Pharmacokinetics of once daily intraperitoneal cefazolin in continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis patients

Reversible cefazolin-induced status epilepticus in a peritoneal dialysis patient

Cefazolin-induced neurotoxicity with the documented toxic concentration has not been reported in uremic patients on continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD). We described an elderly female on CAPD for years presented with newly-onset status epilepticus. Her body weight was 60 kg. And she had received intraperitoneal ceftazidime and cefazolin 1.5 g once daily for her CAPD peritonitis 5 days earlier. She was disoriented but afebrile with normal blood pressure. Laboratory data showed WBC 18,480/uL, pH 6.93, HCO₃ ^- 8.5 mmol/L, free Ca²⁺ 3.5 mmol/L, and albumin 2.8 g/dL. Although antiepileptic drugs and hypocalcemia correction ceased the seizure, her consciousness remained semi-coma. Image studies of brain were unremarkable. Despite undetectable serum ceftazidime, her cefazolin trough level was 149.5 μg/mL. Emergent hemodialysis rapidly resolved her neurological features accompanied by a markedly declined serum cefazolin concentration (28.6 μg/mL). Higher intraperitoneal cefazolin dosing in patients on CAPD may cause drug-induced neurotoxicity with status epilepticus which could be rapidly corrected by hemodialysis.

Continuous Ambulatory Peritoneal Dialysis Peritonitis Guidelines - Consensus Statement of Peritoneal Dialysis Society of India - 2020

Continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) related peritonitis is a major cause of technique failure, morbidity, and mortality in patients on CAPD. Its prevention and management is key to success of CAPD program. Due to variability in practice, microbiological trends and sensitivity towards antibiotics, there is a need for customized guidelines for management of CAPD related peritonitis (CAPDRP) in India. With this need, Peritoneal Dialysis Society of India (PDSI) organized a structured meeting to discuss various aspects of management of CAPDRP and formulated a consensus agreement which will help in management of patients with CAPDRP.

Advances in the pharmacological management of bacterial peritonitis

Introduction: Bacterial peritonitis is an infection with high mortality if not treated immediately. In the absence of an intraabdominal source of infection, bacterial peritonitis may arise in patients with liver cirrhosis, in patients on peritoneal dialysis (PD) for end-stage renal disease or in patients with tuberculosis. In patients with cirrhosis, bacterial peritonitis may trigger acute on chronic liver failure with substantial mortality despite optimal treatment. In patients on PD, peritonitis may make continuation of PD impossible, necessitating the switch to hemodialysis.Areas covered: Recovery from peritonitis and prevention of complications depend on timely pharmacological management. Challenges are the broad microbiological spectrum with growing rates of antimicrobial resistance, the underlying chronic liver or kidney failure and high rates of relapse. The authors provide a review of predisposing conditions, diagnosis, and prevention of bacterial peritonitis with a particular focus on the pharmacological management.Expert opinion: Diagnosis of the type of bacterial peritonitis is essential to pharmacological management. In patients with spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, broad-spectrum antibiotics should be given intravenously in conjunction with albumin. In patients on PD, antibiotic therapy should be preferably applied intraperitoneally with empirical coverage of gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria. Secondary peritonitis usually requires surgical or interventional treatment.

Peritoneal Dialysis Guidelines 2019 Part 1 (Position paper of the Japanese Society for Dialysis Therapy)

Approximately 10 years have passed since the Peritoneal Dialysis Guidelines were formulated in 2009. Much evidence has been reported during the succeeding years, which were not taken into consideration in the previous guidelines, e.g., the next peritoneal dialysis PD trial of encapsulating peritoneal sclerosis (EPS) in Japan, the significance of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), the effects of icodextrin solution, new developments in peritoneal pathology, and a new international recommendation on a proposal for exit-site management. It is essential to incorporate these new developments into the new clinical practice guidelines. Meanwhile, the process of creating such guidelines has changed dramatically worldwide and differs from the process of creating what were “clinical practice guides.” For this revision, we not only conducted systematic reviews using global standard methods but also decided to adopt a two-part structure to create a reference tool, which could be used widely by the society’s members attending a variety of patients. Through a working group consensus, it was decided that Part 1 would present conventional descriptions and Part 2 would pose clinical questions (CQs) in a systematic review format. Thus, Part 1 vastly covers PD that would satisfy the requirements of the members of the Japanese Society for Dialysis Therapy (JSDT). This article is the duplicated publication from the Japanese version of the guidelines and has been reproduced with permission from the JSDT.

Short-Dwell Cycling Intraperitoneal Cefazolin plus Ceftazidime in Peritoneal Dialysis Patients

Background

Current guidelines suggest that intraperitoneal (IP) antibiotics should be administered only in a long peritoneal dialysis (PD) dwell (≥ 6 hours). The long dwell might result in low ultrafiltration and volume overload. We aim to examine plasma and dialysate concentration of cefazolin and ceftazidime after IP administration in a short-dwell (≤ 2 hours) automated cycling exchange.

Methods

Stable PD patients without peritonitis were invited to participate in the present study. Patients underwent 5 2-liter exchanges of PD fluid over 10 hours by the PD cycling machine without last fill or additional dwell. Cefazolin and ceftazidime (20 mg/kg each) were added to the first 5-liter bag of 2.5% dextrose PD fluid that was placed on the warmer of the PD cycling machine. Plasma samples were collected at 12 time-points over 24 hours. Dialysate samples from each exchange were also collected. Antibiotic concentrations in plasma and dialysate were then determined by high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC).

Results

Six stable PD patients without peritonitis participated in the study. Dialysate cefazolin and ceftazidime were consistently high throughout the PD session in all patients (26 - 360 mg/L). Plasma cefazolin and ceftazidime exceeded the minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) for susceptible organisms (≤ 8 mg/L) within 2 hours (cefazolin 28.5 ± 8.0 and ceftazidime 12.5 ± 3.4 mg/L), peak at 10 hours (51.1 ± 14.1 and 23.0 ± 5.2 mg/L) and sustained well above the MIC at 24 hours (42.0 ± 9.6 and 17.1 ± 3.1 mg/L).

Conclusions

The short-dwell cycling IP cefazolin and ceftazidime could provide adequate plasma concentration for up to 24 hours. Daily short-dwell cycling IP cefazolin and ceftazidime might be used to treat peritonitis in PD patients already using a PD cycling machine as well as selected continuous ambulatory PD (CAPD) patients who need shorter dwells during peritonitis due to increasing peritoneal solute transport.

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.

Residual Kidney Function and Peritoneal Dialysis-Associated Peritonitis Treatment Outcomes

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Residual kidney function contributes to the clearance of antibiotics excreted by the kidneys, lowering the antibiotic concentration, which may adversely affect the treatment of peritoneal dialysis-associated peritonitis. The objective of our study was to examine the relationship between residual kidneyfunction and peritonitis treatment outcomes.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

Our study included 181 participants who experienced 339 episodes of Gram-positive, Gram-negative, and culture-negative peritoneal dialysis-associated peritonitis at a single centerfrom 2003 to 2010. Episodes were categorized according to participants' urinary creatinine clearance (0, >0-5, and >5 ml/min). The data were analyzed using generalized estimating equation models to determine the covariate-adjusted association between urinary creatinine clearance and treatment failure (defined as relapse or recurrent peritonitis episodes, peritoneal catheter removal, or death from any cause during peritonitis treatment).

RESULTS

Among episodes of peritonitis due to Gram-positive organisms or culture-negative infections, those experienced by participants with urinary creatinine clearance >5 ml/min had significantly higher odds of treatment failure than episodes experienced by anuric participants (27 of 80 versus 20 of 119 episodes resulting in treatment failure for creatinine clearance >5 versus 0 ml/min; odds ratio, 6.80; 95% confidence interval, 2.37 to 19.6). Episodes experienced by participants with creatinine clearance >0-5 ml/min also had significantly higher odds of treatment failure than episodes experienced by anuric participants (14 of 64 episodes resulting in treatment failure for creatinine clearance >0-5 ml/min; odds ratio, 2.87; 95% confidence interval, 1.12 to 7.35). The odds of relapse and recurrent peritonitis among participants with creatinine clearance >5 ml/min was also significantly higher compared with in anuric participants (17 of 80 versus 12 of 119 episodes resulting in relapse and recurrence for creatinine clearance >5 versus 0 ml/min; odds ratio, 6.76; 95% confidence interval, 1.90 to 23.8). Among participants with Gram-negative peritonitis, creatinine clearance was significantly associated with neither treatment failure nor relapse and recurrent peritonitis.

CONCLUSIONS

Residual kidney function as measured by greater urinary creatinine clearance was associated with treatment failure among participants with Gram-positive and culture-negative peritonitis.

Intraperitoneal antibiotic administration for prevention of postoperative peritoneal catheter-related infections

BACKGROUND

It is recommended that systemic prophylactic antibiotics be given immediately prior to peritoneal catheter insertion. This administration requires intravenous access and could be inconvenient in dynamic and unpredictable operation room schedule. Intraperitoneal antibiotics could be an alternative simple way for prevention of postoperative peritoneal catheter infections.

METHODS

Medical records from 109 patients undergoing permanent PD catheter placement procedures were reviewed retrospectively. Group I patients (66 patients) received intraperitoneal cefazolin through the inserted Tenckhoff catheter in operation room. Group II (43 patients) received intravenous cefazolin 2 h prior to the surgery. The effect of prophylactic antibiotics on the occurrence of peritonitis and exit site infection in the 14 days following surgical peritoneal dialysis catheter placement was evaluated.

RESULTS

During the follow-up period, one patients from group II (2.3%) and none from group I developed peritonitis (P = 0.3945). One patient from each group developed exit site infection (P = 1.000).

CONCLUSION

It was found that intraperitoneal antibiotics have the similar efficacy compared with intravenous antibiotics for postoperative peritoneal catheter-related infections' prevention. It does not require intravenous access and overcome the issue of unpredictable operation room schedule.

Colonoscopy in automated peritoneal dialysis patients: value of prophylactic antibiotics: a prospective study on a single antibiotic

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the need for prophylactic antibiotics in automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) patients undergoing flexible colonoscopy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 93 patients on automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) undergoing diagnostic colonoscopy were enrolled in a prospective, randomized study. Patients were randomized into 2 age- and sex-matched groups; group A (46 patients) with intraperitoneal (IP) ceftazidime prior to colonoscopy and group B (47 patients) without prophylactic antibiotics. The relations between peritonitis and different parameters were analyzed.

RESULTS

Of all colonoscopies, 60.2% showed normal findings, 17.2% with colonic polyps at different sites, 12.9% with angiodysplastic-like lesions, 5.4% with colonic ulcer(s), 3.2% with diverticulae without diverticulitis and 1.1% had transverse colon stricture. Post-colonoscopy peritonitis was documented in 3 (6.5%) and 4 (8.5%) patients in groups A and B, respectively (p = 0.2742); the causative organisms were mainly gram negative bacteria. Polypectomy was not associated with increased peritonitis episodes. By multiple logistic regression analysis, diabetes mellitus was the only independent variable that entered into the best predictive equation over the development of post-colonoscopy peritonitis but not antibiotic use.

CONCLUSIONS

The relation between prophylactic antibiotic use prior to colonoscopy in APD patients and the risk of peritonitis was lacking. Only diabetes mellitus appears to be of significance. Polypectomy did not increase peritonitis episodes.

Pharmacokinetics of Intraperitoneal Cefalothin and Cefazolin in Patients Being Treated for Peritoneal Dialysis-Associated Peritonitis

♦

BACKGROUND

The standard treatment of peritoneal dialysis (PD)-associated peritonitis (PD-peritonitis) is intraperitoneal (IP) administration of antibiotics. Only limited data on the pharmacokinetics and appropriateness of contemporary dose recommendations of IP cefalothin and cefazolin exist. The aim of this study was to describe the pharmacokinetics of IP cefalothin and cefazolin in patients treated for PD-peritonitis. ♦

METHODS

As per international guidelines, IP cefalothin or cefazolin 15 mg/kg once daily was dosed with gentamicin in a 6-hour dwell to patients with PD-peritonitis during routine care. Serial plasma and PD effluent samples were collected over the first 24 hours of therapy. Antibiotic concentrations were quantified using a validated chromatographic method with pharmacokinetic analysis performed using a non-compartmental approach. ♦

RESULTS

Nineteen patients were included (cefalothin n = 8, cefazolin n = 11). The median bioavailability for both antibiotics exceeded 92%, but other pharmacokinetic parameters varied markedly between antibiotics. Both antibiotics achieved high PD effluent concentrations throughout the antibiotic dwell. Cefazolin had a smaller volume of distribution compared with cefalothin (14 vs 40 L, p = 0.003). The median trough total plasma antibiotic concentration for cefazolin and cefalothin during the dwell differed (plasma 56 vs 13 mg/L, p < 0.0001) despite a similar concentration in PD effluent (37 vs 38 mg/L, p = 0.58). Lower antibiotic concentrations were noted during PD dwells not containing antibiotic, particularly cefalothin, which was frequently undetectable in plasma and PD effluent. The median duration that the unbound antibiotic concentration was above the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) was approximately 13% (plasma) and 25% (IP) for cefalothin, and 100% (plasma and IP) for cefazolin, of the dosing interval. ♦

CONCLUSIONS

When IP cefalothin or cefazolin is allowed to dwell for 6 hours, sufficient PD effluent concentrations are present for common pathogens during this time. However, with once-daily IP dosing, in contrast to cefazolin, there is a risk of subtherapeutic plasma and PD effluent cefalothin concentrations, so more frequent dosing may be required.

Effects of peritoneal dialysis on pharmacotherapy: a deductive pharmacokinetic-model approach to predict drug concentration profiles in plasma and peritoneal fluid

The aim of this study was to present a deductive compartment pharmacokinetic (PK) model to predict the concentration profiles of drugs in plasma and peritoneal fluid in peritoneal dialysis (PD) rats. PK parameters of model drugs in normal and experimentally induced acute renal failure (ARF) rats not undergoing PD were obtained inductively in a common regression manner with a two-compartment model. In PD normal and ARF rats, PK parameters relating to the transfer of drugs to the peritoneal dialysate and the progress of renal failure were deductively modified to simulate the drug concentration-time profiles in plasma and in the peritoneal fluid in PD rats. The deductively introduced modifiers were the volume of distribution in the peripheral compartment, plasma protein binding, and solvent movement factor to the peritoneal fluid. Predicted profiles of tolbutamide, propranolol and cefazolin in PD normal and ARF rats were compared with the corresponding observed data. This minimal deductive approach yielded satisfactory accuracy in the prediction of both the plasma and peritoneal fluid concentrations of tolbutamide and propranolol.

Pharmacokinetics of intraperitoneal and intravenous fosfomycin in automated peritoneal dialysis patients without peritonitis

Blood and dialysate concentrations of fosfomycin were determined after intravenous and intraperitoneal application of 4 mg/liter in patients undergoing automated peritoneal dialysis. Maximum serum concentrations after intravenous (287.75 ± 86.34 mg/liter) and intraperitoneal (205.78 ± 66.78 mg/liter) administration were comparable. Ratios of intraperitoneal to systemic exposure were 1.12 (intraperitoneal administration) and 0.22 (intravenous administration), indicating good systemic exposure after intraperitoneal application but limited penetration of fosfomycin into the peritoneal fluid after the intravenous dose.

Pharmacokinetics of clindamycin in the plasma and dialysate after intraperitoneal administration of clindamycin phosphoester to patients on continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis: an open-label, prospective, single-dose, two-institution study

We evaluated the pharmacokinetics of clindamycin and the dose of clindamycin phosphate necessary to treat peritonitis after intraperitoneal administration of clindamycin phosphate to patients on continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD). This was an open-label, prospective, single-dose study conducted at the two levels of institutional clinical care in South Korea. Twelve patients (six men and six women; all older than 25 years), mean CAPD duration of 38.2 months with various origins without peritonitis, received 600 mg clindamycin phosphate mixed with only the first 2-L dialysate (1.5% dextrose). The 1.5%, 1.5%, 2.5% and 1.5% dextrose dialysates were serially exchanged every 6 hr. If patients were non-anuric, 24-hr urine samples were also collected. Clindamycin phosphate was incompletely activated to clindamycin in the dialysate. The clindamycin concentration in the dialysate was greater than the effective concentration (5 μg/mL) at 6.87 μg/mL up to 6 hr. So, 600 mg clindamycin phosphate per every 6 hr dialysate is effective for treatment of peritonitis. It has been reported that the clindamycin concentrations in the dialysate may be higher in CAPD patients with peritonitis. Thus, we can expect that intraperitoneal administration of <600 mg clindamycin phosphate per every 6 hr dialysate could be maintained over 5 μg/mL in patients with peritonitis. The transfer of clindamycin was unidirectional from the dialysate to the plasma.

Dialysis-associated peritonitis in children

Peritonitis remains a frequent complication of peritoneal dialysis in children and is the most common reason for technique failure. The microbiology is characterized by a predominance of Gram-positive organisms, with fungi responsible for less than 5% of episodes. Data collected by the International Pediatric Peritonitis Registry have revealed a worldwide variation in the bacterial etiology of peritonitis, as well as in the rate of culture-negative peritonitis. Risk factors for infection include young age, the absence of prophylactic antibiotics at catheter placement, spiking of dialysis bags, and the presence of a catheter exit-site or tunnel infection. Clinical symptoms at presentation are somewhat organism specific and can be objectively assessed with a Disease Severity Score. Whereas recommendations for empiric antibiotic therapy in children have been published by the International Society of Peritoneal Dialysis, epidemiologic data and antibiotic susceptibility data suggest that it may be desirable to take the patient- and center-specific history of microorganisms and their sensitivity patterns into account when prescribing initial therapy. The vast majority of patients are treated successfully and continue peritoneal dialysis, with the poorest outcome noted in patients with peritonitis secondary to Gram-negative organisms or fungi and in those with a relapsing infection.

Pharmacokinetics of fluconazole and fosfluconazole after intraperitoneal administration to peritoneal dialysis rats

Fluconazole (FLCZ) is an antifungal agent that is efficacious in the treatment of fungal peritonitis. Fosfluconazole (F-FLCZ) is the phosphate prodrug of FLCZ, which is highly soluble compared with FLCZ. F-FLCZ is useful against fungal peritonitis in continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) patients because it has a high water solubility. The aims of the present study were to characterize the peritoneal permeability of FLCZ and the pharmacokinetics of FLCZ and F-FLCZ after intraperitoneal (i.p.) administration to peritoneal dialysis rats. FLCZ or F-FLCZ was administered intravenously and intraperitoneally. After the i.p. administration of F-FLCZ, FLCZ was detected in circulating blood and the dialyzing fluid in peritoneal dialysis rats. The concentration of plasma FLCZ after the i.p. F-FLCZ administration was lower than that after the intravenous (i.v.) F-FLCZ administration. It is considered that the dose should be increased appropriately when F-FLCZ is administered intraperitoneally. The profiles of plasma FLCZ after i.v. and i.p. administrations were analyzed using a two-compartment model in which the distribution volume of the peripheral compartment was fixed at a volume of the dialyzing fluid (peritoneal dialysis PK model). The peritoneal dialysis PK model could describe the profiles of plasma and dialyzing fluid FLCZ. These results suggest that FLCZ and F-FLCZ could be administered intraperitoneally for the treatment of fungal peritonitis in CAPD patients.

Pharmacokinetics of intraperitoneal cefazolin and ceftazidime coadministered to CAPD patients

PURPOSE

Guidelines for empiric treatment of PD-related peritonitis published in 2000 recommend concurrent intraperitoneal (IP) cefazolin and ceftazidime. The pharmacokinetics (PK) of these agents combined have not been studied. This study was designed to determine the PK of combined IP cefazolin and ceftazidime in CAPD patients.

DESIGN

Prospective PK study in seven non-infected CAPD patients.

PROCEDURES

Patients had a peritoneal equilibration test (PET), then received one IP dose of cefazolin and ceftazidime (15 mg/kg each) co-administered over a 4-hour dwell, then performed three CAPD exchanges over the next 16 hours. Serum and dialysate samples collected over the 20-hour study period were assayed for drug concentrations by HPLC.

OUTCOME MEASURES

PK parameters.

STATISTICAL METHODS

Correlations were tested between PET and PK parameters using the Pearson-product correlation coefficient.

MAIN FINDINGS

Serum cefazolin and ceftazidime levels exceeded the minimum inhibitory concentrations for susceptible organisms (8 mg/L) throughout the 20 hour study period. Mean cefazolin and ceftazidime PK parameters included: bioavailability, 71% and 63%; elimination rate constant, 0.031 and 0.045 h -1 ; total clearance, 5.8 and 16.0 ml/min; peritoneal clearance, 1.6 and 3.9 ml/min; renal clearance, 2.3 and 3.9 ml/min, respectively. Predictive equations suggest that 1000 mg IP of cefazolin and of ceftazidime every 24 hours would produce average steady-state trough serum cefazolin and ceftazidime concentrations of 70 +/- 52 mg/L and 17 +/- 7 mg/L, respectively. There was no correlation between PET and PK parameters.

CONCLUSIONS

Co-administration did not adversely affect the PK of either agent. IP cefazolin and ceftazidime (15 mg/kg) produced adequate serum and dialysate concentrations in CAPD patients for 20 hours. PK predictions suggest that most patients would achieve adequate cefazolin and ceftazidime concentrations with 1000 mg IP once-daily. Anuric patients and those with significant residual renal function may require a more individualized approach.

Continuous peritoneal dialysis-associated peritonitis: a review and current concepts

The percentage of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients in the United States maintained on continuous peritoneal dialysis (CPD) therapy is decreasing. Complications from CPD therapy, including peritonitis, may be the reason for the decline. Improvements in CPD technology and a better understanding of the risk factors that predispose patients to the development of peritonitis have been responsible for a decline in the rate of peritonitis. Yet peritonitis remains a significant cause of patient morbidity and mortality and the overall outcome of peritonitis is not acceptable. Factors that have limited our ability to lessen the impact of peritonitis include a lack of data on dosing antibiotics in patients on continuous cycling peritoneal dialysis (CCPD) therapy, a lack of knowledge concerning the biology of bacterial biofilm, and the development of resistance to the current prophylactic antibiotic protocols. Further studies are needed concerning the optimal management of the peritoneal catheter and whether it is feasible to resume CPD therapy after catheter removal.

Management of peritonitis in children receiving chronic peritoneal dialysis

Bacterial peritonitis is a major threat to long-term peritoneal membrane function in pediatric patients receiving chronic peritoneal dialysis (CPD). This review summarizes the demographics, risk factors, and current recommendations regarding diagnostic procedures, management, and prevention of peritonitis in children. Albeit decreasing in incidence, bacterial peritonitis remains a major cause of technique failure in children with endstage renal disease receiving CPD. The use of standardized diagnostic procedures, efficacious antibacterial treatment, and objective response criteria are crucial in improving the outcome of this complication. Current guidelines recommend combining a first- and third-generation cephalosporin for empiric therapy in uncomplicated cases. The initial use of a glycopeptide/third-generation cephalosporin combination should be restricted to patients with risk factors for severe disease, as defined by clinical presentation, young age (<2 years), and recent infection with a methicillin resistant micro-organism. Several risk factors for primary or relapsing peritonitis have been identified, some of which are amenable to preventive measures. These relate to catheter design and implantation technique, connection methodology, early catheter removal in refractory or relapsing peritonitis, and eradication of Staphylococcus aureus from the catheter exit site and/or nasal reservoirs in patients and their caregivers.