Anantharaman Priya, Moss Alvin H
Section of Nephrology, West Virginia University School of Medicine, Morgantown, WV 26506, USA.
Adv Chronic Kidney Dis. 2007 Jul;14(3):290-6. doi: 10.1053/j.ackd.2007.03.001.
End-stage renal disease (ESRD) is a growing problem in the United States and has now reached epidemic proportions. The mortality rate and other complications related to conventional dialysis remain unacceptably high necessitating improvements in dialytic therapies. One strategy has been to increase dialysis frequency through daily dialysis since the Hemodialysis study showed that clinical outcomes are not improved by simply increasing delivered dialysis dose per session. Most studies of daily dialysis are observational and limited by small sample size, variable dialysis techniques, high patient dropout, and lack of adequate control group. These studies have shown consistent improvements in blood pressure and solute clearance, but improvements in patient survival, anemia, and health-related quality of life are less clear. The costs of providing daily dialysis on a large scale are likely to be substantial. However, if there are significant improvements in the outcome measures outlined earlier as well as decreased hospitalization rates, daily dialysis may prove cost-effective or budget neutral from a global standpoint. A scientific basis is needed to justify a change in the Medicare ESRD Program to fund daily dialysis. Decisions regarding the allocation of limited medical resources such as the Medicare budget should consider ethically appropriate criteria including likelihood of benefit, urgency of need, change in quality of life, duration of benefit, patient selection, equitable distribution, and the amount of resources required. In examining the evidence base on daily dialysis according to these ethical criteria, we find that there are not yet sufficient grounds to recommend funding of daily dialysis by the Medicare ESRD Program. Randomized controlled trials comparing conventional hemodialysis to short daily and long nocturnal hemodialysis are much needed.
终末期肾病(ESRD)在美国是一个日益严重的问题,现已达到流行程度。与传统透析相关的死亡率和其他并发症仍然高得令人无法接受,因此需要改进透析疗法。一种策略是通过每日透析来增加透析频率,因为血液透析研究表明,单纯增加每次透析的透析剂量并不能改善临床结果。大多数关于每日透析的研究都是观察性的,受样本量小、透析技术多变、患者高退出率和缺乏适当对照组的限制。这些研究表明,血压和溶质清除率持续改善,但患者生存率、贫血和健康相关生活质量的改善尚不清楚。大规模提供每日透析的成本可能很高。然而,如果上述结果指标有显著改善,以及住院率降低,从全球角度来看,每日透析可能被证明具有成本效益或预算中性。需要有科学依据来证明医疗保险ESRD计划改变为每日透析提供资金是合理的。关于分配有限医疗资源(如医疗保险预算)的决策应考虑符合伦理的适当标准,包括受益可能性、需求紧迫性、生活质量变化、受益持续时间、患者选择、公平分配以及所需资源量。根据这些伦理标准审查关于每日透析的证据基础时,我们发现尚无足够理由建议医疗保险ESRD计划为每日透析提供资金。非常需要进行将传统血液透析与短程每日和长程夜间血液透析进行比较的随机对照试验。