Suppr超能文献

在一个全国性慢性肾病患者队列中比较腹膜透析和血液透析的死亡风险。

Comparing the risk for death with peritoneal dialysis and hemodialysis in a national cohort of patients with chronic kidney disease.

作者信息

Jaar Bernard G, Coresh Josef, Plantinga Laura C, Fink Nancy E, Klag Michael J, Levey Andrew S, Levin Nathan W, Sadler John H, Kliger Alan, Powe Neil R

机构信息

Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, and Independent Dialysis Foundation, Baltimore, Maryland 21205, USA.

出版信息

Ann Intern Med. 2005 Aug 2;143(3):174-83. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-143-3-200508020-00003.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The influence of type of dialysis on survival of patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) is controversial.

OBJECTIVE

To compare risk for death among patients with ESRD who receive peritoneal dialysis or hemodialysis.

DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

SETTING

81 dialysis clinics in 19 U.S. states.

PATIENTS

1041 patients starting dialysis (274 patients receiving peritoneal dialysis and 767 patients receiving hemodialysis) at baseline.

MEASUREMENTS

Patients were followed for up to 7 years and censored at transplantation or loss to follow-up. Cox proportional hazards regression stratified by clinic was used to compare the risk for death with peritoneal dialysis versus hemodialysis.

RESULTS

Twenty-five percent of patients undergoing peritoneal dialysis and 5% of hemodialysis patients switched type of dialysis. After adjustment, the risk for death did not differ between patients undergoing peritoneal dialysis and those undergoing hemodialysis during the first year (relative hazard, 1.39 [95% CI, 0.64 to 3.06]), but the risk became significantly higher among those undergoing peritoneal dialysis in the second year (relative hazard, 2.34 [CI, 1.19 to 4.59]). After stratification, the survival rate was no different for patients who had the highest propensity of being initially treated with peritoneal dialysis. Results were consistent with adjustment based on a propensity score model and in sensitivity analyses that used as-treated models and models in which switches in type of dialysis were treated as treatment failures. Results were similar but stronger in analyses that were restricted to patients who were treated only in clinics offering both types of dialysis.

LIMITATIONS

Patients were not randomly assigned to their initial type of dialysis. Also, more patients undergoing peritoneal dialysis than hemodialysis switched type of dialysis over time, and the reason for switching was often a consequence of the technique.

CONCLUSIONS

The risk for death in patients with ESRD undergoing dialysis depends on dialysis type. Further studies are needed to evaluate a possible survival benefit of a timely change from peritoneal dialysis to hemodialysis.

摘要

背景

透析方式对终末期肾病(ESRD)患者生存的影响存在争议。

目的

比较接受腹膜透析或血液透析的ESRD患者的死亡风险。

设计

前瞻性队列研究。

地点

美国19个州的81家透析诊所。

患者

基线时开始透析的1041例患者(274例接受腹膜透析,767例接受血液透析)。

测量

对患者随访长达7年,并在移植或失访时进行截尾。采用按诊所分层的Cox比例风险回归比较腹膜透析与血液透析的死亡风险。

结果

25%的腹膜透析患者和5%的血液透析患者更换了透析方式。调整后,第一年腹膜透析患者与血液透析患者的死亡风险无差异(相对风险,1.39[95%CI,0.64至3.06]),但第二年腹膜透析患者的死亡风险显著升高(相对风险,2.34[CI,1.19至4.59])。分层后,最初接受腹膜透析倾向最高的患者生存率无差异。结果与基于倾向评分模型的调整一致,在使用实际治疗模型以及将透析方式转换视为治疗失败的模型的敏感性分析中也是如此。在仅限于在提供两种透析方式的诊所接受治疗的患者的分析中,结果相似但更显著。

局限性

患者未被随机分配至初始透析方式。此外,随着时间推移,更换透析方式的腹膜透析患者多于血液透析患者,且更换原因通常是技术问题。

结论

接受透析的ESRD患者的死亡风险取决于透析方式。需要进一步研究以评估及时从腹膜透析转换为血液透析可能带来的生存益处。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验