Clinical relevance of marginal factors on ultrafiltration in peritoneal dialysis

Relationship between intraperitoneal pressure and the development of hernias in peritoneal dialysis: confirmation for the first time of a widely accepted concept

BACKGROUND

Intraperitoneal pressure (IPP) in peritoneal dialysis (PD) is an individual characteristic that can be modified by posture and intraperitoneal volume (IPV). It is considered one of the predisposing factors for complications in the abdominal wall, such as the appearance of hernias. No studies to date have confirmed this. The main aim of this study was to assess the relationship between the development of hernia in incident PD patients and IPP measured at PD onset.

METHODS

A prospective observational study of incident patients in a PD programme between 2010 and 2020. IPP was measured using the Durand's method.

RESULTS

One hundred and twenty-four incident patients on PD, 68% male, mean age 62.1 ± 15.23 years, body mass index (BMI) 27.7 ± 4.82 kg/m2, 44% were diabetic. IPP in supine was 16.6 ± 4.60 cm H2O for a mean IPV of 2047.1 ± 359.19 mL. Hernias were reported in 18.5% of patients during PD follow-up: 57% were inguinal hernias, 33% umbilical, and a further 10% presented in a combined form. PD hernias correlated positively with IPP in supine position (p = 0.037), patient age (p = 0.008), BMI (p = 0.043), a history of prior hernia (0.016), laparoscopic catheter placement (p = 0.026), and technique failure (p = 0.012). In the multivariate analysis, a higher IPP was independently related to the development of hernias (p = 0.028).

CONCLUSIONS

The development of hernias in PD was related to a higher IPP at PD onset, older age, higher BMI, history of prior hernia, catheter placement by laparoscopy, and technique failure.

Intraperitoneal pressure: Stability over time and validation of Durand's measurement method

Intraperitoneal pressure (IPP) is gaining consideration as a relevant parameter of peritoneal dialysis (PD) in adults, although many of its aspects are still pending clarification. We address here its stability over time and the validity of the usual method of clinical measurement, as proposed by Durand in 1992 but never specifically validated. We performed this validation by comparing Durand's method and direct measurements with a central venous pressure system. We performed a total of 250 measurement pairs in 50 patients with different intraperitoneal volumes plus in-vitro measurements with a simulated peritoneum. Absolute differences between the two systems in vivo were 0.87 ± 0.91 cmH₂O (range 0-5 cmH₂O); only 6.4% of them were ≥3 cmH₂O. In vitro results for both methods were identical. We also compared IPP measurements in the same patient separated by 1-4 h (514 measurement pairs in 136 patients), 1 week (92 pairs in 92 patients), and 2 years (34 pairs in 17 patients). Net differences of measurements separated by hours or 1 week were close to 0 cmH₂O, with oscillations of 1.5 cmH₂O in hours and 2.3 cmH₂O in 1 week. IPP measured 2 years apart presented a net decrease of 2.5 ± 4.9 cmH₂O, without correlation with body mass index changes or any other usual parameter of PD. In hours, 7% of IPP differences were >3 cmH₂O, 22% in 1 week, and 50% in 2 years. In conclusion, Durand's method is precise enough to measure IPP in peritoneal dialysis. This parameter is not stable over long timescales, so it is necessary to use recent measurements.