Eosinophilic peritonitis in children undergoing maintenance peritoneal dialysis: A case report and literature review

Eosinophilic peritonitis (EP) constitutes a significant number of culture-negative peritonitis cases that can affect 16-60% of the patients who are treated with maintenance peritoneal dialysis (PD). Although it is mainly considered to be the hypersensitivity response of the peritoneum to foreign substances, it can also develop following culture-positive peritonitis attacks. Besides the presence of more than 100 white blood cells (WBC)/ml, the diagnosis is made with the high number of eosinophils in the dialysate fluid (>10%), usually accompanied by peripheral eosinophilia. In this study, a 12-year-old male patient, who was diagnosed as EP as early as in the first week of PD catheter placement and treated with systemic antihistamines was reported. Additionally, clinical aspects and treatment modalities of EP are presented with a detailed literature review. Although EP is usually a self-limiting clinical manifestation with a benign outcome, it can be overlooked due to the lack of a routine reporting of the count and percentage of peritoneal eosinophils in most centers. For this reason, a detailed examination in culture-negative peritonitis cases for EP in order to avoid unnecessary antibiotic use for these patients should be the strategy.

Fungal Peritonitis in Peritoneal Dialysis Patients

Peritonitis is one of the most frequent complications of peritoneal dialysis (PD) and 1% – 15% of episodes are caused by fungal infections. The mortality rate of fungal peritonitis (FP) varies from 5% to 53%; failure to resume PD occurs in up to 40% of patients. The majority of these FP episodes are caused by Candida species. Candida albicans has historically been reported to be a more common cause than non-albicans Candida species, but in recent reports a shift has been observed and non-albicans Candida may now be more common. Unusual, often “nonpathogenic,” fungi are being increasingly reported as etiologic agents in FP. Clinical features of FP are not different from those of bacterial peritonitis. Phenotypic identification of fungi in clinical microbiology laboratories is often difficult and delayed. New molecular diagnostic techniques ( e.g., polymerase chain reaction) are being developed and evaluated, and may improve diagnosis and so facilitate early treatment of infected patients. Abdominal pain, abdominal pain with fever, and catheter left in situ are risk factors for mortality and technique failure in FP. In programs with high baseline rates of FP, nystatin prophylaxis may be beneficial. Each program must examine its own history of FP to decide whether prophylaxis would be beneficial. Catheter removal is indicated immediately after fungi are identified by Gram stain or culture in all patients with FP. Prolonged treatment with antifungal agents to determine response and attempt clearance is not encouraged. Antifungals should be continued for 10 days to 2 weeks after catheter removal. Attempts at reinsertion should be made only after waiting for 4 – 6 weeks.

Incidence and Significance of Peritoneal Eosinophilia during Peritoneal Dialysis-Related Peritonitis

Objective

To determine the incidence and significance of peritoneal eosinophilia (PEo) during peritoneal dialysis (PD)-related peritonitis.

Design

Retrospective observational study.

Setting

Tertiary-care public hospital.

Patients and Method

We performed a cytological study of dialysate at the start of 465 cases of peritonitis diagnosed between January 1987 and May 2002. Cases associated with PEo (> 10% eosinophils) were classified according to their infectious or seemingly noninfectious origin. We compared the two groups, trying to disclose differentiating patterns of presentation.

Results

We found PEo in 42 cases. Infectious peritonitis was the final diagnosis in 22 of the 42 cases; a diagnosis of idiopathic eosinophilic peritonitis was finally established in 20 cases. The etiologic spectrum of infectious peritonitis with PEo did not differ markedly from the global spectrum of peritonitis in our unit. Infectious peritonitis with PEo tended to appear later in the course of PD therapy, presented with more severe clinical symptoms, displayed higher total peritoneal leukocyte and neutrophil counts, and showed lower degrees of PEo than idiopathic eosinophilic peritonitis, but overlap between the groups was significant.

Conclusions

Peritoneal eosinophilia is infrequent but not rare during infectious PD-related peritonitis. Our findings agree with established concepts on idiopathic eosinophilic peritonitis, but overlap in presentation with infectious eosinophilic peritonitis is significant, which should be taken into consideration at the time of planning therapy for this condition.