Peritoneal Dialysis Guidelines 2019 Part 2: Main Text (Position paper of the Japanese Society for Dialysis Therapy)

Background

This article is a duplicated publication from the Japanese version of “2019 JSDT Guidelines for Peritoneal Dialysis” with permission from the Japanese Society for Dialysis Therapy (JSDT). This clinical practice guideline (CPG) was developed primarily by the Working Group on Revision of Peritoneal Dialysis (PD) Guidelines of the Japanese Society for Dialysis Therapy. Recently, the definition and creation process for CPGs have become far more rigorous; traditional methods and formats no longer adhere to current standards. To improve the reliability of international transmission of our findings, CPGs are created in compliance with the methodologies developed by the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) working group. Part 2 of this PD guideline is the first CPG developed by our society that conforms to the GRADE approach.

Methods

Detailed processes were created in accordance with the Cochrane handbook and the GRADE approach developed by the GRADE working group.

Results

Clinical question (CQ)1: Is the use of renin-angiotensin system inhibitors (RAS inhibitors), such as angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB), effective in PD patients?

Recommendation: We suggest the usage of RAS inhibitors (ACEI and ARB) in PD patients (GRADE 2C).

CQ2: Icodextrin or glucose solution: which is more useful as a dialysate among patients with PD?

Recommendation: We suggest using icodextrin when managing body fluids in PD patients (GRADE 2C).

CQ3: Is it better to apply or not apply mupirocin/gentamicin ointment to the exit site?

Recommendation: We suggest not applying mupirocin/gentamicin ointment to the exit sites of PD patients (GRADE 2C).

CQ4: Which surgical approach is more desirable when a PD catheter is placed, open surgery or laparoscopic surgery?

No recommendation.

CQ5: Which administration route of antibiotics is better in PD patients with peritonitis, intravenous or intraperitoneal?

Recommendation: We suggest intraperitoneal administration of antibiotics in PD patients with peritonitis (GRADE 2C).

Note: The National Insurance does not currently cover intraperitoneal administration.

CQ6: Is peritoneal dialysis or hemodialysis better as the first renal replacement therapy in diabetic patients?

No recommendation.

Conclusions

In the future, we suggest that society members construct their own evidence to answer CQs not brought up in this guideline, and thereby show the achievements of Japan worldwide.

Regional variation in the treatment and prevention of peritoneal dialysis-related infections in the Peritoneal Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study

BACKGROUND

Peritoneal dialysis (PD)-related infections lead to significant morbidity. The International Society for Peritoneal Dialysis (ISPD) guidelines for the prevention and treatment of PD-related infections are based on variable evidence. We describe practice patterns across facilities participating in the Peritoneal Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (PDOPPS).

METHODS

PDOPPS, a prospective cohort study, enrolled nationally representative samples of PD patients in Australia/New Zealand (ANZ), Canada, Thailand, Japan, the UK and the USA. Data on PD-related infection prevention and treatment practices across facilities were obtained from a survey of medical directors'.

RESULTS

A total of 170 centers, caring for >11 000 patients, were included. The proportion of facilities reporting antibiotic administration at the time of PD catheter insertion was lowest in the USA (63%) and highest in Canada and the UK (100%). Exit-site antimicrobial prophylaxis was variably used across countries, with Japan (4%) and Thailand (28%) having the lowest proportions. Exit-site mupirocin was the predominant exit-site prophylactic strategy in ANZ (56%), Canada (50%) and the UK (47%), while exit-site aminoglycosides were more common in the USA (72%). Empiric Gram-positive peritonitis treatment with vancomycin was most common in the UK (88%) and USA (83%) compared with 10-45% elsewhere. Empiric Gram-negative peritonitis treatment with aminoglycoside therapy was highest in ANZ (72%) and the UK (77%) compared with 10-45% elsewhere.

CONCLUSIONS

Variation in PD-related infection prevention and treatment strategies exist across countries with limited uptake of ISPD guideline recommendations. Further work will aim to understand the impact these differences have on the wide variation in infection risk between facilities and other clinically relevant PD outcomes.

Topical application of mupirocin to exit sites in patients on peritoneal dialysis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

The International Society for Peritoneal Dialysis guidelines recommends the topical application of antibiotics on the exit site for the prevention of peritoneal dialysis (PD)-related infections. However, the recommendation is based on meta-analyses on applying nasal mupirocin ointment or observational or retrospective studies. Here, we evaluated the efficacy of topical application of mupirocin on the exit site for the prevention of PD-related infections.

Methods

We searched the databases, MEDLINE and CENTRAL, documenting the topical application of antibiotics on the exit site in PD patients in April 2017. We included only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with adult patients wherein the effects of mupirocin were examined. Exit site infection (ESI), peritonitis, and technical failure were assessed as the main outcomes.

Results

Overall, six RCTs were included in this study. It was uncertain whether the application of mupirocin ointment prevents ESI (rate ratio (RR), 0.36; 95% CI, 0.13–1.05), peritonitis (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.50–1.21), and technical failure (RR, 1.35; 95% CI, 0.25–7.21). Moreover, a comparison between mupirocin and gentamicin showed no difference in the incidence of ESI (RR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.27–4.81), peritonitis (RR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.32–2.26), and technical failure (RR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.28–1.20).

Conclusions

It remains unclear whether topical application of mupirocin on the exit site has any significant effects on PD-related infection or technical failure. Large-scale RCTs with high methodological quality are required to confirm the efficacy of topical application of antibiotics on the exit site.

Trial registration

UMINR000039267

Comparative Effectiveness of Local Application of Chlorhexidine Gluconate, Mupirocin Ointment, and Normal Saline for the Prevention of Peritoneal Dialysis-related Infections (COSMO-PD Trial): a multicenter randomized, double-blind, controlled protocol

BACKGROUND

Current international guidelines recommend the use of a daily topical exit-site antimicrobial to prevent peritoneal dialysis (PD)-related infections. Although nonantibiotic-based therapies are appealing because they may limit antimicrobial resistance, no controlled trials have been conducted to compare topical antimicrobial agents with usual exit-site care for the prevention of PD-related infections among the Thai PD population. We propose a controlled three-arm trial to examine the efficacy and safety of a daily chlorhexidine gluconate-impregnated patch versus mupirocin ointment versus usual exit-site care with normal saline for the prevention of PD-related infections.

METHODS/DESIGNS

This study is a randomized, double-blind, multicenter, active-controlled, clinical trial. Adult patients aged 18 years or older who have end-stage kidney disease and are undergoing PD will be enrolled at three PD Centers in Thailand. A total of 354 PD patients will be randomly assigned to either the 2% chlorhexidine gluconate-impregnated patch, mupirocin ointment, or usual exit-site care with normal saline dressing according to a computer-generated random allocation sequence. Participants will be followed until discontinuation of PD or completion of 24 months. The primary study outcomes are time to first PD-related infection (exit-site/tunnel infection or peritonitis) event and the overall difference in PD-related infection rates between study arms. Secondary study outcomes will include (i) the rate of infection-related catheter removal and PD technique failure, (ii) rate of nasal and exit-site Staphylococcus aureus colonization, (iii) healthcare costs, and (iv) skin reactions and adverse events. We plan to conduct a cost-utility analysis alongside the trial from the perspectives of patients and society. A Markov simulation model will be used to estimate the total cost and health outcome in terms of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) over a 20-year time horizon. An incremental cost-effectiveness ratio in Thai Baht and U.S. dollars per QALYs gained will be illustrated. A series of probabilistic sensitivity analyses will be conducted to assess the robustness of the cost-utility analysis findings.

DISCUSSION

The results from this study will provide new clinical and cost-effectiveness evidence to support the best strategy for the prevention of PD-related infections among the Thai PD population.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02547103. Registered on September 11, 2015.

Effect of Local Polyhexanide Application in Preventing Exit-Site Infection and Peritonitis: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Topical antibiotic and antiseptic agents have been documented to reduce exit-site infection (ESI) and peritonitis in PD. The aim of this randomized controlled study was to evaluate the efficacy of polyhexanide in the prevention of ESI and peritonitis. Patients were excluded if they had active infection, > 18 years of age, ESI and peritonitis within the previous 4 weeks, received PD for less than 3-months and history of allergy to either drug. All patients were followed up until catheter removal, death, switch to dialysis, transplantation or the end of the study. ESI, tunnel infection, peritonitis, catheter removal and microorganism cause of catheter-related infection were recorded prospectively during clinic follow-up. A total of 88 patients (41 povidone-iodine group; 47 polyhexanide group) were enrolled with a total follow-up duration of 480 and 555 patient-months for povidone-iodine and alternating group, respectively. There were no significant differences in the age, sex, BMI, time of PD, rate of DM, and S. aureus carriage state. A total of 8 ESI and 25 peritonitis episodes were detected during the study. ESI and peritonitis rates tended to be lower in polyhexanide group compared with the povidone-iodine group (0.06 episodes/patient-year vs. 0.12 episodes/patient-year; 0.26 episodes/patient-year vs. 0.32 episodes/patient-year, respectively), but were not significant statistically. Moreover, catheter removal was similar in both groups (0.04 / patient-year vs. 0.05 / patient-year). Polyhexanide is efficient and safe for the prevention of ESI and peritonitis and it may be used as an alternative procedure for the care of healthy exit sites.

Peritoneal Dialysis Access Associated Infections

Infection is a significant driver of morbidity and mortality in patients with end-stage renal disease undergoing maintenance dialysis. In the United States, septicemia and other infections account for 8% deaths in patients undergoing dialysis. In patients undergoing peritoneal dialysis (PD), PD-related peritonitis remains the most frequent treatment-related infection and is the greatest contributor to infection-related morbidity, including risk for hospitalization, and temporary or permanent transfer to hemodialysis. In the 4 decades since the introduction of ambulatory PD in clinical practice, a large number of treatment innovations have been shown to be effective in reducing the risk for exit site infection and PD-related peritonitis. Notwithstanding the evidence for efficacy of these innovations and the numerous adverse health consequences with PD-related peritonitis, the uptake of these interventions in clinical practice around the world remains inconsistent. This article reviews current knowledge with regards to prevention of PD-associated infections, and the diagnosis and management of exit site infections and peritonitis.

Mycobacterium wolinskyi Peritonitis after Peritoneal Catheter Embedment Surgery

Mycobacterium wolinskyi belongs to the Mycobacterium smegmatis group, which comprises rapidly growing non-tuberculous mycobacteria. The number of case reports on M. wolinskyi infections associated with postoperative wounds has increased in recent years. We herein report a case of peritonitis due to M. wolinskyi after peritoneal catheter embedment surgery. Identification was achieved based on 16S ribosomal RNA and rpoB gene sequencing of the isolate. The patient recovered following catheter removal and treatment with levofloxacin and minocycline for one month.

Bacterial colonization patterns in daily chlorhexidine care at the exit site in peritoneal dialysis patients-A prospective, randomized controlled trial

Bacterial colonization patterns in daily chlorhexidine care at the exit site in peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients were not known. We performed a prospective, randomized controlled trial enrolling 89 PD patients. After stratification by initial Staphylococcus aureus (SA) carrier status, patients were randomly assigned to receive daily 4% chlorhexidine care (intervention group) or normal saline (control group) at the exit site. Monthly, we cultured bacteria from the exit site and nasal swabs for 1 year. The SA colonization rates at exit site at 6 and 12 months were significantly lower in the intervention group than the control group (5.0% vs. 22.9%, p = 0.023 and 8.6% vs. 28.1%, p = 0.037 for 6 and 12 months, respectively). The Methicillin-resistant SA (MRSA) colonization rate at exit site at 6 months was similar (5.7% vs. 2.5%,p = 0.596) in control and intervention group, but significantly lower in the intervention group than the control group at exit site at 12months (0% vs. 12.5%, p = 0.047). The gram-negative bacilli (GNB) colonization rates were similar between the intervention and control groups at 6 and 12 months. Genotyping of all MRSA isolates showed ST (sequence type) 59 was the most predominant clone. In conclusion, chlorhexidine care at the exit site in PD patients may be a good strategy for SA and MRSA decolonization.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02446158.

Antimicrobial agents for preventing peritonitis in peritoneal dialysis patients

BACKGROUND

Peritoneal dialysis (PD) is an important therapy for patients with end-stage kidney disease and is used in more than 200,000 such patients globally. However, its value is often limited by the development of infections such as peritonitis and exit-site and tunnel infections. Multiple strategies have been developed to reduce the risk of peritonitis including antibiotics, topical disinfectants to the exit site and antifungal agents. However, the effectiveness of these strategies has been variable and are based on a small number of randomised controlled trials (RCTs). The optimal preventive strategies to reduce the occurrence of peritonitis remain unclear.This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2004.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of antimicrobial strategies used to prevent peritonitis in PD patients.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant's Specialised Register to 4 October 2016 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies contained in the Specialised Register are identified through search strategies specifically designed for CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE; handsearching conference proceedings; and searching the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs or quasi-RCTs in patients receiving chronic PD, which evaluated any antimicrobial agents used systemically or locally to prevent peritonitis or exit-site/tunnel infection were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed risk of bias and extracted data. Summary estimates of effect were obtained using a random-effects model, and results were expressed as risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-nine studies, randomising 4435 patients, were included. Twenty additional studies have been included in this update. The risk of bias domains were often unclear or high; risk of bias was judged to be low in 19 (49%) studies for random sequence generation, 12 (31%) studies for allocation concealment, 22 (56%) studies for incomplete outcome reporting, and in 12 (31%) studies for selective outcome reporting. Blinding of participants and personnel was considered to be at low risk of bias in 8 (21%) and 10 studies (26%) for blinding of outcome assessors. It should be noted that blinding of participants and personnel was not possible in many of the studies because of the nature of the intervention or control treatment.The use of oral or topical antibiotic compared with placebo/no treatment, had uncertain effects on the risk of exit-site/tunnel infection (3 studies, 191 patients, low quality evidence: RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.19 to 1.04) and the risk of peritonitis (5 studies, 395 patients, low quality evidence: RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.19).The use of nasal antibiotic compared with placebo/no treatment had uncertain effects on the risk of exit-site/tunnel infection (3 studies, 338 patients, low quality evidence: RR 1.34, 95% CI 0.62 to 2.87) and the risk of peritonitis (3 studies, 338 patients, low quality evidence: RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.31).Pre/perioperative intravenous vancomycin compared with no treatment may reduce the risk of early peritonitis (1 study, 177 patients, low quality evidence: RR 0.08, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.61) but has an uncertain effect on the risk of exit-site/tunnel infection (1 study, 177 patients, low quality evidence: RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.10 to 1.32).The use of topical disinfectant compared with standard care or other active treatment (antibiotic or other disinfectant) had uncertain effects on the risk of exit-site/tunnel infection (8 studies, 973 patients, low quality evidence, RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.33) and the risk of peritonitis (6 studies, 853 patients, low quality evidence: RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.06).Antifungal prophylaxis with oral nystatin/fluconazole compared with placebo/no treatment may reduce the risk of fungal peritonitis occurring after a patient has had an antibiotic course (2 studies, 817 patients, low quality evidence: RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.63).No intervention reduced the risk of catheter removal or replacement. Most of the available studies were small and of suboptimal quality. Only six studies enrolled 200 or more patients.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In this update, we identified limited data from RCTs and quasi-RCTs which evaluated strategies to prevent peritonitis and exit-site/tunnel infections. This review demonstrates that pre/peri-operative intravenous vancomycin may reduce the risk of early peritonitis and that antifungal prophylaxis with oral nystatin or fluconazole reduces the risk of fungal peritonitis following an antibiotic course. However, no other antimicrobial interventions have proven efficacy. In particular, the use of nasal antibiotic to eradicate Staphylococcus aureus, had an uncertain effect on the risk of peritonitis and raises questions about the usefulness of this approach. Given the large number of patients on PD and the importance of peritonitis, the lack of adequately powered and high quality RCTs to inform decision making about strategies to prevent peritonitis is striking.

Comparison of topical mupirocin and gentamicin in the prevention of peritoneal dialysis-related infections: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Topical antibiotics have been shown to reduce exit-site infection and peritonitis. The aim of this study was to compare infection rates between mupirocin and gentamicin.

METHODS

Multiple comprehensive databases were searched systematically to include relevant randomized controlled trials and observational studies. Pooled risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals were calculated for the incidences of exit-site infection and peritonitis.

RESULTS

Seven studies (mupirocin group n = 458, gentamicin group n = 448) were analyzed for exit-site infection. The risk of gram-positive exit-site infection was similar between the groups. Gram-negative exit-site infection rate was higher in the mupirocin group (RR = 2.125, P = 0.037). Six studies were assessed the peritonitis risk. There was no difference in the gram-positive and -negative peritonitis rate.

CONCLUSIONS

Topical use of gentamicin is associated with fewer exit-site infections caused by gram-negative organisms. Gentamicin has comparable efficacy to mupirocin for peritonitis and gram-positive exit-site infection.

Chlorhexidine for routine PD catheter exit-site care

PURPOSE

Although guidelines suggest the routine use of mupirocin or gentamicin at the exit site of PD catheter, our PD unit has been using chlorhexidine gluconate 0.5 % as exit-site care protocol. The aim of this study was to ascertain whether mupirocin application is superior to the traditionally applied chlorhexidine-regarding prevention of exit-site infections and peritonitis in our unit.

METHODS

Stable incident and prevalent patients of our unit were randomized to apply mupirocin or chlorhexidine at exit site. The study started on July 1, 2010, and continued till December 2014. End point was the first episode of exit-site infection or peritonitis.

RESULTS

Sixty-two patients (mean age 58.5 ± 14.6 years) were randomized. At the end of follow-up, there were 33 patients on mupirocin treatment and 29 on chlorhexidine. The two groups had no differences in age, sex, PD vintage or PD mode. The only difference between the two groups was the percentage of patients with diabetes, 28 % in chlorhexidine group versus 10 % in mupirocin group. Mean time of follow-up was 28.46 ± 16.37 months. Twenty-four episodes of infections (peritonitis and exit site) were recorded. Time to first infection episode was 32 months in mupirocin group (95 % CI 21.4-42.5) versus 29 months (95 % CI 8.6-49.4) in chlorhexidine group. The Kaplan-Meier survival analysis revealed no difference in the infections between the two protocols (log-rank test, p = 0.477).

CONCLUSIONS

Mupirocin is not superior in preventing infections comparing with chlorhexidine in this cohort of patients.

Alternating Mupirocin/Gentamicin is Associated with Increased Risk of Fungal Peritonitis as Compared with Gentamicin Alone - Results of a Randomized Open-Label Controlled Trial

♦

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Catheter-related infection, namely exit-site infection (ESI) and peritonitis, is a major infectious complication and remains a main cause of technique failure for patients receiving peritoneal dialysis (PD). Topical application of antibiotic cream might reduce catheter-related infection but emergence of resistant or opportunistic organisms could be a concern. Optimal topical agents and regimens remain to be determined. We did a study to examine the effect of an alternating topical antibiotic regimen in preventing catheter-related infection. ♦

METHOD

We performed a single-center, randomized, open-label study to compare daily topical application of gentamicin cream with a gentamicin/mupirocin alternate regimen to the exit site. Patients randomized to alternating regimen were asked to have daily application of gentamicin cream in odd months and mupirocin cream in even months. Primary outcomes were ESI and peritonitis. Secondary outcomes were catheter removal or death caused by catheter-related infection. A total of 146 patients (71, gentamicin group; 75, alternating regimen group) were enrolled with a total follow-up duration of 174 and 181 patient-years for gentamicin and alternating groups, respectively. All patients were followed up until catheter removal, death, transfer to another unit, transplantation or the end of the study on March 31, 2014. There were no significant differences in the age, sex, dialysis vintage, and rate of diabetes, helper-assisted dialysis and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) carriage state. ♦

RESULTS

No difference was seen in the time to first ESI or peritonitis. However, the time to first gram-negative peritonitis seemed longer for the gentamicin group (p = 0.055). The 2 groups showed a similar rate of ESI (0.17/yr vs 0.19/yr, p = 0.93) but P. aeruginosa ESI was less common in the gentamicin group (0.06/yr vs 0.11/yr, p < 0.001). There was no difference in the incidence of ESI due to non-tuberculous mycobacteria. Peritonitis rate was significantly lower in the gentamicin group (0.22/yr vs 0.32/yr, p < 0.001), with a striking decrease in gram-negative peritonitis (0.08/yr vs 0.14/yr, p < 0.001), and fungal peritonitis (0.006/yr vs 0.03/yr, p < 0.001), which was all antibiotics-related episodes with antecedent use of systemic antibiotics for the treatment of catheter-related infections. There was no significant difference in the catheter loss or death related to catheter-related infection. ♦

CONCLUSION

Alternating gentamicin/mupirocin cream application appeared as effective as gentamicin alone in preventing ESI except for P. aeruginosa. However, it was inferior to gentamicin in the prevention of peritonitis episodes, especially for those caused by gram-negative organisms. It was also not useful in reducing catheter-related infection due to opportunistic organisms but instead associated with a higher incidence of antibiotic-related fungal peritonitis.

Prevention of peritonitis in peritoneal dialysis

Reducing the frequency of peritonitis for patients undergoing peritoneal dialysis (PD) continues to be a challenge. This review focuses on recent updates in catheter care and other patient factors that influence infection rates. An experienced nursing staff plays an important role in teaching proper PD technique to new patients, but nursing staff must be cognizant of each patient's unique educational needs. Over time, many patients become less adherent to proper dialysis technique, such as washing hands or wearing a mask. This behavior is associated with higher risk of peritonitis and is modifiable with re-training. Prophylactic antibiotics before PD catheter placement can decrease the infection risk immediately after catheter placement. In addition, some studies suggest that prophylaxis against fungal superinfection after antibiotic exposure is effective in reducing fungal peritonitis, although larger randomized studies are needed before this practice can be recommended for all patients. Over time, exit site and nasal colonization with pathogenic organisms can lead to exit-site infections and peritonitis. For patients with Staphylococcus aureus colonization, exit-site prophylaxis with either mupirocin or gentamicin cream reduces clinical infection with this organism. Although there are limited data for support, antibiotic prophylaxis before gastrointestinal, gynecologic, or dental procedures may also help reduce the risk of peritonitis.

Prevention of peritoneal dialysis catheter infections in Saudi peritoneal dialysis patients: the emergence of high-level mupirocin resistance

PURPOSE

Exit-site infection (ESI) and peritonitis remain the major causes of morbidity and mortality in peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients. This study compared the effectiveness of local mupirocin ointment and gentamicin cream in preventing both gram-positive and gram-negative bacterial infections in PD patients.

METHODS

Patients from two centers (n = 203) were assigned to daily mupirocin ointment or gentamicin cream application. Infections were tracked prospectively by organisms and expressed as episodes per patient-year for both ESI and peritonitis.

RESULTS

The rate of gram-positive ESI was 0.31/episode/patient-year and 0.22 episodes/patient-year (p<0.05), whereas the rate of gram-negative ESI was 0.28 episode/patient-year and 0.11 episode/patient-year (p<0.01) in the mupirocin group and gentamicin group, respectively. Gram-positive ESI occurred in 17.1% vs 10.2% of patients (p<0.05), whereas 20% of and 5.1% of patients (p<0.001) had gram-negative ESI in the 2 groups respectively. S.aureus was cultured at exit-site in the mupirocin group in 27.8% patients, 60% (16.7% of the total Gram-positive isolates) of them being with high-level mupirocin-resistance. Pseudomonas aeruginosa was cultured in 21.8% of ESI in the mupirocin group, and in only 6.7% in the gentamicin group (p<0.01). Peritonitis rates were lower using gentamicin cream, 0.17 episode/patient-year compared with mupirocin, 0.39 episode/patient-year (p<0.01). With multivariate analysis, only gentamicin exit-site use was a significant predictor for lower catheter infection rate.

CONCLUSION

Prolonged use of mupirocin for ESI-prophylaxis is associated with the emergence of mupirocin-resistant S. aureus. Gentamicin cream is superior to mupirocin ointment in the prevention of PD catheter infections.

The effect on peritoneal dialysis pathogens of changing topical antibiotic prophylaxis

BACKGROUND

Prophylactic gentamicin 0.1% cream has demonstrated efficacy in preventing both exit-site infection (ESI) and peritonitis attributable to gram-positive and gram-negative organisms; however, the effect of this practice on the gentamicin susceptibility patterns of bacterial pathogens isolated from such infections is unknown. We therefore examined the effect of a change in our prophylactic topical antibiotic exit-site protocol (from mupirocin 2% cream to gentamicin 0.1% cream) on infection rates and susceptibility patterns.

METHODS

This retrospective observational cohort study examined two periods of time: before and after the change in exit-site protocol. Each period was 30 months in duration, with a 2-month implementation period between, during which patient data were excluded. Demographic, clinical, and microbiology data were collected for each patient and episode of infection.

RESULTS

Overall, 377 patients were evaluated. In the mupirocin period (MUP), 145 infections occurred in 79 patients, and in the gentamicin period, 145 infections occurred in 93 patients. No significant effect was found either in overall episodes of infection (0.53 per year) or in episodes of peritonitis (0.429 vs 0.375 per year), but episodes of ESI increased significantly (0.098 vs 0.153 per year; p = 0.024; odds ratio: 1.55; 95% confidence interval: 1.05 to 2.28). Episodes of Staphylococcus aureus peritonitis increased by 38% (0.018 vs 0.025 per year), and episodes of S. aureus ESI increased significantly by 150% (0.022 vs 0.055 per year; p = 0.03; hazard ratio: 3.00; 95% confidence interval: 1.09 to 8.26). Episodes of pseudomonal peritonitis declined by 68% (0.022 vs 0.007 per year), and episodes of pseudomonal ESI increased by 150% (0.007 vs 0.018 per year). The gentamicin susceptibility for gram-positive isolates demonstrated no significant change; however, the gentamicin susceptibility for Enterobacteriaceae decreased by 12% and for Pseudomonas, by 14%.

CONCLUSIONS

The significant increase in episodes of ESI and the decrease in susceptibility for both Enterobacteriaceae and Pseudomonas isolates represent a concerning trend. Centers should examine trends in infection rates and in bacterial susceptibilities to determine the most appropriate agent for ESI prophylaxis.

A randomized controlled trial comparing mupirocin and polysporin triple ointments in peritoneal dialysis patients: the MP3 Study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Infectious complications remain a significant cause of peritoneal dialysis (PD) technique failure. Topical ointments seem to reduce peritonitis; however, concerns over resistance have led to a quest for alternative agents. This study examined the effectiveness of applying topical Polysporin Triple ointment (P(3)) against mupirocin in a multi-centered, double-blind, randomized controlled trial.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

PD patients routinely applied either P(3) or mupirocin ointment to their exit site. Patients were followed for 18 months or until death or catheter removal. The primary study outcome was a composite endpoint of exit-site infection (ESI), tunnel infection, or peritonitis.

RESULTS

Seventy-five of 201 randomized patients experienced a primary outcome event (51 peritonitis episodes, 24 ESIs). No difference was seen in the time to first event for P(3) (13.2 months; 95% confidence interval, 11.9-14.5) and mupirocin (14.0 months; 95% confidence interval, 12.7-15.4) (P=0.41). Twice as many patients reported redness at the exit site in the P(3) group (14 versus 6, P=0.10). Over the complete study period, a higher rate per year of fungal ESIs was seen in patients using P(3) (0.07 versus 0.01; P=0.02) with a corresponding increase in fungal peritonitis (0.04 versus 0.00, respectively; P<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that P(3) is not superior to mupirocin in the prophylaxis of PD-related infections. Colonization of the exit site with fungal organisms is of concern and warrants further study. As such, the use of P(3) over mupirocin is not advocated in the prophylaxis of PD-related infections.

Prevention of peritoneal dialysis-related infections

Despite substantial advances in peritoneal dialysis (PD) as a renal replacement modality, PD-related infection remains an important cause of morbidity, technique failure, and mortality. This review describes the microbiology and outcomes of PD peritonitis and catheter infection, followed by a discussion of several strategies that may reduce the risk of PD-related infections. Strategies that are reviewed include use of antibiotics at the time of PD catheter insertion, selection of PD catheter design and insertion technique, patient training, PD connectology, exit site prophylaxis, periprocedural prophylaxis, fungal prophylaxis, and choice of PD solutions.

Microbiology and outcomes of peritonitis in Australian peritoneal dialysis patients

We analyzed data from the Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry for 1 October 2003 to 31 December 2008 with the aim of describing the nature of peritonitis, therapies, and outcomes in patients on peritoneal dialysis (PD) in Australia. At least 1 episode of PD was observed in 6639 patients. The overall peritonitis rate was 0.60 episodes per patient-year (95% confidence interval: 0.59 to 0.62 episodes), with 6229 peritonitis episodes occurring in 3136 patients. Of those episodes, 13% were culture-negative, and 11% were polymicrobial. Gram-positive organisms were isolated in 53.4% of single-organism peritonitis episodes, and gram-negative organisms, in 23.6%. Mycobacterial and fungal peritonitis episodes were rare. Initial antibiotic therapy for most peritonitis episodes used 2 agents (most commonly vancomycin and an aminoglycoside); in 77.2% of episodes, therapy was subsequently changed to a single agent. Tenckhoff catheter removal was required in 20.4% of cases at a median of 6 days, and catheter removal was more common in fungal, mycobacterial, and anaerobic infections, with a median time to removal of 4 - 5 days. Peritonitis was the cause of death in 2.6% of patients. Transfer to hemodialysis and hospitalization were frequent outcomes of peritonitis. There was no relationship between center size and peritonitis rate. The peritonitis rate in Australia between 2003 and 2008 was higher than that reported in many other countries, with a particularly higher rate of gram-negative peritonitis.

Mupirocin application at the exit site in peritoneal dialysis patients: five years of experience

INTRODUCTION

In this study, we aimed to analyze the effects of once- or thrice-weekly mupirocin application on peritonitis, exit-site infection (ESI), and antibiotic resistance with mupirocin.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

By 2000 mupirocin began to be applied once a week to 33 patients who previously did not use mupirocin at the exit site. By the beginning of 2002, the patients were assigned to two groups. In group I patients continued to apply mupirocin once a week. In group II patients began to apply mupirocin to the exit site three times weekly and we began to obtain cultures from the nares, inguinal area, axillae, and the exit site.

RESULTS

A total of 28 episodes of ESI and 41 episodes of peritonitis were seen in 33 patients prior to mupirocin treatment, while a total of 14 episodes of ESI and 34 episodes of peritonitis were observed in all groups of patients who used mupirocin. In a subgroup analysis, 13 episodes of peritonitis and 7 episodes of ESI were determined in group I, while 6 episodes of peritonitis and 1 episode of ESI were determined in group II. Staphylococcus aureus reproduction rate and mupirocin resistance were 2.11 and 0.2%, respectively. Coagulase-negative staphylococcus reproduction rate was 70.56% (MuR: 59.87% and MeR: 33.7%) and 72.6% (MuR: 64.7% and MeR: 33.3%) in groups I and II, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Mupirocin application at the exit sites reduces peritonitis and ESI to a considerable amount, and thrice-weekly application of mupirocin seems to be more efficient compared to once-weekly application.

Relationship between double-cuff versus single-cuff peritoneal dialysis catheters and risk of peritonitis

BACKGROUND

Peritonitis among peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients remains an important complication. To date, no catheter type has consistently been shown to reduce peritonitis risk. It has been hypothesized that double-cuff catheters might be superior to single-cuff catheters in preventing peritonitis caused by periluminal entry of organisms.

METHODS

Using data collected in the multicentre Canadian Baxter Peritonitis Organism Exit-Sites Tunnel Infections (POET) database between 1996 and 2005, the association between number of catheter cuffs and peritonitis was tested. Variables adjusted for in the negative binomial model included age, gender, race, diabetes, renal disease, transfer from haemodialysis, previous renal transplant, PD modality and swan neck versus straight catheter.

RESULTS

Data were available for 4247 incident patients with a total of 2555 peritonitis episodes, corresponding to a peritonitis rate of 0.364 per dialysis year at risk. After adjustment for covariates, double-cuff catheter use was associated with a trend towards a lower peritonitis rate ratio (RR) 0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.80-1.01, P = 0.08]. This trend was largely due to a decreased Staphylococcus aureus peritonitis rate in those with a double-cuff catheter (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.33-0.64, P < 0.001). When stratified by era of PD initiation, the benefit of double-cuff catheters was seen only among those initiating PD before 2001.

CONCLUSION

Use of a double-cuff PD catheter is associated with a reduction in S. aureus peritonitis. Loss of the association between cuff number and peritonitis after the year 2000 may relate to changes in exit-site care that reduce the bacterial burden available for periluminal migration.