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.

Peritoneal dialysis after kidney transplant failure: a nationwide matched cohort study from the French Language Peritoneal Dialysis Registry (RDPLF)

BACKGROUND

Failed kidney transplant is becoming a frequent cause of dialysis initiation. Although studies have shown no difference between peritoneal dialysis (PD) and haemodialysis (HD) in terms of patients and technique survival, PD remains quite rarely used in this condition. Studies in larger multicentre matched cohorts are missing.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study about 328 patients registered in the French Language Peritoneal Dialysis Registry (RDPLF) who started PD after kidney transplant failure (Tx group) between January 2002 and December 2012 who were compared with 656 matched never-transplanted patients having started PD during the same period (control group). Patients and PD technique survival as well as peritonitis episodes were analysed.

RESULTS

Over the study period, patients' survival was similar between the two groups (P = 0.34). The mean time on PD was significantly shorter for patients in the Tx group [17 months (range 14-20)] compared with the control group [21 months (range 19-23)] (P = 0.003). The main cause of transfer to HD was for both group adequacy and/or ultrafiltration failure. Peritonitis rates were similar in the two groups: 43.6% (n = 143) versus 40.1% (n = 263) in the Tx and control group, respectively (P = 0.3). In multivariate Cox analysis, kidney transplant failure (P < 0.0001), younger age (P = 0.02) and male gender (P = 0.01) were associated with a higher risk of transfer to HD. Using multivariate competing risk analysis, kidney transplant failure was again observed as a predictive factor (P < 0.0001), but not age and gender. The only other significant predictive factor observed was peritonitis episodes experienced during PD treatment (P = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

Comparing the Tx and control groups, we report similar patient survival and peritonitis rates but a higher PD technique failure in the Tx group.

Care of the patient after renal allograft failure: managing the present and planning for the future

The number of patients with end-stage renal disease undergoing kidney transplantation - both cadaveric and living-donor - continues to rise. With long-term graft survival relatively fixed, this trend means that increasing numbers of patients are returning to dialysis after graft loss. Most will never be retransplanted, which introduces a host of clinical questions regarding optimal management of this unique patient population. In this paper, we explore data that informs astute care of the patient requiring dialysis after graft loss. We address new data about the increased clinical risk and the optimal dialysis modality in renal allograft loss, explore new approaches to immunosuppression and transfusion management, and examine the risks and benefits of allograft nephrectomy and timing thereof. While there are no randomized clinical trials in this field, rapidly evolving data will aid the clinician whose practice includes patients who have been transplanted and are returning to dialysis.

Clinical outcomes after failed renal transplantation-does dialysis modality matter?

Patients returning to dialysis after graft loss (DAGL) are an increasing segment of the end-stage renal disease (ESRD) population. It is unclear whether patients with previous graft loss have equivalent or reduced survival from the time of restarting dialysis when compared with ESRD patients initiating dialysis for the first time. Moreover, the impact of dialysis modality on the survival of patients returning to DAGL is not known. Studies of patients with transplant graft failure returning to hemodialysis (HD) have suggested decreased survival when compared with transplant-naïve dialysis patients, yet some studies of patients with graft failure returning to peritoneal dialysis (PD) have demonstrated equivalent survival. Based on these data, it is unclear whether survival differences may exist between the dialysis modalities, and if they do, whether they can be attributed to either differences in patient characteristics or to factors related to the dialysis modalities. For patients starting back onto dialysis, in whom preservation of residual renal function is important, it is also unclear how immunosuppression reduction or transplant nephrectomy may affect survival. In this review, we will summarize the available literature on survival rates of patients returning to DAGL; compare and contrast survival after initiation of HD and PD and discuss what is known about the impact of transplant nephrectomy and the different approaches to immunosuppression reduction. Practical considerations will be discussed with a specific emphasis on patients treated by PD.

Predictors of baseline peritoneal transport status in Australian and New Zealand peritoneal dialysis patients

BACKGROUND

Factors that predict peritoneal transport status in peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients are poorly understood. The aim of the present study is to determine these factors in Australian and New Zealand incident PD patients.

METHODS

The study included all patients on the Australian and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry who started PD therapy between April 1, 1991, and March 31, 2002, and underwent a peritoneal equilibration test (PET) within the first 6 months. Predictors of peritoneal transport category and dialysate-plasma creatinine ratio at 4 hours (D-P Cr 4h) were assessed by multivariate ordinal logistic regression and multiple linear regression, respectively.

RESULTS

A total of 3,188 patients were studied. Mean D-P Cr 4h was 0.69 +/- 0.13. High transport status was associated with older age (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.08 for each 10 years; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03 to 1.13), Maori and Pacific Islander racial origin (OR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.13 to 1.94), and normal body mass index (BMI; < 18.5 kg/m2: OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.65 to 1.24; BMI of 18.5 to 25 kg/m2: OR, 1 [reference]; BMI of 25 to 30 kg/m2: OR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.70 to 0.95; BMI > 30 kg/m2: OR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.86), but was not independently predicted by sex, diabetes, other comorbid diseases, smoking, previous hemodialysis therapy or transplantation, or residual renal function. Similar results were found when peritoneal permeability was modeled as a continuous variable (D-P Cr 4h).

CONCLUSION

In Australian and New Zealand PD patients, higher peritoneal transport status is independently associated with racial origin, older age, and lower BMI. The diversity of peritoneal transport characteristics in different ethnic populations suggests that additional validation of PET measurements in various racial groups and study of their relationship to patient outcomes are warranted.