement initiatives should be entertained in an effort to improve outcomes.

Association between serum leptin levels and peritoneal dialysis: A meta-analysis

There is limited information available with regard to the association between serum leptin levels, or other adipokines, and serum lipid levels and insulin sensitivity in patients undergoing peritoneal dialysis (PD). Thus, the aim of the present study was to perform a meta-analysis investigating this association. Potential relevant studies were identified through searching the following databases: MEDLINE, Science Citation Index, Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Chinese Biomedical, Chinese Journal Full-Text and Weipu Journal. Statistical analyses were calculated using version 12.0 STATA software. In total, 21 case-control studies comprising 1,187 subjects (574 patients and 613 controls) were collected for the meta-analysis. The results identified a statistically significant difference in the serum levels of leptin when comparing the PD patients with the healthy controls [controls vs. cases, standardized mean difference (SMD), 2.09; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.58-2.59; P<0.001]. Furthermore, ethnicity-subgroup analysis indicated that the PD patients of Asian and Caucasian populations were associated with increased serum levels of leptin (Asian population, SMD, 2.05; 95% CI, 1.48-2.62; P<0.001; Caucasian population, SMD, 2.19; 95% CI, 1.19-3.18; P<0.001). Therefore, serum leptin levels may be used as a prognostic marker for PD.