IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0166181.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Urgent-Start Peritoneal Dialysis and Hemodialysis in ESRD Patients: Complications and Outcomes

Author

Listed:
  • Haijiao Jin
  • Wei Fang
  • Mingli Zhu
  • Zanzhe Yu
  • Yan Fang
  • Hao Yan
  • Minfang Zhang
  • Qin Wang
  • Xiajing Che
  • Yuanyuan Xie
  • Jiaying Huang
  • Chunhua Hu
  • Haifen Zhang
  • Shan Mou
  • Zhaohui Ni

Abstract

Background: Several studies have suggested that urgent-start peritoneal dialysis (PD) is a feasible alternative to hemodialysis (HD) in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD), but the impact of the dialysis modality on outcome, especially on short-term complications, in urgent-start dialysis has not been directly evaluated. The aim of the current study was to compare the complications and outcomes of PD and HD in urgent-start dialysis ESRD patients. Methods: In this retrospective study, ESRD patients who initiated dialysis urgently without a pre-established functional vascular access or PD catheter at a single center from January 2013 to December 2014 were included. Patients were grouped according to their dialysis modality (PD and HD). Each patient was followed for at least 30 days after catheter insertion (until January 2016). Dialysis-related complications and patient survival were compared between the two groups. Results: Our study enrolled 178 patients (56.2% male), of whom 96 and 82 patients were in the PD and HD groups, respectively. Compared with HD patients, PD patients had more cardiovascular disease, less heart failure, higher levels of serum potassium, hemoglobin, serum albumin, serum pre-albumin, and lower levels of brain natriuretic peptide. There were no significant differences in gender, age, use of steroids, early referral to a nephrologist, prevalence of primary renal diseases, prevalence of co-morbidities, and other laboratory characteristics between the groups. The incidence of dialysis-related complications during the first 30 days was significantly higher in HD than PD patients. HD patients had a significantly higher probability of bacteremia compared to PD patients. HD was an independent predictor of short-term (30-day) dialysis-related complications. There was no significant difference between PD and HD patients with respect to patient survival rate. Conclusion: In an experienced center, PD is a safe and feasible dialysis alternative to HD for ESRD patients with an urgent need for dialysis.

Suggested Citation

  • Haijiao Jin & Wei Fang & Mingli Zhu & Zanzhe Yu & Yan Fang & Hao Yan & Minfang Zhang & Qin Wang & Xiajing Che & Yuanyuan Xie & Jiaying Huang & Chunhua Hu & Haifen Zhang & Shan Mou & Zhaohui Ni, 2016. "Urgent-Start Peritoneal Dialysis and Hemodialysis in ESRD Patients: Complications and Outcomes," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(11), pages 1-12, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0166181
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0166181
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0166181
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0166181&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0166181?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0166181. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.