Diálise peritoneal ambulatorial contínua versus diálise peritoneal automatizada: análise dos dados do estudo multicêntrico brasileiro de diálise peritoneal (Braz-PD)
Carregando...
Arquivos
Data
2017-02-24
Autores
Beduschi, Gabriela de Carvalho [UNESP]
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título de Volume
Editor
Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
Resumo
Introdução: A terapia renal substitutiva por diálise peritoneal (DP) na doença renal crônica pode ser realizada manualmente pela DP ambulatorial contínua (CAPD) ou pala utilização de cicladoras automatizadas (APD). O impacto da modalidade de DP nos resultados clínicos, sobrevida do paciente, da técnica de diálise e risco de peritonite não foi avaliado por ensaios clínicos randomizados com alto número de pacientes. Estudos observacionais não mostraram de modo consistente, superioridade de um desses métodos. Objetivos: Comparar os resultados e desfechos clínicos do tratamento por CAPD e APD, em coorte de pacientes incidentes adultos e incluídos no Estudo Multicêntrico Brasileiro de Diálise Peritoneal (BRAZ-PD). Métodos: Estudo nacional de coorte prospectivo multicêntrico no qual foi incluídos pacientes incidentes com pelo menos 90 dias em DP. Os pacientes foram alocados em dois grupos, tratados exclusivamente por CAPD ou APD, utilizando-se o escore de propensão para pareamento dos mesmos, de acordo com as variáveis: idade, etnia, sexo, diabetes mellitus, índice de massa corporal, experiência do centro, biênio de início da DP, doença arterial coronária, doença arterial periférica, hipertensão arterial, presença de neoplasia maligna, tempo de escolaridade, renda familiar, tempo de acompanhamento pré-diálise e hemodiálise prévia. Os desfechos clínicos foram avaliados utilizando o modelo de risco proporcional de Cox e análise para riscos competitivos de Fine e Gray. A evolução dos dados bioquímicos, hemoglobina e pressão arterial foi comparada pelo teste t ou teste de Wilcoxon. Resultados: Após o pareamento, 1445 pacientes incidentes foram incluídos em cada grupo. O risco de morte por todas as causas (SHR1.44 CI95%1.21-1.71) e por causa cardiovascular (SHR1.34 CI95%1.03-1.73) foi maior nos pacientes em CAPD, mas não observamos diferença na sobrevida da técnica e tempo para o primeiro episódio de peritonite. As médias de concentração sérica de potássio e de fósforo foram menores nos pacientes em CAPD na maioria das avalições, não se observando diferenças no controle pressórico e das demais variáveis. Conclusão: Com base em um grande estudo de coorte, randomizado e prospectivo, não foram encontradas diferenças na falência da técnica e tempo para o primeiro episódio de peritonite entre a CAPD e APD. Por outro lado, a APD se associou a maior sobrevida do paciente em comparação com CAPD. Esses achados podem influenciar a escolha da modalidade e estimular uma mais ampla utilização da APD.
Introduction: Renal substitutive therapy by peritoneal dialysis (PD) in chronic kidney disease patients can be performed manually by continuous ambulatory PD (CAPD) or using automated cyclers (APD).The impact of PD modality on patient survival, technique failure and peritonitis rates is not fully understood, and no large-scale randomized clinical trial is available. Observational studies have failed to show superiority of one of PD modalities. Objective: The aim of this study is to compare the clinical results and endpoints between CAPD and APD, in a large nation-wide PD cohort, BRAZ-PD. Methods: This is a prospective cohort study that included all incident PD patients with at least 90 days of PD recruited in the BRAZ-PD study. All patients who were treated exclusively with either CAPD or APD were matched for different covariates (age, diabetes, BMI, center-experience, coronary artery disease, cancer, literacy, hypertension, race, previous hemodialysis, gender, pre-dialysis care, family income, peripheral artery disease and year of starting PD) using a propensity score calculated with the nearest neighbor method. Clinical outcomes analyzed were overall mortality, technique failure and time to first peritonitis. For all analysis we also adjusted the curves for the presence of competing risks with the Fine and Gray analysis. Biochemical data, blood pressure and hemoglobin levels were compared by test or Wilcoxon test. Results: After the matching procedure, 1,445 patients were included in each group. General (SHR1.44 CI95%1.21-1.71) and cardiovascular mortality risk (SHR1.34 CI95%1.03-1.73) were higher in CAPD patients, but no difference was observed for technique failure nor for time till the first peritonitis episode. The mean of serum and phosphorus concentration were lower in CAPD group in the majority of measurements. Conclusion: In the first large PD cohort study with groups balanced for several covariates using propensity score matching, PD modality was not associated with differences in neither time to first peritonitis nor in technique failure. Nevertheless, patient survival was significantly better in APD patients. These findings can influence the PD modality choice and encourage a greater APD utilization.
Introduction: Renal substitutive therapy by peritoneal dialysis (PD) in chronic kidney disease patients can be performed manually by continuous ambulatory PD (CAPD) or using automated cyclers (APD).The impact of PD modality on patient survival, technique failure and peritonitis rates is not fully understood, and no large-scale randomized clinical trial is available. Observational studies have failed to show superiority of one of PD modalities. Objective: The aim of this study is to compare the clinical results and endpoints between CAPD and APD, in a large nation-wide PD cohort, BRAZ-PD. Methods: This is a prospective cohort study that included all incident PD patients with at least 90 days of PD recruited in the BRAZ-PD study. All patients who were treated exclusively with either CAPD or APD were matched for different covariates (age, diabetes, BMI, center-experience, coronary artery disease, cancer, literacy, hypertension, race, previous hemodialysis, gender, pre-dialysis care, family income, peripheral artery disease and year of starting PD) using a propensity score calculated with the nearest neighbor method. Clinical outcomes analyzed were overall mortality, technique failure and time to first peritonitis. For all analysis we also adjusted the curves for the presence of competing risks with the Fine and Gray analysis. Biochemical data, blood pressure and hemoglobin levels were compared by test or Wilcoxon test. Results: After the matching procedure, 1,445 patients were included in each group. General (SHR1.44 CI95%1.21-1.71) and cardiovascular mortality risk (SHR1.34 CI95%1.03-1.73) were higher in CAPD patients, but no difference was observed for technique failure nor for time till the first peritonitis episode. The mean of serum and phosphorus concentration were lower in CAPD group in the majority of measurements. Conclusion: In the first large PD cohort study with groups balanced for several covariates using propensity score matching, PD modality was not associated with differences in neither time to first peritonitis nor in technique failure. Nevertheless, patient survival was significantly better in APD patients. These findings can influence the PD modality choice and encourage a greater APD utilization.
Descrição
Palavras-chave
Ambulatory peritoneal dialysis continues, Automated peritoneal dialysis, Survival, Peritonitis, Technique failure