The Effect of Automated versus Continuous Ambulatory Peritoneal Dialysis on Mortality Risk in China

Impact of peritoneal dialysis strategy on technique and patient survival

Background

The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of peritoneal dialysis (PD) strategy on technique and patient survival.

Methods

This was a retrospective, single-center study conducted on consecutive patients with chronic kidney disease who underwent PD between January 2009 and December 2019. The study sample was stratified into four different groups according to PD technique [automated (APD) or manual (CAPD)] and icodextrin use (yes versus no). The primary endpoints were survival of both technique and patient.

Results

A total of 531 patients were included in the analysis. Mean ± standard deviation age was 60.6 ± 14.6 years, 68.4% (363) were men and 34.8% (185) had diabetes. The median technique survival time was 19 (15) months. A total of 185 (34.8%), 96 (18.1%), 99 (18.7%) and 151 (28.4%) patients were included in the CAPD/No-Icodextrin, CAPD/Icodextrin, APD/No-Icodextrin and APD/Icodextrin study groups, respectively. Throughout the study, 180 (33.9%) patients underwent renal transplant, 71 (13.4%) were changed to hemodialysis and 151 (28.4%) died. Age [hazard ratio (HR) 0.975, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.960-0.990, P = .001] and incidence of early peritoneal infection (HR 2.440, 95% CI 1.453-4.098, P = .001) were associated with technique survival, while age (HR 1.029, 95% CI 1.013-1.045, P < .001), Charlson Index (HR 1.192, 95% CI 1.097-1.295, P < 0.001), use of icodextrin (HR 0.421, 95% CI 0.247-0.710, P < .001) and APD/Icodextrin (HR 0.499, 95% CI 0.322-0.803, P = .005) were associated with patient survival.

Conclusions

Icodextrin use and APD/Icodextrin had a positive impact on patient survival, while older age and higher Charlson Index had a negative one. Age and incidence of early peritoneal infection significantly impacted on technique survival.

Factors Influencing the Choice of Automated Peritoneal Dialysis Treatment by Patients Receiving Home Peritoneal Dialysis

Objective

This study was conducted to understand the influencing factors for home peritoneal dialysis patients choosing APD and to provide a scientific basis for improving the completion rate of APD treatment and the follow-up of peritoneal dialysis patients.

Methods

The study was a cross-sectional questionnaire-based study. A total of 588 patients on peritoneal dialysis were randomly selected from 6 regions in Fujian Province in southern China using a stratified cluster sampling method.

Results

The mean age of the patients were 56.5 ± 14.73 years. In the univariate analysis, knowledge, user experience and family support were the factors that affected patients' choice of APD (all P < 0.05) and were positively correlated with the treatment utilization rate. In the multivariate analysis, 3 factors (treatment with APD, knowledge of APD, and family support) remained significantly associated not choosing APD. The selection rate for APD was 2.594 times higher among patients who had received APD than among patients who had never received APD. The selection rate for patients with "a lot of knowledge" about APD was 10.75 times that of patients with "no knowledge".

Conclusion

Patients' knowledge of APD, experience in application and family support were the main factors affecting the choice of APD as a treatment mode (P < 0.05) and were positively correlated with the treatment utilization rate. Further studies are needed to improve the APD treatment completion rates by modulation the above-mentioned factors.

Relevance to Clinical Practice

This study provides scientific evidence for improving APD treatment completion rates and improving patient quality of life.

An update on absolute and relative indications for dialysis treatment modalities

Background

Choosing a dialysis modality is an important decision for people to make as their kidney failure progresses. In doing so, their options should be informed by any absolute or relative indications that may favour one modality over another.

Methods

In creating this update, we reviewed literature using a framework that considered first, high-level outcomes (survival and modality transition) from large registry data and cohort studies when considering optimal patient pathways; second, factors at a dialysis provider level that might affect relative indications; and third, specific patient-level factors. Both main types of dialysis modality, peritoneal (PD) and haemodialysis (HD), and their subtypes were considered.

Results

For most people starting dialysis, survival is independent of modality, including those with diabetes. Better survival is seen in those with less comorbidity starting with PD or home HD, reflecting continued improvements over recent decades that have been greater than improvements seen for centre HD. There are provider-level differences in the perceived relative indications for home dialysis that appear to reflect variability in experience, prejudice, enthusiasm, and support for patients and carers. Absolute contraindications are uncommon and, in most cases, where modality prejudice exists, e.g. obesity, Adult Polycystic Kidney Disease, and social factors, this is not supported by reported outcomes.

Conclusion

Absolute contraindications to a particular dialysis modality are rare. Relative indications for or against particular modalities should be considered but are rarely more important than patient preferences.

Research hotspots and emerging trends of automated peritoneal dialysis: A bibliometric analysis from 2000 to 2020

BACKGROUND

The implementation of automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) has considerably increased in many countries. We conducted a bibliometric analysis to evaluate the accumulating studies on APD in the last two decades quantitatively and qualitatively.

METHODS

Publications regarding APD research between 2000 and 2020 were retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection database by using the index term "automated peritoneal dialysis." CiteSpace, VOSviewer, and an online platform were employed to analyze the number of publications and the collaboration relationships between countries, institutions, authors, and co-cited journals. Cluster analysis and burst keywords detection were performed on co-cited references and keywords, respectively.

RESULTS

We obtained a record of 545 publications related to APD in total. The United States was the country that contributes most, and Baxter Healthcare Corporation was the leading institution. Peritoneal Dialysis International was the most active journals in this field. Claudio Ranco was the most productive author, and Simon J Davies ranked the first in the cited authors. Co-cited reference cluster analysis and high frequency keywords showed that survival, ultrafiltration and peritonitis are continuous hot topics. While remote monitoring (RM) and telemedicine may be APD research frontiers according to burst keywords detection.

CONCLUSION

This bibliometric study provides comprehensive overview on the publications of APD over the past two decades. These findings help to identify the hotspots and explore new directions for future research. RM has become an emerging trend in APD field.

Impact of peritoneal dialysis modality on patient and PD survival: A systematic review

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the effect of the peritoneal dialysis (PD) modality, automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) or continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD), on all-cause mortality (ACM) and PD failure. Studies were identified in PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Weipu and Wanfang databases from database inception until April 1, 2021. The inclusion and exclusion criteria were based on the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, and Study (PICOS) design. Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used to pool outcome estimates. Seventeen studies (more than 230,000 patients) were included. Our meta-analysis showed that compared with CAPD, APD demonstrated a significantly lower ACM risk (HR 0.87 [95% CI 0.77–0.99], p = 0.04), especially in studies involving an as-treated analysis (HR 0.75 [95% CI, 0.63–0.90], p = 0.00), published in Asia (HR 0.76 [95% CI, 0.67–0.86], p < 0.001) or Europe (HR 0.81 [95% CI, 0.74–0.89], p < 0.00), or published after 2012 (HR 0.82 [95% CI, 0.68–0.99], p = 0.04). However, APD was as effective as CAPD for PD survival (HR, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.75 to 1.00], p = 0.05 or HR, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.60 to 1.35], p = 0.61). Our results demonstrate a significant survival benefit for APD and provide evidence for increasing the global use of APD, especially in developing nations, where APD use has been hampered by a lack of reimbursement for care.

Clinical outcomes of automated versus continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis for end-stage kidney disease: protocol of a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

An increasing number of studies comparing automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) with continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) in clinical outcomes have been published since the publication of a systematic review and meta-analysis including three randomised controlled trials in 2007. We will conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore more clinical outcomes of APD versus CAPD for end-stage kidney disease.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The protocol is conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols guidelines. Three databases-PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library-will be searched comprehensively from inception to 16 June 2022, without language restriction. Studies reporting clinical outcomes comparing APD with CAPD will be included. Two independent reviewers will screen the titles and abstracts and then obtain and assess full texts of potential relevant articles for eligibility following the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The methodological quality of included observational studies will be assessed by using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The risk of bias of included randomised controlled studies will be assessed by using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Relative risk for dichotomous outcomes and standard mean difference for continuous outcomes with corresponding 95% CIs will be pooled for summary effects. Cochrane Q test and I ² values will be used to assess heterogeneity between studies. To assess and explore the source of heterogeneity, subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses will be conducted, and meta-regression, funnel plot and Egger's test will be performed if there are no less than 10 studies. Analyses will be performed using STATA software, V.13.0 (STATA Corporation, College Station, Texas, USA).

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval is not applicable as no personal information is collected from patients. The results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal or disseminated in relevant academic conferences.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42022311401.

Similar survival on home hemodialysis and automated peritoneal dialysis: an inception cohort study

BACKGROUND

Several studies have shown superior survival of patients on home hemodialysis (HD) compared to peritoneal dialysis (PD), but patients on automated PD (APD) and continuous ambulatory PD (CAPD) have not been considered separately. As APD allows larger fluid volumes and may be more efficient than CAPD, we primarily compared patient survival between APD and home HD.

METHODS

All adult patients who started kidney replacement therapy (KRT) between 2004 and 2017 in the district of Helsinki-Uusimaa in Finland, and who were on one of the home dialysis modalities at 90 days from starting KRT, were included. We used intention-to-treat analysis.Survival of home HD, APD and CAPD patients was studied using Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression with adjustment for propensity scores that were based on extensive data on possible confounding factors.

RESULTS

The probability of surviving 5 years was 90% for home HD, 88% for APD and 56% for CAPD patients. After adjustment for propensity score, the hazard ratio of death was 1.1 [95% CI 0.52-2.4] for APD and 1.6 [95% CI 0.74-3.6] for CAPD in comparison to home HD. Censoring at the time of kidney transplantation or at transfer to in-center hemodialysis did not change the results. Characteristics of home HD and APD patients at the start of dialysis were similar, whereas patients on CAPD had higher median age and more comorbidities, and received kidney transplantation less frequently.

CONCLUSIONS

Home HD and APD patients had comparable characteristics and their survival appeared similar.

A systematic review of quantitative bias analysis applied to epidemiological research

BACKGROUND

Quantitative bias analysis (QBA) measures study errors in terms of direction, magnitude and uncertainty. This systematic review aimed to describe how QBA has been applied in epidemiological research in 2006-19.

METHODS

We searched PubMed for English peer-reviewed studies applying QBA to real-data applications. We also included studies citing selected sources or which were identified in a previous QBA review in pharmacoepidemiology. For each study, we extracted the rationale, methodology, bias-adjusted results and interpretation and assessed factors associated with reproducibility.

RESULTS

Of the 238 studies, the majority were embedded within papers whose main inferences were drawn from conventional approaches as secondary (sensitivity) analyses to quantity-specific biases (52%) or to assess the extent of bias required to shift the point estimate to the null (25%); 10% were standalone papers. The most common approach was probabilistic (57%). Misclassification was modelled in 57%, uncontrolled confounder(s) in 40% and selection bias in 17%. Most did not consider multiple biases or correlations between errors. When specified, bias parameters came from the literature (48%) more often than internal validation studies (29%). The majority (60%) of analyses resulted in >10% change from the conventional point estimate; however, most investigators (63%) did not alter their original interpretation. Degree of reproducibility related to inclusion of code, formulas, sensitivity analyses and supplementary materials, as well as the QBA rationale.

CONCLUSIONS

QBA applications were rare though increased over time. Future investigators should reference good practices and include details to promote transparency and to serve as a reference for other researchers.

APD or CAPD: one glove does not fit all

The use of Automated Peritoneal Dialysis (APD) in its various forms has increased over the past few years mainly in developed countries. This could be attributed to improved cycler design, apparent lifestyle benefits and the ability to achieve adequacy and ultrafiltration targets. However, the dilemma of choosing the superior modality between APD and Continuous Ambulatory Peritoneal Dialysis (CAPD) has not yet been resolved. When it comes to fast transporters and assisted PD, APD is certainly considered the most suitable Peritoneal Dialysis (PD) modality. Improved patients’ compliance, lower intraperitoneal pressure and possibly lower incidence of peritonitis have been also associated with APD. However, concerns regarding increased cost, a more rapid decline in residual renal function, inadequate sodium removal and disturbed sleep are APD’s setbacks. Besides APD superiority over CAPD in fast transporters, the other medical advantages of APD still remain controversial. In any case, APD should be readily available for all patients starting PD and the most important indication for its implementation remains patient’s choice.

Comparison of patient survival and technique survival between continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis and automated peritoneal dialysis

Background:

This retrospective cohort study compared patient survival and technique survival between patients on continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) and automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) using recent data at a single tertiary medical center in Taiwan.

Methods:

From medical records, we identified incident 459 CAPD patients and 266 APD patients on dialysis for at least 90 days and aged more than 18 years to estimate mortality and technique failure rates, and related hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) from 2007 to 2018.

Results:

There were more women (52.3%) in the CAPD group, whereas patients in the APD group were younger. Compared to CAPD patients, APD patients had a lower mortality rate (2.83 vs. 5.79 per 100 person-years) with an adjusted HR of 0.69 (95% CI = 0.47–1.02), and a lower technique failure rate (9.70 vs. 17.52 per 100 person-years) with an adjusted HR of 0.65 (95% CI = 0.51–0.83). Further subgroup analyses revealed that, compared to CAPD, APD was associated with a significant lower risk of technique failure in male patients, patients aged 50–65 years, diabetic patients, patients without cardiovascular disease (CVD), patients with higher peritoneal permeability, or patients initiating PD in an earlier era.

Conclusions:

The mortality risk was not significant between CAPD and APD patients. APD is associated with a lower risk of technique failure than CAPD, particularly for male patients, and patients aged 50–65 years, with diabetes, without CVD, with high or high average peritoneal permeability, or initiating PD in an earlier era.

International comparison of peritoneal dialysis prescriptions from the Peritoneal Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (PDOPPS)

Background:

We describe peritoneal dialysis (PD) prescription variations among Peritoneal Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (PDOPPS) participants on continuous ambulatory PD (CAPD) and automated PD (APD; n = 4657) from Australia/New Zealand (A/NZ), Canada, Japan, Thailand, United Kingdom (UK), and United States (US).

Results:

CAPD was more commonly used in Thailand and Japan, while APD predominated over CAPD in A/NZ, Canada, the US, and the UK. Total prescribed PD volume normalized to the surface area was the highest in Thailand and the lowest in Japan (for both APD and CAPD) and the UK (for CAPD). PD patients from Thailand had the lowest residual urine volume and residual renal urea clearance, yet achieved the highest dialysis urea clearance. Japanese patients had the lowest dialysis urea clearances for both APD and CAPD. Despite having similar urine volumes to patients in A/NZ, Canada, Japan, and the UK, US CAPD and APD patients used 2.5% and 3.86% glucose PD solutions more frequently, whereas fewer than 25% of these patients used icodextrin. Over half of the patients in A/NZ, Canada, the UK, and Japan used icodextrin, whereas it was hardly used in Thailand. Japan and Thailand were more likely to use 1.5% glucose solutions for their PD prescription.

Conclusions:

There are considerable international variations in PD modality use and prescription patterns that translate into important differences in achieved dialysis clearances. Ongoing recruitment of additional PDOPPS participants and accrual of follow-up time will allow us to test the associations between specific PD prescription regimens and clinical and patient-reported outcomes.

Center-Specific Risk-Adjusted Standardized Mortality Rates on Continuous Ambulatory Peritoneal Dialysis in China

Background

The aim of this study was to determine if there were centers in China with unusually high levels of risk-adjusted mortality in continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) patients.

Methods

We analyzed an inception cohort commencing CAPD between 1 January 2005 and 13 August 2015, followed until death, dropout defined as discontinuation of Baxter products, loss to follow-up, or 13 November 2015, whichever occurred first. We calculated standardized mortality ratios (SMRs) from Cox proportional hazards models, adjusting for age, gender, employment status, insurance status, primary renal disease, size of peritoneal dialysis (PD) program, and year of dialysis inception. We calculated 2 SMRs, 1 from models including a fixed effect for center of treatment, and 1 from stratified models.

Results

In this study, there was a 9.9% annual mortality rate in China, with decreasing mortality risk over time. There was significant variation of outcomes between Chinese centers, with up to 20% of facilities having SMRs indicating a higher risk-adjusted mortality rate than average. In particular, larger centers had better than expected mortality than smaller ones. There was significant misclassification of SMRs calculated using stratification versus fixed-effects models, although both showed directionally similar results.

Conclusion

Despite overall satisfactory and improving outcomes, our study showed a significant proportion of PD centers with higher than expected mortality. This is a signal for further assessment of these centers in China, after which there might be a range of actions taken depending on the results of the assessment and context, bearing in mind that the variation seen may be driven by factors unrelated to quality of care or beyond the control of hospital.