medigraphic.com
ISSN 1527-3172 (Electronic)

2015, Number 2

<< Back Next >>

MEDICC Review 2015; 17 (2)

Use of home peritoneal dialysis by Cuba’s Nephrology Institute, 2007–2012

Bohorques RR, Álvarez GY, Martínez TA, Ballard ÁY, Pérez CS, Gutiérrez F

Language: English
References: 26
Page: 29-32
PDF size: 110.05 Kb.


ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION Peritoneal dialysis is a maintenance therapy option for patients with end-stage renal disease. Continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis in Cuba was introduced in December 2007, and automated peritoneal dialysis one year later. This paper presents the outcomes attained with this blood purification technique, enabling an assessment to decide on scaling up its use in Cuba.
OBJECTIVE Describe the clinical course of patients in the first five years of the Home Peritoneal Dialysis Program at Havana’s Nephrology Institute.
METHODS An observational, descriptive study with a retrospective cohort was conducted. The universe comprised the 40 Nephrology Institute patients who underwent treatment with home peritoneal dialysis from December 20, 2007 to December 20, 2012. Relative and absolute frequencies were calculated for the study variables and the Kaplan-Meier method was used for survival curves for patients and for the peritoneum as dialysis membrane.
RESULTS Of the 40 patients in the program, 23 were men and 17 were women, primarily aged 40 to 59 years. The most frequent causes of chronic kidney failure were hypertension (42.5%), glomerulopathies (22.5%), and diabetes mellitus (22.5%). A total of 103 complications occurred, both infectious (68, 66%) and non-infectious (35, 34%). The most common infectious complication was peritonitis (45, 66.2%); the most frequent non-infectious complication was catheter displacement (13, 37.1%). Seven patients left the peritoneal dialysis program. Of these, three died, two lost function of the peritoneum as a dialysis membrane, one received a kidney transplant and one recovered kidney function. Survival was 100% at one year, 97% at 2 years, 93.2% at 3 and 4 years, and 92% at 5 years. However, the peritoneal membrane was functional in 100% of patients during the first 2 years, decreasing to 96% at 3 and 4 years and to 88.6% at 5 years.
CONCLUSIONS In our setting, peritoneal dialysis attained outcomes similar to those obtained internationally, which supports its usefulness as a renal replacement therapy method in Cuban patients with end-stage renal disease.


REFERENCES

  1. Kramer A, Stel V, Zoccali C, Heaf J, Ansell D, Grönhagen-Riska C, et al. An update on renal replacement therapy in Europe: ERA–EDTA Registry data from 1997 to 2006. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2009 Dec;24(12):3557–66.

  2. McDonald SP, Marshall MR, Johnson DW, Polkinghorne KR. Relationship between dialysis modality and mortality. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2009 Jan;20(1):155–63.

  3. Popovich RP, Moncrief JW. Kinetic modeling of peritoneal transport. In: Treviño Becerra A, Boen FST editors. Today’s Art of Peritoneal Dialysis. Basel (CH): S. Karger Pub; 1979 Sep. p. 59–83.

  4. Moncrief JW, Popovich RP, Nolph KD. The history and current status of continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis. Am J Kidney Dis. 1990 Dec;16(6):579–84.

  5. Remón Rodríguez C, Quirós-Ganga PL. La evidencia actual demuestra una equivalencia de resultados entre las técnicas de diálisis. Nefrología. 2011 May 20;31(5):520–7. Spanish.

  6. Portolés J, Remón C. En busca de la efi ciencia y la sostenibilidad del tratamiento sustitutivo renal integrado. Nefrología. 2010;1(Suppl 1):S2–7. Spanish.

  7. Alvarez-Ude F, Vicente E, Badía X. La medida de la calidad de vida relacionada con la salud en los pacientes en programa de hemodiálisis y diálisis peritoneal continua ambulatoria de Segovia. Instituto de Salud Pública de Cataluña. Nefrología. 1995 Jun 13;15(6):572–80. Spanish.

  8. Ponz E, Sató J, García García M, Mañé N, Ramírez Vaca J, García Morales M, et al. Análisis de la gestión económica de un programa de diálisis peritoneal. Comparación con el programa de hemodiálisis. Unidad de Nefrología. Servicio de Medicina. Consorcio Hospitalario del Parc Taulí. Sabadell. Nefrología. 1997;17(2):152–61. Spanish.

  9. Grapsa E, Oreopoulos D. Chronic peritoneal dialysis in the elderly. In: Khanma R, Krediet RT, editors. Textbook of peritoneal dialysis. New York: Springer; 2009. p. 737–55.

  10. Mehrotra R, Chiu YW, Kalantar-Zadeh K, Bargman J, Vonesh E. Similar outcomes with hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis in patients with end-stage renal disease. Arch Intern Med. 2011 Jan 24;171(2):110–8.

  11. Weinhandl ED, Foley RN, Gilbertson DT, Arneson TJ, Snyder JJ, Collins AJ. Propensitymatched mortality comparison of incident hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis patients. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2010 Mar;21(3):499–506.

  12. Sociedad Española de Nefrología [Internet]. Barcelona: Sociedad Española de Nefrología; c2009. Registro Español de Enfermos Renales. Informe de Diálisis y Trasplante; 2010 [cited 2013 Oct 18]; [about 30 screens]. Available from: http://www.senefro.org/modules.php?name=web structure&idwebstructure=128. Spanish.

  13. Pérez Oliva J. Programa enfermedad Renal Crónica, Diálisis y Trasplante. Centro Coordinador. Instituto de Nefrología. Havana: Institute of Nephrology (CU); 2012. p. 7–52. Spanish.

  14. Alfonzo Guerra J. Diálisis peritoneal. In: Historia de la Nefrología en Cuba. Havana: ECIMED; 2013. p. 107–14. Spanish.

  15. Rodríguez CR, Quirós PL, Cunquero JM, Ruiz SR, Fosalba NA, Fernández AR, et al. Diez años de diálisis peritoneal en Andalucía (1999–2008): datos epidemiológicos, tipos de tratamiento, peritonitis, comorbilidad y supervivencia de pacientes y técnica. Nefrología. 2010;30(1):46–53. Spanish.

  16. Quirós-Ganga PL, Remón-Rodríguez C. Logrando mejores resultados para la diálisis peritoneal en los últimos años. Servicio de Nefrología. Hospital Universitario Puerto Real. Cádiz. Nefrología. 2012 Sep 26;32(5):587–96. Spanish.

  17. Arrieta J, Rodríguez-Carmona A, Remón C, Pérez-Fontán M, Ortega F, Sánchez Tornero JA, et al. La diálisis peritoneal es la mejor alternativa costo-efectiva para la sostenibilidad del tratamiento con diálisis. Nefrología (Madr). 2011;31(5):505–13. Spanish.

  18. Boulanger E. Peritoneal and systemic infl ammation: the benefi ts of using biocompatible peritoneal dialysis fl uids. Perit Dial Int. 2008 Jan– Feb;28(1):28–31.

  19. Verde E, Sanz Guajardo D, Luño J. Epidemiología de la enfermedad renal crónica y su tratamiento sustitutivo. Indicaciones, contraindicaciones y opciones terapéuticas. In: Jofre R, López Gómez JM, Luño J, Pérez García R, Rodríguez Benítez P, editors. Tratado de Hemodiálisis. 2nd. ed. Barcelona: Editorial Médica Jims; 2006. p. 39–54. Spanish.

  20. Fenton SSA. Peritonitis-related deaths among CAPD patients. Perit Dial Bull. 1983 Jul–Sep;3 Suppl:S9–11.

  21. Montenegro J. Peritonitis bacteriana. In: Tratado de Diálisis Peritoneal. 3ra ed. Barcelona: Elsevier España S.L; 2009. p. 283–320. Spanish.

  22. De Sousa E, Bajo Rubio MA, Del Peso G, Castro MJ, Celadilla O, Selgas Gutiérrez R. Experiencia de 30 años en una unidad de diálisis peritoneal: supervivencia a largo plazo. Nefrología. 2013;33(4):546–51. Spanish.

  23. Li PK, Szeto CC, Piraino B, Bernardini J, Figueiredo AE, Gupta A, et al. Peritoneal dialysis-related infections recommendations: 2010 update. Perit Dial Int. 2010 Jul–Aug;30(4):393–423.

  24. Arrieta J, Bajo Rubio MA, Caravaca F, Coronel F, García Pérez H, González Parra E, et al. Guías de Práctica Clínica en Diálisis Peritoneal. Nefrología. 2006;26 Suppl 4. Spanish.

  25. Montenegro J, Olivares J. Peritonitis bacteriana en diálisis peritoneal. In: Montenegro J, Olivares J, editors. La Diálisis Peritoneal. 2nd ed. Barcelona: Ed. DIBE, SL; 2003. p. 307–59. Spanish.

  26. Brown EA. Peritoneal dialysis for older people, overcoming the barriers. Kidney Int Suppl. 2008 Apr;(108):S68–71.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com