Urgent-start dialysis: Comparison of complications and outcomes between peritoneal dialysis and haemodialysis

The effect of urgent-start peritoneal dialysis and urgent-start hemodialysis on clinical outcomes in patients with chronic kidney disease: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Recently, urgent-start peritoneal dialysis (PD) has been suggested in place of urgent-start hemodialysis (HD) in cases of chronic kidney disease (CKD). However, the comparative effectiveness of these methods is still unclear. This study compared the outcomes of urgent-start PD and urgent-start HD in CKD patients.

METHODS

Electronic searches were conducted in PubMed, EMbase, Google Scholar databases, and Cochrane Library, up to 30th July 2023 for studies reporting data on all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included dialysis-related infectious and mechanical complications. Risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated.

RESULTS

Nine eligible studies involving 941 PD and 779 HD patients were analyzed. Pooled analysis demonstrated elevated risk of all-cause mortality (RR: 1.06, 95% CI: 1.02 to 1.09), dialysis-related infectious complications (RR: 1.05, 95% CI: 1.02 to 1.07), and mechanical complications (RR: 1.08, 95% CI: 1.04 to 1.13) in patients undergoing urgent-start HD than in patients on urgent-start PD.

CONCLUSION

Our findings indicate that CKD patients that received urgent-start HD are at increased risk of all-cause mortality and infectious, and mechanical complications that are associated with the dialysis than patients that received urgent-start PD. These findings have to be considered when making treatment decisions for patients with acute kidney injury. Better understanding of the mechanism of these differences may help to create guidelines for more informed clinical practices.

A comparison of urgent-start of hemodialysis vs urgent initiation of peritoneal dialysis: a meta-analysis study

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effects of urgent-start HD(USHD) and urgent-start PD(USPD) on dialysis patients and provide references for relevant clinical practice.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted in Chinese and English databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CNKI, Wanfang, VIP) and the cutoff date for which was July 30, 2023. Studies comparing USHD and USPD were included and I2 statistics and Q tests were used to determine heterogeneity among them. Risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were computed for count data.

RESULTS

Nine studies met the inclusion criteria. The all-cause mortality rate was 0.173 (0.070, 0.277) for USPD versus 0.214 (0.142, 0.286) for USHD, indicating that USPD had a protective effect against all-cause mortality compared to USHD (RR = 0.76, 95% CI 0.63-0.91). Patients receiving USPD had lower risks of infection-related mortality (RR = 0.19; 95% CI 0.05-0.76), bacteremia (RR = 0.38; 95% CI 0.18-0.80), and composite complications (RR = 0.54; 95% CI 0.41-0.71). However, no significant differences were found between USHD and USPD for cardiovascular mortality (RR = 0.68; 95% CI 0.28-1.68) or cancer mortality (RR = 0.44; 95% CI 0.15-1.29).

CONCLUSION

Compared to USHD, USPD has better protective effects against all-cause mortality, infection-related mortality, bacteremia, and composite complications. However, more high-quality research is still needed to further investigate the impacts of the two dialysis modalities on patients.

Survival, cumulative hospital days and infectious complications in urgent-start PD compared with urgent-start HD

BACKGROUND

Urgent-start peritoneal dialysis (PD) carries a similar efficacy and safety profile compared to urgent-start haemodialysis (HD) but is only sparsely applied due to resource issues and concerns of complication risks. Furthermore, few data exist on adverse outcomes associated with central venous catheter (CVC) insertions in urgent-start HD patients. Thus, we sought to compare patient and dialysis-related outcomes in patients undergoing urgent-start PD or HD.

METHODS

All patients initiating urgent-start PD in a tertiary research hospital in 2005-2018 were included in this retrospective, single-centre, comparative study and matched with urgent-start HD patients of similar age and chronic kidney disease aetiology. All urgent-start PDs were initiated within 72 h after catheter insertion, and urgent-start HDs were performed via a CVC. All analyses were performed at 3 months and at 1 year of follow-up, respectively.

RESULTS

Thirty-three patients who commenced urgent-start PD and 58 matched urgent-start HD control patients were included. Altogether, 26 patients (29%; PD: 36%, HD 24%) died within the 1-year follow-up, and patient survival was similar at 3 months (hazard ratio (HR): 1.15, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.35-3.81, p = 0.82) and at 1 year of follow-up (HR: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.30-1.39, p = 0.26) between the study groups. There were no differences in the total kidney replacement therapy (KRT)-related infection rate (p = 0.66) or cumulative first-year hospital care days (p = 0.43) between the treatment groups. Altogether, 139 CVCs were inserted during the 1-year follow-up. The number of CVCs per patient was associated with the emergence of blood culture-positive bacteraemia and increased cumulative first-year hospital care days.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient survival, cumulative first-year hospital care days and total KRT-related infection rate at 3 months and 1-year follow-up are similar between urgent-start PD and urgent-start HD patients. Furthermore, CVC insertion rate is associated with incident blood culture-positive bacteraemia and increased cumulative first-year hospital care days.

Risk factors of different mortality periods in older patients with end-stage renal disease undergoing urgent-start peritoneal dialysis: a retrospective observational study

BACKGROUND

The first six months of therapy represents a high-risk period for peritoneal dialysis (PD) failure. The risk of death in the first six months is higher for older patients treated with urgent-start PD (USPD). However, there are still gaps in research on mortality and risk factors for death in this particular group of patients. We aimed to investigate mortality rates and risk factors for death in older patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) receiving USPD within and after six months of therapy.

METHODS

We retrospectively studied the clinical information of older adults aged ≥ 65 years with ESRD who received USPD between 2013 and 2019 in five Chinese hospitals. Patients were followed up to June 30, 2020. The mortality and risk factors for death in the first six months of USPD treatment and beyond were analyzed.

RESULTS

Of the 379 elderly patients in the study, 130 died over the study period. During the follow-up period, the highest number (45, 34.6%) of deaths occurred within the first six months. Cardiovascular disease was the most common cause of death. The baseline New York Heart Association (NYHA) class III-IV cardiac function [hazard ratio (HR) = 2.457, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.200-5.030, p = 0.014] and higher white blood cell (WBC) count (HR = 1.082, 95% CI: 1.021-1.147, p = 0.008) increased the mortality risk within six months of USPD. The baseline NYHA class III-IV cardiac function (HR = 1.945, 95% CI: 1.149-3.294, p = 0.013), lower WBC count (HR = 0.917, 95% CI: 0.845-0.996, p = 0.040), lower potassium levels (HR = 0.584, 95% CI: 0.429-0.796, p = 0.001), and higher calcium levels (HR = 2.160, 95% CI: 1.025-4.554, p = 0.043) increased the mortality risk after six months of USPD.

CONCLUSION

Different risk factors correlated with mortality in older adults with ESRD within and after six months of undergoing USPD, including baseline NYHA class III-IV cardiac function, WBC count, potassium, and calcium levels.

Exploring Preconceptions as Barriers to Peritoneal Dialysis Eligibility: A Global Scenario-Based Survey of Kidney Care Physicians

Introduction

Despite the growing number of patients requiring kidney replacement therapy (KRT), peritoneal dialysis (PD) is underutilized globally. A contributory factor may be clinician myths about its use. The aim of this study was to explore perceptions about PD initiation by clinicians according to various physical, social, and clinical characteristics of patients.

Methods

An online global survey (in English and Thai) was administered to ascertain nephrologists' and nephrology trainees' decisions on recommending PD as a treatment modality.

Results

A total of 645 participants (522 nephrologists and 123 trainees; 56% male) from 54 countries (66% from high-income countries [HICs], 22% from upper middle-income countries [UMICs], 12% from lower middle-income countries, and 1% from low-income countries [LICs]) completed the survey. Of the respondents, 81% identified as attending physicians or consultants, and 19% identified as trainees or other. PD was recommended for most scenarios, including repeated exposures to heavy lifting, swimming (especially in a private pool and ocean), among patients with cirrhosis or cognitive impairment with available support, and those living with a pet if a physical separation can be achieved during PD. Certain abdominal surgeries were more acceptable to proceed with PD (hysterectomy, 90%) compared to others (hemicolectomy, 45%). Similar variation was noted for different types of stomas (nephrostomies, 74%; suprapubic catheters, 53%; and ileostomies, 27%).

Conclusion

The probability of recommending PD in various scenarios was greater among clinicians from HICs, larger units, and consultants with more clinical experience. There is a disparity in recommending PD across various clinical scenarios driven by experience, unit-level characteristics, and region of practice. Globally, evidence-informed education is warranted to rectify misconceptions to enable greater PD uptake.

Early outcomes of peritoneal dialysis in a middle-income country: A retrospective cohort study of a large dialysis network in Colombia

BACKGROUND

The first year of dialysis is critical given the significant risk for complications following dialysis initiation. We analysed complications during the first year among incident peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study comprised adult kidney failure patients starting PD in Baxter Renal Care Services in Colombia, receiving their first PD catheter between 1 January 2017 and 31 December 2020 and were followed up for up to 1 year. We analysed incidence, causes and factors associated with complications using logistic regression and transfer to haemodialysis (HD) using the Fine-Gray regression model.

RESULTS

Among 4743 patients receiving their first PD catheter: 4628 (97.6%) of catheter implantations were successful; 377 (7.9%) patients experienced early complications. The incidence rate of complications during the year was 0.51 events per patient-year (95% CI: 0.48-0.54). Age, obesity and urgent start were associated with higher probability of complications after catheter implantation. The cumulative incidence of transfer to HD within 1 year of PD initiation was 10.1% [95% CI: 9.2-11.1%]. The hazard function for transfer to HD showed an accelerating pattern during the first month followed by progressive decrease during the first year.

CONCLUSIONS

In this large population of incident PD patients, there is a high primary catheter placement success rate. Urgent start, age ≥65 years, obesity, centre size ≥150 PD patients and diabetes were risk factors associated with early complications. The follow-up of the cohort from day 1 of PD treatment showed that the risk for transfer to HD was higher during the first month.

Safety of a 24-h-or-less break-in period in elderly patients undergoing urgent-start peritoneal dialysis: A multicenter retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Several elderly patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) had to undergo urgent-start peritoneal dialysis (USPD). This study aimed to determine whether break-in period (BI) within 24 h was feasible in elderly patients undergoing USPD.

METHODS

Patients with ESRD who underwent PD at five hospitals were screened. Patients were divided into the BI ≤24 h and >24 h groups. Complications were compared between the two groups. Multivariate logistic regression model was used to determine whether BI ≤24 h was associated with complications.

RESULTS

A total of 175 elderly patients were included: BI ≤24 h group, 78; and BI >24 h group, 97. There was no significant difference in the rate of complications between the two groups (all p > 0.05). Furthermore, BI ≤24 h was not an independent risk factor for complications (all p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Starting PD within 24 h after PD catheter insertion was feasible in elderly ESRD patients.

Peritoneal dialysis in the modern era

The practice and clinical outcomes of peritoneal dialysis (PD) have demonstrated significant improvement over the past 20 years. The aim of this review is to increase awareness and update healthcare professionals on current PD practice, especially with respect to patient and technique survival, patient modality selection, pathways onto PD, understanding patient experience of care and use prior to kidney transplantation. These improvements have been impacted, at least in part, by greater emphasis on shared decision-making in dialysis modality selection, the use of advanced laparoscopic techniques for PD catheter implantation, developments in PD connecting systems, glucose-sparing strategies, and modernising technology in managing automated PD patients remotely. Evidence-based clinical guidelines such as those prepared by national and international societies such as the International Society of PD have contributed to improved PD practice underpinned by a recognition of the place of continuous quality improvement processes.

Automated peritoneal dialysis as a cost-effective urgent-start dialysis option for ESRD patients: A prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Several studies have reported the feasibility of urgent-start peritoneal dialysis (PD) as an alternative to hemodialysis (HD) using a central venous catheter (CVC). However, the cost-effectiveness of automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) as an urgent-start dialysis modality has not been directly evaluated, especially in China.

METHODS

We prospectively enrolled patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) who required urgent-start dialysis at a single center from March 2019 to November 2020. Patients were grouped according to their urgent-start dialysis modality (APD and HD). Urgent-start dialysis conducted until 14 days after PD catheter insertion. Then, PD was maintained. Each patient was followed until July 2021 or death or loss to follow-up. The primary outcome was the incidence of short-term dialysis-related complications. The secondary outcome was the cost and duration of the initial hospitalization. Technique survival, peritonitis-free or bacteriamia-free survival and patient survival were also compared.

RESULTS

Sixty-eight patients were included in the study, of whom 36 (52.9%) patients were in APD group. Mean follow-up duration was 20.1 months. Compared with the HD group, the APD group had significantly fewer short-term dialysis-related complications. The cost of initial hospitalization was also significantly lower in APD patients. There was no significant difference between APD and HD patients with respect to duration of the initial hospitalization, technique survival rate, peritonitis-free or bacteriemia-free survival rate, and patient survival rate.

CONCLUSION

Among ESRD patients with an urgent need for dialysis, APD as urgent-start dialysis modality, compared with HD using a CVC, resulted in fewer short-term dialysis-related complications and lower cost.

Risk factors for mortality within 6 mo in patients with diabetes undergoing urgent-start peritoneal dialysis: A multicenter retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

The risk of early mortality of patients who start dialysis urgently is high; however, in patients with diabetes undergoing urgent-start peritoneal dialysis (USPD), the risk of, and risk factors for, early mortality are unknown.

AIM

To identify risk factors for mortality during high-risk periods in patients with diabetes undergoing USPD.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study enrolled 568 patients with diabetes, aged ≥ 18 years, who underwent USPD at one of five Chinese centers between 2013 and 2019. We divided the follow-up period into two survival phases: The first 6 mo of USPD therapy and the months thereafter. We compared demographic and baseline clinical data of living and deceased patients during each period. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were generated for all-cause mortality according to the New York Heart Association (NYHA) classification. A multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression model was used to identify risk factors for mortality within the first 6 mo and after 6 mo of USPD.

RESULTS

Forty-one patients died within the first 6 mo, accounting for the highest proportion of mortalities (26.62%) during the entire follow-up period. Cardiovascular disease was the leading cause of mortality within 6 mo (26.83%) and after 6 mo (31.86%). The risk of mortality not only within the first 6 mo but also after the first 6 mo was higher for patients with obvious baseline heart failure symptoms than for those with mild or no heart failure symptoms. Independent risk factors for mortality within the first 6 mo were advanced age [hazard ratio (HR: 1.908; 95%CI: 1.400-2.600; P < 0.001), lower baseline serum creatinine level (HR: 0.727; 95%CI: 0.614-0.860; P < 0.001), higher baseline serum phosphorus level (HR: 3.162; 95%CI: 1.848-5.409; P < 0.001), and baseline NYHA class III-IV (HR: 2.148; 95%CI: 1.063-4.340; P = 0.033). Independent risk factors for mortality after 6 mo were advanced age (HR: 1.246; 95%CI: 1.033-1.504; P = 0.022) and baseline NYHA class III-IV (HR: 2.015; 95%CI: 1.298-3.130; P = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

To reduce the risk of mortality within the first 6 mo of USPD in patients with diabetes, controlling the serum phosphorus level and improving cardiac function are recommended.

Analysis of mechanical complications in urgent-start peritoneal dialysis

BACKGROUND

Peritoneal dialysis (PD) is an excellent, but underutilized dialysis technique. Thus, its implementation may depend also on the chance to offer this modality of treatment to patients referred late to the nephologists. This approach has recently been named "urgent-start peritoneal dialysis" (UPD). The main barrier to this practice is represented by the fear of early mechanical complications.

METHODS

All prevalent patients needing urgent-start PD at our institution between 1 January, 2009 and 31 December, 2019 were included in the study. During this period, 242 peritoneal catheters were inserted in 222 patients. In all patients, an anti-leakage/dislocation suture was made. PD was started within 24 h from catheter placement.

RESULTS

The early incidence of leakages, catheter dislocations, omental wrappings, bleedings, peritonitis and exit-site infections was 11/242 (4.5%), 5/242 (2%), 3/242 (1.2%), 2/242 (0.8%), 6/242 (2.5%) and 4/242 (1.6%), respectively. No bowel perforations were observed. Nearly one third of the late complications (13/45; 35.2%) resulted in discontinuation of PD, while one fourth (11/45; 24.4%) required surgical revision. The remaining episodes (21/45; 46.6%) were successfully managed by a conservative approach. The survival of the catheter at 3, 6, 12, 24, 36 and 48 months was 93.6, 91.2, 84.8, 77.4, 65.5 and 59.3%, respectively. The technique survival at 3, 6, 12, 24, 36 and 48 months was 97.2, 94.9, 87.6, 78.9, 66.6 and 60.0%, respectively. The main causes of PD drop-out included infectious complications (36.8%) followed by mechanical complications (17.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

A tight seal between deep cuff and surrounding tissues (double purse-string technique) in association with a starting low-volume exchange scheme allows to minimize early and late mechanical complication in UPD.

Urgent-start peritoneal dialysis: Association with outcomes

The majority of end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) patients start dialysis without adequate pre-dialysis planning. Of these patients, the vast majority initiate in-centre haemodialysis using a central venous catheter (ICHD-CVC). A minority utilise urgent-start peritoneal dialysis (USPD), whereby a peritoneal dialysis catheter is placed and used for dialysis without the usual 2-4-week waiting period. In this multicentre, retrospective study of adult patients initiating dialysis during 2018, we compared outcomes among patients utilising these two dialysis initiation routes. Patients who initiated dialysis via ICHD-CVC were matched 1:1 to patients who utilised USPD on the basis of aetiology of ESKD, race, diabetes status and insurance type. Hospitalisation and mortality were evaluated from dialysis initiation through the first of death, transplant, loss to follow-up or study end (30 June 2019). Outcomes were compared using models adjusted for age and sex. A total of 717 USPD patients were matched to ICHD-CVC patients. During follow-up, USPD patients were hospitalised at a rate of 1.21 admissions/patient-year (pt-yr) versus 1.51 admissions/pt-yr for ICHD-CVC. This corresponded to a 24% lower rate of hospitalisation among USPD patients (adjusted incidence rate ratio 0.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.65-0.88). Mortality rates were 0.08 and 0.11 deaths/pt-yr among USPD patients and ICHD-CVC patients, respectively (adjusted hazard ratio 0.84, 95% CI 0.62, 1.15). These findings suggest that more widespread adoption of USPD may be beneficial among patients with limited pre-dialysis planning.

Break-in Period ≤24 Hours as an Option for Urgent-start Peritoneal Dialysis in Patients With Diabetes

BACKGROUND

The optimal break-in period (BI) of urgent-start peritoneal dialysis (USPD) initiation for patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and diabetes is unclear. We aimed to explore the safety and applicability of a BI ≤24 h in patients with ESRD and diabetes.

METHODS

We used a retrospective cohort design wherein we recruited patients with ESRD and diabetes who underwent USPD at five institutions in China between January 2013 and August 2020. The enrolled patients were grouped according to BI. The primary outcomes were mechanical and infectious complication occurrences, whereas the secondary outcome was technique survival.

RESULTS

We enrolled 310 patients with diabetes, of whom 155 and 155 patients were in the BI ≤24 h and BI >24 h groups, respectively. The two groups showed a comparable incidence of infectious and mechanical complications within 6 months after catheter insertion (p>0.05). Logistic regression analysis revealed that a BI ≤24 h was not an independent risk factor for mechanical or infectious complications. Kaplan-Meier estimates showed no statistically significant between-group differences in technique survival rates (p>0.05). Cox multivariate regression analysis revealed that a BI ≤24 h was not an independent risk factor for technique failure.

CONCLUSION

USPD initiation with a BI ≤24 h may be safe and feasible for patients with ESRD and diabetes.

Urgent vs. planned peritoneal dialysis initiation: complications and outcomes in the first year of therapy

INTRODUCTION

Urgent-start peritoneal dialysis (US-PD) has been proposed as a safe modality of renal replacement therapy (RRT) for end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients with an indication for emergency dialysis initiation. We aimed to compare the characteristics, 30-day complications, and clinical outcomes of US-PD and planned peritoneal dialysis (Plan-PD) patients over the first year of therapy.

METHODS

This was a single-center retrospective study that included incident adult patients followed for up to one year. US-PD was considered when incident patients started therapy within 7 days after Tenckhoff catheter implantation. Plan-PD group consisted of patients who started therapy after the breaking period (15 days). Mechanical and infectious complications were compared 30 days from PD initiation. Hospitalization and technique failure during the first 12 months on PD were assessed by Kaplan-Meier curves and the determinants were calculated by Cox regression models.

RESULTS

All patients starting PD between October/2016 and November/2019 who fulfilled the inclusion criteria were analyzed. We evaluated 137 patients (70 in the US-PD x 67 Plan-PD). The main complications in the first 30 days were catheter tip migration (7.5% Plan-PD x 4.3% US-PD - p= 0.49) and leakage (4.5% Plan-PD x 5.7% US-PD - p=0.74). Most catheters were placed using the Seldinger technique. The main cause of dropout was death in US-PD patients (15.7%) and transfer to HD in Plan-PD patients (13.4%). The occurrence of complications in the first 30 days was the only risk factor for dropout (OR = 2.9; 95% CI 1.1-7.5, p = 0.03). Hospitalization rates and technique survival were similar in both groups.

CONCLUSION

The lack of significant differences in patients' outcomes between groups reinforces that PD is a safe and applicable dialysis method in patients who need immediate dialysis.

Risk factors for early death in urgent-start peritoneal dialysis patients: A multicenter retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Assess risk factors for early death in patients who underwent urgent-start peritoneal dialysis (USPD).

METHODS

Patients who initiated USPD in five peritoneal dialysis centers from 2013 to 2019 were screened in this multicenter retrospective cohort study. Risk factors for all-cause mortality within 3 months were explored.

RESULTS

A total of 1265 USPD patients with 43 early deaths were included. Cox regression analyses showed that age older than 60 years (hazard ratio [HR], 3.054; 95% CI [1.597, 5.842]; p = 0.001), albumin less than 30 g/L (HR, 2.234; 95%CI [1.207, 4.136]; p = 0.011), blood glucose greater than 7 mmol/L (HR, 2.766; 95%CI [1.477, 5.180]; p = 0.001), higher estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR; HR, 1.121; 95%CI [1.071, 1.172]; p = 0.000), and poor stages of heart failure (class IV compared with class 0-I; HR, 5.165; 95%CI [2.544, 10.486]; p = 0.000) were independent predicting factors for early death.

CONCLUSIONS

Risk factors for early death were older age, hypoproteinemia, hyperglycemia, higher eGFR, and severe heart failure.

Spectrum of Complications of Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease on Maintenance Continuous Ambulatory Peritoneal Dialysis: An Experience of Tertiary Nephrology Center in Najaf City-Iraq

BACKGROUND: Chronic kidney disease (CKD), also called chronic kidney failure, is described as gradual loss of kidney function. CKD can progress to end-stage kidney failure, which is fatal without artificial filtering (dialysis) or kidney transplant. Peritoneal dialysis (PD) has a widespread renal replacement therapy with great acceptance because of simplicity, flexibility, and independence. AIM: The aim of this study was to evaluate the complications of continuous ambulatory PD (CAPD) in patients with CKD. METHODS: A cross-sectional study, involved 140 patients, aged between 18 and 80 years old and suffered from CKD under maintenance CAPD in the dialysis unit of the renal center. All data regarding the sociodemographic profile of the patient, vitals, etiological diagnosis, frequency and duration of dialysis, and dialysis-related complications were taken. RESULTS: In the current study, there is a significant difference in the distribution of complications among gender where the female patients had a higher incidence of both infectious and non-infectious complications. The study also reported that there is much lower rate of complications among patients on laparoscope operation in compared with the open operation. In addition, patients with open abdomen PD developed the complications earlier than those with laparoscope maintenance CAPD. CONCLUSION: Peritoneal infection is the most prevalent complication among the other complications in the current study. There is much lower rate of complications among patients on PD in compared with hemodialysis and on laparoscope in compared with the open operation.

Comparison of mortality and complications between urgent-start peritoneal dialysis and urgent-start hemodialysis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

The advantages of urgent-start peritoneal dialysis (PD) vis-à-vis urgent-start hemodialysis (HD) are not clear. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing the two modalities. Databases of PubMed, Embase, Ovoid, and Google Scholar were searched up to November 1, 2020. The primary outcome was mortality, and secondary outcomes were dialysis-related infectious complications and mechanical complications. Risk ratios (RRs) were calculated for all outcomes. Seven studies were included. The pooled analysis revealed a statistically significant reduced risk of all-cause mortality in patients undergoing urgent-start PD as compared to urgent-start HD (RR: 0.61, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.40, 0.94], I²  = 56.34%). A meta-analysis of dialysis-related infectious complications indicated no statistically significant difference between the two modalities (RR: 0.66, 95% CI [0.29, 1.50], I²  = 69.62%). Our analysis revealed a statistically significant reduced risk of mechanical complications in patients undergoing urgent-start PD (RR: 0.54, 95% CI [0.40, 0.73], I²  = 0%). To conclude, unadjusted data from observational studies are indicative of lower mortality and lower risk of mechanical complications with urgent-start PD versus urgent-start HD. The risk of infectious complications was not different between the two groups. Further studies with a larger sample size using propensity-matched cohorts are needed to strengthen current evidence.

Barriers and opportunities to increase PD incidence and prevalence: Lessons from a European Survey

INTRODUCTION

Peritoneal dialysis (PD) remains underutilised and unplanned start of dialysis further diminishes the likelihood of patients starting on PD, although outcomes are equal to haemodialysis (HD).

METHODS

A survey was sent to members of EuroPD and regional societies presenting a case vignette of a 48-year-old woman not previously known to the nephrology department and who arrives at the emergency department with established end-stage kidney disease (unplanned start), asking which dialysis modality would most likely be chosen at their respective centre. We assessed associations between the modality choices for this case vignette and centre characteristics and PD-related practices.

RESULTS

Of 575 respondents, 32.8%, 32.2% and 35.0% indicated they would start unplanned PD, unplanned HD or unplanned HD with intention to educate patient on PD later, respectively. Likelihood for unplanned start of PD was only associated with quality of structure of the pre-dialysis program. Structure of pre-dialysis education program, PD program in general, likelihood to provide education on PD to unplanned starters, good collaboration with the PD access team and taking initiatives to enhance home-based therapies increased the likelihood unplanned patients would end up on PD.

CONCLUSIONS

Well-structured pre-dialysis education on PD as a modality, good connections to dedicated PD catheter placement teams and additional initiatives to enhance home-based therapies are key to grow PD programs. Centres motivated to grow their PD programs seem to find solutions to do so.

Renal replacement therapy for critically ill patients with COVID-19-associated acute kidney injury: A review of current knowledge

The outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) has rapidly evolved into a global pandemic. A significant proportion of COVID‐19 patients develops severe symptoms, which may include acute respiratory distress syndrome and acute kidney injury as manifestations of multi‐organ failure. Acute kidney injury (AKI) necessitating renal replacement therapy (RRT) is increasingly prevalent among critically ill patients with COVID‐19. However, few studies have focused on AKI treated with RRT. Many questions are awaiting answers as regards AKI in the setting of COVID‐19; whether patients with COVID‐19 commonly develop AKI, what are the underlying pathophysiologic mechanisms? What is the best evidence regarding treatment approaches? Identification of the potential indications and the preferred modalities of RRT in this context, is based mainly on clinical experience. Here, we review the current approaches of RRT, required for management of critically ill patients with COVID‐19 complicated by severe AKI as well as the precautions that should be adopted by health care providers in dealing with these cases. Electronic search was conducted in MEDLINE, PubMed, ISI Web of Science, and Scopus scientific databases. We searched the terms relevant to this review to identify the relevant studies. We also searched the conference proceedings and ClinicalTrials.gov database.

Safety and Efficacy of Bedside Peritoneal Dialysis Catheter Placement in the COVID-19 Era: Initial Experience at a New York City Hospital

Introduction

Acute kidney injury (AKI) requiring renal replacement therapy (RRT) is common in critically ill patients with COVID-19. Unparalleled numbers of patients with AKI and shortage of dialysis machines and operative resources prompted consideration of expanded use of urgent-start peritoneal dialysis (PD) and evaluation of the safety and efficacy of bedside surgical placement of PD catheters.

Study design

Bedside, open PD catheter insertions were performed in early April 2020, at a large academic center in New York City. Patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection and AKI and ambulatory patients with chronic kidney disease and impending need for RRT were included. Detailed surgical technique is described.

Results

Fourteen catheters were placed at the bedside over 2 weeks, 11 in critically ill COVID-19 patients and three in ambulatory patients. Mean patient age was 61.9 years (43–83), and mean body mass index was 27.1 (20–37.6); four patients had prior abdominal surgery. All catheters were placed successfully without routine radiographic studies or intraoperative complications. One patient (7%) experienced primary nonfunction of the catheter requiring HD. One patient had limited intraperitoneal bleeding while anticoagulated, which was managed by mechanical compression of the abdominal wall and temporarily holding anticoagulation. All other catheters had an adequate function at 3–18 days of follow-up.

Conclusions

Bedside placement of PD catheters is safe and effective in ICU and outpatient clinic settings. Our surgical protocols allowed for optimization of critical hospital resources, minimization of hazardous exposure to healthcare providers and a broader application of urgent-start PD in selected patients. Long-term follow-up is warranted.