Suppr超能文献

间歇性腹膜透析与自动化腹膜透析用于紧急腹膜透析的比较

A Comparison between Intermittent Peritoneal Dialysis and Automatic Peritoneal Dialysis on Urgent Peritoneal Dialysis.

作者信息

Wang Chang, Fu Xiao, Yang Yuan, Deng Jun, Zhang Hong-Qing, Deng Hong-Mei, Lu Jia, Peng Youming, Liu Hong, Liu Fu-You, Liu Yinghong

机构信息

Department of Nephrology, The Second Xiangya Hospital, Changsha, China.

出版信息

Am J Nephrol. 2017;45(6):540-548. doi: 10.1159/000477178. Epub 2017 May 23.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Urgent-start dialysis is a major problem for incident dialysis population. Urgent start on hemodialysis is associated with an increased risk of infectious or mechanical complications, and its mortality is equal to or higher than that of urgent start on peritoneal dialysis (PD). However, compared to patients starting PD in a planned setting, those on urgent-started PD have an increased risk of mechanical complications and lower technique survival.

METHODS

In this study, 101 adult incident dialysis patients (≥18 years old) who underwent Tenckhoff catheter implantation were enrolled. All of the patients were grouped according to the urgent PD mode: the intermittent PD (IPD) or automatic PD (APD) group, and patients were followed for 1 year. The paired or independent t test was used to analyze the change of laboratory variables. Pearson chi-square test was applied to compare the short outcome between the 2 groups.

RESULTS

When PD was treated for 7 days and 1 month, the APD group has the lower serum potassium and phosphorus levels than the IPD group. The incidence of catheter dysfunction was significantly lower in the APD group. The morbidity of infection associated with PD in the first year was lower in the APD group despite no significant difference existing. The technique survival and patient survival rate have no evident difference between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

Compared to IPD, urgent start on APD could reduce the risk of mechanical complication, which could be considered a gentle, safe, and feasible alternative to urgent start on IPD.

摘要

背景

紧急开始透析是新进入透析人群面临的一个主要问题。紧急开始血液透析与感染或机械并发症风险增加相关,其死亡率等于或高于紧急开始腹膜透析(PD)。然而,与在计划环境中开始腹膜透析的患者相比,紧急开始腹膜透析的患者发生机械并发症的风险增加且技术生存率较低。

方法

在本研究中,纳入了101例接受Tenckhoff导管植入的成年新进入透析患者(≥18岁)。所有患者根据紧急腹膜透析模式分组:间歇性腹膜透析(IPD)或自动化腹膜透析(APD)组,并对患者进行1年的随访。采用配对或独立t检验分析实验室变量的变化。应用Pearson卡方检验比较两组间的短期结局。

结果

当腹膜透析治疗7天和1个月时,APD组的血清钾和磷水平低于IPD组。APD组导管功能障碍的发生率显著较低。尽管无显著差异,但APD组第一年与腹膜透析相关的感染发病率较低。两组间的技术生存率和患者生存率无明显差异。

结论

与IPD相比,紧急开始APD可降低机械并发症风险,可被视为紧急开始IPD的一种温和、安全且可行的替代方案。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验