Held P J, Wolfe R A, Gaylin D S, Port F K, Levin N W, Turenne M N
Renal Research Program, Urban Institute, Washington, DC.
Am J Kidney Dis. 1994 May;23(5):692-708. doi: 10.1016/s0272-6386(12)70280-9.
This historic prospective study assessed the relationship between dialyzer reuse practices and hemodialysis patient mortality through 1 year of follow-up. Medicare patient demographic and survival data were combined with dialyzer reuse data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's annual survey of dialysis-related diseases. Data were analyzed for the US Medicare hemodialysis population of never transplanted patients prevalent on January 1, 1989, and January 1, 1990, who were treated in freestanding dialysis units that used primarily conventional (not high-flux) dialyzers. Time to mortality, or transplant, and other censoring on December 31st of each year was regressed with proportional hazards models on patient, dialysis unit, and reuse measures. Age-, race-, and diagnosis-standardized mortality ratios for dialysis units were also regressed with weighted least squares techniques against dialysis unit and reuse measures. The results showed that patients treated in dialysis units that disinfected dialyzers with a peracetic acid, hydrogen peroxide, acetic acid mixture, or glutaraldehyde experienced higher mortality than patients treated in units that used formalin or in units that did not reuse dialyzers. The relative risk of mortality, compared with patients treated in nonreuse dialysis units, was 1.17 (P = 0.010) for glutaraldehyde and 1.13 (P < 0.001) for the peracetic acid mixture. The relative risk for formalin compared with the reference group of nonreuse was 1.06 (P = 0.088). With adjustment for several patient and dialysis unit characteristics, dialyzer reuse with certain germicides was associated with a significantly elevated mortality risk. This elevated risk, the etiology of which is currently not known, may represent a large number of potentially avoidable deaths per year. Only a large, nationally based analysis of this type has sufficient sample size to detect mortality risks such as these.
这项具有历史意义的前瞻性研究通过1年的随访评估了透析器复用做法与血液透析患者死亡率之间的关系。医疗保险患者的人口统计学和生存数据与疾病控制和预防中心年度透析相关疾病调查中的透析器复用数据相结合。对1989年1月1日和1990年1月1日在美国医疗保险血液透析人群中未接受移植且在主要使用传统(而非高通量)透析器的独立透析单位接受治疗的患者数据进行了分析。每年12月31日的死亡或移植时间以及其他截尾情况,使用比例风险模型对患者、透析单位和复用措施进行回归分析。还使用加权最小二乘法技术对透析单位的年龄、种族和诊断标准化死亡率进行回归分析,以分析透析单位和复用措施。结果显示,在使用过氧乙酸、过氧化氢、乙酸混合物或戊二醛对透析器进行消毒的透析单位接受治疗的患者,其死亡率高于在使用福尔马林的单位或未复用透析器的单位接受治疗的患者。与在未复用透析单位接受治疗的患者相比,使用戊二醛的患者死亡相对风险为1.17(P = 0.010),使用过氧乙酸混合物的患者为1.13(P < 0.001)。与未复用参考组相比,福尔马林的相对风险为1.06(P = 0.088)。在对患者和透析单位的若干特征进行调整后,使用某些杀菌剂复用透析器与显著升高的死亡风险相关。这种升高的风险,其病因目前尚不清楚,可能代表每年大量潜在可避免的死亡。只有这种基于全国范围的大型分析才有足够的样本量来检测此类死亡风险。