Acute Peritoneal Dialysis in Patients with Acute Kidney Injury

Urgent Implantation of Peritoneal Dialysis Catheter in Chronic Kidney Disease and Acute Kidney Injury-A Review

Acute kidney injury (AKI) and sudden exacerbation of chronic kidney disease (CKD) frequently necessitate urgent kidney replacement therapy (UKRT). Peritoneal dialysis (PD) is recognized as a viable modality for managing such patients. Urgent-start peritoneal dialysis (USPD) may be associated with an increased number of complications and is rarely utilized. This review examines recent literature investigating the clinical outcomes of USPD in CKD and AKI. Relevant research was identified through searches of the MEDLINE (PubMed), Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases using MeSH terms and relevant keywords. Included studies focused on the emergency use of peritoneal dialysis in CKD or AKI and reported treatment outcomes. While no official recommendations exist for catheter implantation in USPD, the impact of the technique itself on outcomes was found to be less significant compared with the post-implantation factors. USPD represents a safe and effective treatment modality for AKI, although complications such as catheter malfunctions, leakage, and peritonitis were observed. Furthermore, USPD demonstrated efficacy in managing CKD, although it was associated with a higher incidence of complications compared to conventional-start peritoneal dialysis. Despite its cost-effectiveness, PD requires greater technical expertise from medical professionals. Close supervision and pre-planning for catheter insertion are essential for CKD patients. Whenever feasible, an urgent start should be avoided. Nevertheless, in emergency scenarios, USPD does remain a safe and efficient approach.

Peritoneal dialysis in critically ill children in resource-limited setting: A prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Peritoneal dialysis (PD) is easily available and simple lifesaving procedure in children with renal impairment. There is paucity of reports on efficacy of PD in critically ill children in presence of shock and those requiring mechanical ventilation.

METHODS

In this prospective observational study, efficacy and outcome of PD were evaluated in 50 critically ill children aged 1 month to 14 years admitted in pediatric intensive care unit of a tertiary care teaching hospital in India.

RESULTS

Indication of PD was acute kidney injury (AKI) in 66% of patients followed by chronic kidney disease with acute deterioration due to infectious complications in 34%. Bacterial sepsis was the most common cause of AKI (22%), others being malaria (14%) and severe dengue (12%). At initiation of PD, 26% of patients were in shock and 46% were mechanically ventilated. PD was effective and improvement in pH, bicarbonate, and lactate started within hours, with consistent improvement in estimated glomerular filtration rate by 24 h, which continued till the end of procedure, including the subgroup of patients with shock and mechanical ventilation. Total complications were seen in 14% and of which peritonitis was present in 4.0% of patients. Mortality was seen in 14% (7/50) of patients. Shock at initiation of PD (odds ratio (OR), 5.03; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.95-26.69; p < 0.04) and requirement of mechanical ventilation (OR, 9.17; 95% CI, 1.01-83.10; p < 0.02) were associated with mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Acute PD in critically ill children with renal impairment is a lifesaving procedure. Treatment of shock with resuscitative measures and respiratory failure with mechanical ventilation, along with PD, resulted in favorable renal outcome.

Peritoneal dialysis for acute kidney injury: Equations for dosing in pandemics, disasters, and beyond

BACKGROUND

Peritoneal dialysis (PD) is a viable option for renal replacement therapy in acute kidney injury (AKI), especially in challenging times during disasters and pandemics when resources are limited. While PD techniques are well described, there is uncertainty about how to determine the amount of PD to be prescribed toward a target dose. The aim of this study is to derive practical equations to assist with the prescription of PD for AKI.

METHODS

Using established physiological principles behind PD clearance and membrane transport, a primary determinant of dose delivery, equations were mathematically derived to estimate dialysate volume required to achieve a target dose of PD.

RESULTS

The main derivative equation is V_D = (1.2 × std-Kt/V × TBW)/(t_dwell + 4), where V_D is the total dialysate volume per day, std-Kt/V is the desired weekly dose, TBW is the total body water, and t_dwell is the dwell time. V_D can be expressed in terms of dwell volume, v_dwell, by V_D = (0.3 × std-Kt/V × TBW) - (6 × v_dwell). Two further equations were derived which directly describe the mathematical relationship between t_dwell and v_dwell. A calculator is included as an Online Supplementary Material.

CONCLUSIONS

The equations are intended as a practical tool to estimate solute clearances and guide prescription of continuous PD. The estimated dialysate volume required for any dose target can be calculated from cycle duration or dwell volume. However, the exact target dose of PD is uncertain and should be adjusted according to the clinical circumstances and response to treatment. The equations presented in this article facilitate the adjustment of PD prescription toward the targeted solute clearance.

Percutaneous insertion of peritoneal dialysis catheter is a safe and effective technique irrespective of BMI

BACKGROUND

A large body mass index (BMI) has been considered as a relative contraindication for percutaneous catheter insertion, although this technique has many advantages. Up to now, there are few studies on peritoneal catheter placement and obesity. The aim of this study was to determine whether patients with large BMI can also choose the percutaneous technique for peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion.

METHODS

One hundred eighty seven consecutive patients underwent peritoneal catheter insertions in the Chinese PLA General Hospital between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2016, with 178 eligible cases being included in the analysis. Two groups were created based on the catheter insertion techniques, the percutaneous group (group P) and the surgical group (group S). Subgroups were created according to BMI > 28 or ≤ 28. The outcomes included catheter related complications and catheter survival.

RESULTS

Total infectious complication rates were significantly lower in group P than in group S. There were no significant differences in peritonitis rate between group P and group S (1.20% vs. 3.16% with P = 0.71 in early stage, and 4.82% vs. 11.58% with P = 0.11 in late stage). All other measured complications were similar between the two groups. Though the one-year infection-free catheter survival in group P was 7.5% higher than group S, the difference was not significant. The one-year dysfunction-free catheter survival, one-year dysfunction-and-infection-free catheter survival, and overall catheter survival were similar between the two groups. Subgroup analyses showed a superior one-year infection-free catheter survival of percutaneous technique in patients with BMI > 28, which was confirmed by Kaplan-Meier analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the challenges that may be encountered with patients who have a large BMI, the percutaneous technique seems to be a safe and effective approach to placing a peritoneal dialysis catheter.

Vancomycin Removal During High-Volume Peritoneal Dialysis in Acute Kidney Injury Patients: A Prospective Cohort Clinical Study

Introduction

Vancomycin pharmacokinetic data in patients with acute kidney injury (AKI) on high-volume peritoneal dialysis (HVPD) are lacking. The aims were to study the pharmacokinetics of i.v. vancomycin in patients with AKI treated by HVPD who received an i.v. dose of vancomycin (15–20 mg/kg), to determine the vancomycin removal, and to establish vancomycin dosing and evaluation pharmacokinetics target attainment achievement for the empirical treatment of patients with AKI treated by HVPD.

Methods

Vancomycin was administered 1 hour before dialysis start. Samples of all dialysate were collected for a 24-hour period. Blood samples were collected after 1, 2, 4, and 24 hours of therapy. Vancomycin concentrations were determined using a liquid chromatographic (high-performance liquid chromatography)–fluorescence method. Pharmacokinetic calculations were completed assuming a 1-compartment model.

Results

Ten patients completed the study. The mean vancomycin dose administered was 18.0 ± 2.95 mg/kg (14.7–21.8 mg/kg) on the day of study (first day) and the mean percentage of vancomycin removal by HVPD was 21.7% ± 2.2% (16%–29%). Peritoneal clearance was 8.1 ± 2.2 ml/min (5.3–12 ml/min). The serum vancomycin half-life was 71.2 ± 24.7 hours (42–110 hours) during HVPD session, the maximum serum concentration was 26.2 ± 3.5 mg/l, which occurred 1 hour after vancomycin administration and HVPD start. Area under the curve (AUC)0–24/minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) ratio ≥400 was achieved in all patients when MIC = 1 mg/l was considered.

Conclusion

HVPD removes considerable amounts of vancomycin in septic patients with AKI. Administration of 18 mg/kg vancomycin each 48 to 72 hours in patients with AKI undergoing HVPD was required to reach and maintain therapeutic concentrations.

Acute Kidney Injury in Critically Ill Patients: A Prospective Randomized Study of Tidal Peritoneal Dialysis Versus Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy

Few studies have discussed the role of peritoneal dialysis (PD) in managing acute kidney injury (AKI) in critically ill patients. The present study compares the outcome of AKI in intensive care unit (ICU) patients randomized to treatment with tidal PD (TPD) or continuous venovenous hemodiafiltration (CVVHDF). One hundred and twenty-five ICU patients with AKI were randomly allotted to CVVHDF, (Group A, N = 62) or TPD, (group B, N = 63). Cause and severity of renal injury were assessed at the time of initiating dialysis. The primary outcome was hospital mortality at 28 days, and secondary outcomes were time to recovery of renal function, duration of stay in the ICU, metabolic and fluid control, and improvement of sensorial and hemodynamic parameters. No statistically significant differences were observed between groups in regard to patients' characteristics. The survival at 28 days was significantly better in the patients treated with TPD when compared to CVVHDF (69.8% vs. 46.8%, P < 0.01). Infectious complications were significantly less (P < 0.01) in the TPD group (9.5%) when compared to the CVVHDF group (17.7%). Recovery of kidney function (60.3% vs. 35.5%), median time to resolution of AKI and the median duration of ICU stay of 9 days (7-11) vs. 19 days (13-20) were all in favor of TPD (P < 0.01). This study suggests that there are better outcomes with TPD compared to CRRT in the treatment of critically ill patients with AKI.