Innovations in Treatment Delivery, Risk of Peritonitis, and Patient Retention on Peritoneal Dialysis

Mobile Apps for Patients with Peritoneal Dialysis: Systematic App Search and Evaluation

BACKGROUND

Peritoneal dialysis (PD) is one type of renal replacement therapy. If patients have problems during the dialysis process, healthcare providers may not be able assist the patients immediately. mHealth can provide patients with information and help them to solve problems in real-time, potentially increasing their willingness to choose PD.

OBJECTIVE

The objectives of this study were to conduct a comprehensive review of free mobile applications for patients with PD on the Internet and to recommend suitable mobile applications to facilitate patient self-management and health.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search for PD mobile applications on Google Play and the Apple iTunes Store from 3 to 16 June 2023.

RESULTS

A total of 828 identifiable mobile applications were initially identified, and ultimately, 21 met the inclusion criteria. The Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) assessment of the applications revealed the highest score in the functionality domain, followed by the aesthetics, information, app-specific, subjective quality, and engagement domains, respectively. In the comprehensive self-management of PD, the highest percentage was related to disease-related information.

CONCLUSION

The findings of this study suggest that some applications, with the highest quality, can be recommended to patients for use in English or traditional Chinese.

The effect of rural and urban life on peritonitis rates in chronic peritoneal patients

BACKGROUND

It has been reported that living far from the peritoneal dialysis (PD) unit is a risk factor for peritonitis. Considering that PD units are urban located; the question of whether living in a rural area compared to an urban area is a risk factor for peritonitis has arisen.

METHODS

From March 2010 to August 2020, 335 episodes of peritonitis in 202 PD patients followed in a single center were evaluated retrospectively. People living in areas with a population <1000 were defined as living in rural areas regardless of their distance from the PD center. Cox regression analysis was used to identify independent factors associated with peritonitis.

RESULTS

A total of 202 PD patients were followed during 791 patient-years (mean follow-up of 3.9 years per patient). Total patients had 335 episodes of peritonitis and the rate of peritonitis was 0.42 episodes per year (episodes/patient-year). Cox regression analysis revealed that living environment (urban vs. rural) was not a risk factor for peritonitis (p = 0.57).

CONCLUSIONS

In Turkey, we report that living in a rural area in our region is not a risk factor for peritonitis. It is not the right approach for both the physician and the patient to be reluctant in the choice of PD due to the concern of peritonitis in rural areas.

Market Consolidation and Innovation in US Dialysis

While patients with end-stage kidney disease have benefited from innovations in clinical therapeutics and care delivery, these changes have been primarily incremental and have not fundamentally transformed care delivery. Dialysis markets are highly concentrated, which may impede innovation. Unique features of the dialysis industry that have contributed to consolidation can help to explain links between consolidation and innovation. We discuss these unique features and then provide a framework for considering the effects of consolidation on innovation in dialysis that focuses on the following economic considerations: (1) industry characteristics, composition, and stage of consolidation, (2) innovation characteristics and relative profitability, (3) the role of government regulation, and (4) innovation from smaller providers and new entrants. We present examples of how these considerations have influenced the adoption of alternative dialysis technologies such as peritoneal dialysis and erythropoietin-stimulating agents, and we discuss how consolidated markets can both help and hinder recent policy initiatives to transform dialysis care delivery. Only by considering these important drivers of consolidation, future efforts can be successful in transforming end-stage kidney disease care.

Treatment practices and outcomes in incident peritoneal dialysis patients: the Swedish Renal Registry 2006-2015

BACKGROUND

Therapeutic developments have contributed to markedly improved clinical outcomes in peritoneal dialysis (PD) during the 1990s and 2000s. We investigated whether recent advances in PD treatment are implemented in routine Swedish care and whether their implementation parallels improved patient outcomes.

METHODS

We conducted an observational study of 3122 patients initiating PD in Sweden from 2006 to 2015. We evaluated trends of treatment practices (medications, PD-related procedures) and outcomes [patient survival, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), peritonitis, transfer to haemodialysis (HD) and kidney transplantation] and analysed associations of changes of treatment practices with changes in outcomes.

RESULTS

Over the 10-year period, demographics (mean age 63 years, 33% women) and comorbidities remained essentially stable. There were changes in clinical characteristics (body mass index and diastolic blood pressure increased), prescribed drugs (calcium channel blockers, non-calcium phosphate binders and cinacalcet increased and the use of renin-angiotensin system inhibitors, erythropoietin and iron decreased) and dialysis treatment (increased use of automated PD, icodextrin and assisted PD). The standardized 1- and 2-year mortality and MACE risk did not change over the period. Compared with the general population, the risk of 1-year mortality was 4.1 times higher in 2006-2007 and remained stable throughout follow-up. However, the standardized 1- and 2-year peritonitis rate decreased and the incidence of kidney transplantation increased while transfers to HD did not change.

CONCLUSIONS

Over the last decade, treatment advances in PD patients were accompanied by a substantial decline in peritonitis frequency and an increased rate of kidney transplantations, while 1- and 2-year survival and MACE risk did not change.

Comparative effectiveness of lactulose and sennosides for the prevention of peritoneal dialysis-related peritonitis: an open-label, randomized, active-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

To the best of our knowledge, the effectiveness and safety of lactulose in comparison to sennosides, for the prevention of peritoneal dialysis (PD)-related peritonitis, has never been tested in a randomized study.

METHODS

We conducted an open-label, randomized, active-controlled trial in a PD-center in Northern Thailand. Adult patients on PD were enrolled and randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio into two groups; one group received lactulose 15 mL once daily (n = 50) and the other group received sennosides two tablets daily (n = 50). The primary outcome was time-to-first bacterial peritonitis. The secondary outcomes included a composite of bacterial peritonitis and all-cause mortality. Cox proportional hazards regression was calculated and presented as hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

One hundred PD patients were recruited (50.0% men; mean age 55.5 ± 13.0 years) in this study. The baseline characteristics of the study participants were similar in both groups. No significant trend towards a higher risk of PD-related peritonitis was observed in the lactulose group (HR, 2.32 [95% CI, 0.92-5.83]; p = .051) compared to the sennosides group. Nevertheless, the secondary outcome was significantly higher in the lactulose group (HR, 2.77 [95% CI, 1.20-6.41]; p = .010). The incidence of adverse events was not substantially different between the two groups; however, diarrhoea was more frequent in the lactulose group (38.0% vs. 18.0%; p = .030) than in the sennosides group.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with lactulose is not more effective than sennosides and cannot be routinely recommended for the prevention of peritonitis among the PD population. TRIAL REGISTRATION Thai Clinical Trial Registry (clinicaltrials.in.th); ID: TCTR20171012001 KEY MESSAGE To the best of our knowledge, no randomized controlled trial that compares the efficacy and safety profiles of lactulose versus sennosides for the prevention of PD-related peritonitis among the PD population has been conducted. In this open-label, randomized, active-controlled trial, treatment with lactulose is not more effective than sennosides in the prevention of PD-related peritonitis, and it could increase the risk of bacterial PD-related peritonitis. Further studies with a larger sample size by incorporated real-world evidence are needed to confirm our findings and to explore strategies to prevent peritonitis among PD patients.

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.