Suppr超能文献

比较持续性不卧床腹膜透析和自动化腹膜透析患者生存率和技术生存率。

Comparison of patient survival and technique survival between continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis and automated peritoneal dialysis.

机构信息

Graduate Institute of Biological Sciences, College of Medicine, China Medical University, Taichung.

Division of Nephrology, China Medical University Hospital, Taichung.

出版信息

Perit Dial Int. 2020 Nov;40(6):563-572. doi: 10.1177/0896860820942987. Epub 2020 Jul 31.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

This retrospective cohort study compared patient survival and technique survival between patients on continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) and automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) using recent data at a single tertiary medical center in Taiwan.

METHODS

From medical records, we identified incident 459 CAPD patients and 266 APD patients on dialysis for at least 90 days and aged more than 18 years to estimate mortality and technique failure rates, and related hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) from 2007 to 2018.

RESULTS

There were more women (52.3%) in the CAPD group, whereas patients in the APD group were younger. Compared to CAPD patients, APD patients had a lower mortality rate (2.83 vs. 5.79 per 100 person-years) with an adjusted HR of 0.69 (95% CI = 0.47-1.02), and a lower technique failure rate (9.70 vs. 17.52 per 100 person-years) with an adjusted HR of 0.65 (95% CI = 0.51-0.83). Further subgroup analyses revealed that, compared to CAPD, APD was associated with a significant lower risk of technique failure in male patients, patients aged 50-65 years, diabetic patients, patients without cardiovascular disease (CVD), patients with higher peritoneal permeability, or patients initiating PD in an earlier era.

CONCLUSIONS

The mortality risk was not significant between CAPD and APD patients. APD is associated with a lower risk of technique failure than CAPD, particularly for male patients, and patients aged 50-65 years, with diabetes, without CVD, with high or high average peritoneal permeability, or initiating PD in an earlier era.

摘要

背景

本回顾性队列研究使用台湾一家三级医学中心的最新数据比较了持续非卧床腹膜透析(CAPD)和自动化腹膜透析(APD)患者的生存情况和技术生存情况。

方法

从病历中,我们确定了至少接受 90 天透析且年龄大于 18 岁的 459 名 CAPD 患者和 266 名 APD 患者,以估计死亡率和技术失败率,并计算 2007 年至 2018 年的相关危险比(HR)和 95%置信区间(CI)。

结果

CAPD 组中女性(52.3%)较多,而 APD 组患者较年轻。与 CAPD 患者相比,APD 患者的死亡率较低(每 100 人年 2.83 与 5.79),调整后的 HR 为 0.69(95%CI=0.47-1.02),技术失败率也较低(每 100 人年 9.70 与 17.52),调整后的 HR 为 0.65(95%CI=0.51-0.83)。进一步的亚组分析显示,与 CAPD 相比,APD 与男性患者、50-65 岁患者、糖尿病患者、无心血管疾病(CVD)患者、腹膜通透性较高或更早开始 PD 的患者的技术失败风险显著降低。

结论

CAPD 和 APD 患者的死亡率无显著差异。APD 与 CAPD 相比,技术失败风险较低,尤其是男性患者、50-65 岁患者、糖尿病患者、无 CVD 患者、腹膜通透性较高或更早开始 PD 的患者。

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