Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry, Adelaide, Australia.
Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2010 Jun;25(6):1973-9. doi: 10.1093/ndt/gfp780. Epub 2010 Jan 22.
Automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) is widely recommended for the management of high transporters by the International Society of Peritoneal Dialysis (ISPD), although there have been no adequate studies to date comparing the outcomes of APD and continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) in this high risk group.
The relative impact of APD versus CAPD on patient and technique survival rates was examined by both intention-to-treat (PD modality at Day 90) and 'as-treated' time-varying Cox proportional hazards model analyses in all patients who started PD in Australia or New Zealand between 1 April 1999 and 31 March 2004 and who had baseline peritoneal equilibration tests confirming the presence of high peritoneal transport status.
During the study period, 4128 patients commenced PD. Of these, 628 patients were high transporters on PD at Day 90 (486 on APD and 142 on CAPD). Compared to high transporters treated with CAPD, APD-treated high transporters were more likely to be younger and Caucasian, and less likely to be diabetic. On multivariate intention-to-treat analysis, APD treatment was associated with superior survival [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.56, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.35-0.87] and comparable death-censored technique survival (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.64-1.21). Superior survival of high transporters treated with APD versus CAPD was also confirmed in supplemental as-treated analysis (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.54-0.96), matched case-control analysis (HR 0.60, 95% CI 0.36-0.96) and subgroup analysis of high transporters treated entirely with APD versus those treated entirely with CAPD (HR 0.29, 95% CI 0.14-0.60). There were no statistically significant differences in patient survival or death-censored technique survival between APD and CAPD for any other transport group, except for low transporters, who experienced a higher mortality rate on APD compared with CAPD (HR 2.19, 95% CI 1.02-4.70).
APD treatment is associated with a significant survival advantage in high transporters compared with CAPD. However, APD treatment is associated with inferior survival in low transporters.
国际腹膜透析学会(ISPD)广泛推荐自动化腹膜透析(APD)用于高转运患者的治疗,尽管迄今为止,尚无足够的研究比较 APD 和持续非卧床腹膜透析(CAPD)在这一高危人群中的治疗效果。
通过意向治疗(PD 模式在第 90 天)和基于时间变化的 Cox 比例风险模型分析,评估 APD 与 CAPD 对患者和技术生存率的相对影响,纳入在 1999 年 4 月 1 日至 2004 年 3 月 31 日期间在澳大利亚或新西兰开始 PD 的所有患者,且所有患者在基线时进行了腹膜平衡试验以确定高腹膜转运状态。
在研究期间,有 4128 名患者开始接受 PD 治疗。其中,628 名患者在第 90 天时是高转运者(APD 组 486 例,CAPD 组 142 例)。与 CAPD 治疗的高转运者相比,APD 治疗的高转运者更年轻、更白种人,糖尿病的发病率更低。多变量意向治疗分析显示,APD 治疗与较高的生存率相关(调整后的危险比 [HR]0.56,95%置信区间 [CI]0.35-0.87),且无死亡技术生存率相当(HR0.88,95%CI0.64-1.21)。在基于时间变化的补充治疗分析(HR0.72,95%CI0.54-0.96)、匹配病例对照分析(HR0.60,95%CI0.36-0.96)和完全接受 APD 治疗的高转运者亚组分析(HR0.29,95%CI0.14-0.60)中,也证实了 APD 治疗的高转运者的生存优势。除了低转运者,APD 和 CAPD 在任何其他转运组中,患者生存率或无死亡技术生存率均无统计学差异,而低转运者在 APD 治疗中的死亡率高于 CAPD(HR2.19,95%CI1.02-4.70)。
与 CAPD 相比,APD 治疗在高转运患者中具有显著的生存优势。然而,APD 治疗在低转运患者中与较差的生存率相关。