Are ISPD Guidelines on Peritonitis Diagnosis Too Narrow? A 15-Year Retrospective Single-Center Cohort Study on PD-Associated Peritonitis Accounting for Untrained Patients

ISPD peritonitis guideline recommendations: 2022 update on prevention and treatment

Peritoneal dialysis (PD)-associated peritonitis is a serious complication of PD and prevention and treatment of such is important in reducing patient morbidity and mortality. The ISPD 2022 updated recommendations have revised and clarified definitions for refractory peritonitis, relapsing peritonitis, peritonitis-associated catheter removal, PD-associated haemodialysis transfer, peritonitis-associated death and peritonitis-associated hospitalisation. New peritonitis categories and outcomes including pre-PD peritonitis, enteric peritonitis, catheter-related peritonitis and medical cure are defined. The new targets recommended for overall peritonitis rate should be no more than 0.40 episodes per year at risk and the percentage of patients free of peritonitis per unit time should be targeted at >80% per year. Revised recommendations regarding management of contamination of PD systems, antibiotic prophylaxis for invasive procedures and PD training and reassessment are included. New recommendations regarding management of modifiable peritonitis risk factors like domestic pets, hypokalaemia and histamine-2 receptor antagonists are highlighted. Updated recommendations regarding empirical antibiotic selection and dosage of antibiotics and also treatment of peritonitis due to specific microorganisms are made with new recommendation regarding adjunctive oral N-acetylcysteine therapy for mitigating aminoglycoside ototoxicity. Areas for future research in prevention and treatment of PD-related peritonitis are suggested.

Optimizing Peritoneal Dialysis-Associated Peritonitis Prevention in the United States: From Standardized Peritoneal Dialysis-Associated Peritonitis Reporting and Beyond

Peritoneal dialysis (PD)-associated peritonitis is the leading cause of permanent transition to hemodialysis among patients receiving PD. Peritonitis is associated with higher mortality risk and added treatment costs and limits more widespread PD utilization. Optimizing the prevention of peritonitis in the United States will first require standardization of peritonitis definitions, key data elements, and outcomes in an effort to facilitate nationwide reporting. Standardized reporting can also help describe the variability in peritonitis rates and outcomes across facilities in the United States in an effort to identify potential peritonitis prevention strategies and engage with stakeholders to develop strategies for their implementation. Here, we will highlight considerations and challenges in developing standardized definitions and implementation of national reporting of peritonitis rates by PD facilities. We will describe existing peritonitis prevention evidence gaps, highlight successful infection-reporting initiatives among patients receiving in-center hemodialysis or PD, and provide an overview of nationwide quality improvement initiatives, both in the United States and elsewhere, that have translated into a reduction in peritonitis incidence. We will discuss opportunities for collaboration and expansion of the Nephrologists Transforming Dialysis Safety (NTDS) initiative to develop knowledge translation pathways that will lead to dissemination of best practices in an effort to reduce peritonitis incidence.

Peritoneal dialysis-associated peritonitis outcomes reported in trials and observational studies: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Peritoneal dialysis (PD)-associated peritonitis carries significant morbidity, mortality, and is a leading cause of PD technique failure. This study aimed to assess the scope and variability of PD-associated peritonitis reported in randomized trials and observational studies.

METHODS

Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials, MEDLINE, and Embase were searched from 2007 to June 2018 for randomized trials and observational studies in adult and pediatric patients on PD that reported PD-associated peritonitis as a primary outcome or as a part of composite primary outcome. We assessed the peritonitis definitions used, characteristics of peritonitis, and outcome reporting and analysis.

RESULTS

Seventy-seven studies were included, three were randomized trials. Thirty-eight (49%) of the included studies were registry-based observational studies. Twenty-nine percent (n = 22) of the studies did not specify how PD-associated peritonitis was defined. Among those providing a definition of peritonitis, three components were reported: effluent cell count (n = 42, 54%), clinical features consistent with peritonitis (e.g. abdominal pain and/or cloudy dialysis effluent) (n = 35, 45%), and positive effluent culture (n = 19, 25%). Of those components, 1 was required to make the diagnosis in 6 studies (8%), 2 out of 2 were required in 22 studies (29%), 2 out of 3 in 11 studies (14%), and 3 out of 3 in 4 studies (5%). Peritonitis characteristics and outcomes reported across studies included culture-negative peritonitis (n = 47, 61%), refractory peritonitis (n = 42, 55%), repeat peritonitis (n = 9, 12%), relapsing peritonitis (n = 5, 7%), concomitant exit site (n = 16, 21%), and tunnel infections (n = 8, 10%). Peritonitis-related hospitalization was reported in 38% of the studies (n = 29), and peritonitis-related mortality was variably defined and reported in 55% of the studies (n = 42). Peritonitis rate was most frequently reported as episodes per patient year (n = 40, 52%).

CONCLUSION

Large variability exists in the definitions, methods of reporting, and analysis of PD-associated peritonitis across trials and observational studies. Standardizing definitions for reporting of peritonitis and associated outcomes will better enable assessment of the comparative effect of interventions on peritonitis. This will facilitate continuous quality improvement measures through reliable benchmarking of this patient-important outcome across centers and countries.

Patient Perspectives on Renal Replacement Therapy Modality Choice: A Multicenter Questionnaire Study on Bioethical Dimensions

Background:Peritoneal dialysis (PD) incidence and prevalence in Germany are low compared with hemodialysis (HD), an underachievement with multifactorial causes. Patient perspectives on renal replacement therapy (RRT) choice play a growing role in research. To date, and to the best of our knowledge, the importance of bioethical dimensions in the context of RRT choice has not been analyzed. The aim of this multicenter questionnaire study was to delineate differences in patient perspectives of PD vs HD in terms of bioethical dimensions, thus helping nephrologists target potential PD candidates more efficiently.Methods:A total of 121 stable outpatients from 2 tertiary care hospitals and 4 dialysis clinics were surveyed for bioethical dimensions ("autonomy," "beneficence," "non-maleficence," "justice," and "trust") with ranking and Likert scale items. Inclusion criteria were RRT > 3 months, age ≥ 18 years, and sufficient cognitive and language skills.Results:A surprisingly high percentage of patients felt excluded from the RRT choice process. Peritoneal dialysis patients were more critical of RRT. They used more versatile information sources on RRT, whereas HD patients were mainly informed by their nephrologist. Peritoneal dialysis patients felt more often dissatisfied with RRT than HD patients and had less trust in their co-patients. However, PD patients felt less autonomy impairment regarding body integrity, fluid balance, and dialysis in general.Conclusions:Our study demonstrates that PD patients showed more scrutiny of their situation as patients, especially their co-patients. Their treatment empowered them toward feeling more autonomous than HD patients. These new insights into patient perspectives on RRT choice might facilitate modality choice for nephrologists.