Joachim Emily, Gardezi Ali I, Chan Micah R, Shin Jung-Im, Astor Brad C, Waheed Sana
Division of Nephrology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, United States.
Division of Nephrology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, United States
Perit Dial Int. 2017 May-Jun;37(3):259-265. doi: 10.3747/pdi.2016.00011. Epub 2016 Dec 22.
♦ BACKGROUND: It remains unclear whether post-transplant outcomes differ according to the pre-transplant dialysis modality (peritoneal dialysis [PD] versus hemodialysis [HD]). We performed a meta-analysis of studies that assessed either post-transplant mortality, graft survival, or delayed graft function (DGF) in both PD and HD patients. ♦ METHODS: Two independent authors searched English-language literature from January 1, 1980, through August 31, 2014, national conference proceedings, and reference lists. We used combinations of terms related to dialysis (hemodialysis, peritoneal dialysis, or renal replacement therapy), kidney transplant, and outcomes. Studies were included if they measured any of the 3 post-transplant study outcomes in both pre-transplant HD and PD. ♦ RESULTS: A total of 16 studies were included in the final analysis. Of these, 6 studies reported adjusted hazard ratio for mortality, pooled adjusted risk ratio: 0.89 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.82 - 0.97) in favor of PD ( = 0.006). The same 6 studies reported adjusted hazard ratio for graft survival, pooled adjusted risk ratio: 0.97 (95% CI 0.92 - 1.01, = 0.16). A total of 13 studies reported unadjusted DGF. Pooled odds ratio: 0.5 (95% CI 0.41 - 0.63) in favor of PD ( < 0.005). Significant heterogeneity observed for all outcomes: I2 = 72.7%, I2 = 59.9%, and I2 = 66.8%, respectively. ♦ CONCLUSIONS: Based on these results, pre-transplant PD is associated with better post-transplant survival than HD. Pre-transplant PD was also associated with decreased risk for DGF compared with HD, although these results were unadjusted. There was no significant difference in graft survival between pre-transplant HD and PD. These results suggest that PD may be the preferred dialysis modality for patients expected to receive a transplant.
♦ 背景:移植后结局是否因移植前透析方式(腹膜透析[PD]与血液透析[HD])不同仍不清楚。我们对评估PD和HD患者移植后死亡率、移植物存活率或移植肾功能延迟恢复(DGF)的研究进行了荟萃分析。♦ 方法:两位独立作者检索了1980年1月1日至2014年8月31日的英文文献、全国会议论文集及参考文献列表。我们使用了与透析(血液透析、腹膜透析或肾脏替代治疗)、肾移植及结局相关的术语组合。如果研究测量了移植前HD和PD患者的3种移植后研究结局中的任何一种,则纳入研究。♦ 结果:最终分析共纳入16项研究。其中,6项研究报告了调整后的死亡率风险比,合并调整风险比:0.89(95%置信区间[CI] 0.82 - 0.97),支持PD(P = 0.006)。同样的6项研究报告了调整后的移植物存活率风险比,合并调整风险比:0.97(95%CI 0.92 - 1.01,P = 0.16)。共有13项研究报告了未调整的DGF。合并比值比:0.5(95%CI 0.41 - 0.63),支持PD(P < 0.005)。所有结局均观察到显著异质性:I2分别为72.7%、59.9%和66.8%。♦ 结论:基于这些结果,移植前PD与移植后比HD更好的存活率相关。与HD相比,移植前PD也与DGF风险降低相关,尽管这些结果未进行调整。移植前HD和PD之间的移植物存活率无显著差异。这些结果表明,PD可能是预期接受移植患者的首选透析方式。