Patients with total Kt/V maintained below 1.7 had significantly more clinical problems and severe anemia but there was no difference in outcome demonstrated for patients with Kt/V maintained above 2.0 and between 1.7 and 2.0. We recommended that the minimal target of total Kt/V should be above 1.7.
Background: Different studies in the past have shown that the risk of cancer development is increased in chronic dialysis patients. However, data concerning the cancer risk in Asian dialysis patients was scarce. More importantly, there was lack of information about the cancer-specific mortality in dialysis patients. Methods: A multicenter retrospective cohort study of 6,254 patients who started either chronic peritoneal dialysis or hemodialysis between 1994 and 2014 in 4 renal units in Hong Kong. Patterns of cancer incidence and mortality in our dialysis patients were compared with those of the general population using standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) and standardized mortality ratios (SMRs) respectively. Results: With 14,887 person-years of follow-up, 220 cancers were recorded. The SIR of all cancers was 1.44 (95% CI 1.26-1.65). A trend of an increased SIR was observed in young patients and within the first year of dialysis. Colorectum was the most common site of cancer (20%) while kidney cancer carried the highest risk (SIR 12.28, 95% CI 8.44-17.08). The SMR of all cancers was 0.91 (95% CI 0.72-1.13) and only kidney cancer had higher cancer mortality risk (SMR 4.92, 95% CI 1.80-10.70). SMR was highest in young patients and then decreased with age. Conclusions: The incidence of cancers in our chronic dialysis patients was elevated. Our findings of substantially increased risks in young patients, particularly in relation to kidney cancer, suggest that we can adopt a more individualized approach to cancer screening in chronic dialysis patients.
Intraperitoneal cefazolin plus netilmicin and cefazolin plus ceftazidime have similar efficacy as empirical treatment for CAPD peritonitis. In CAPD patients with RRF, significant but reversible reduction in RRF and 24-hour urine volume could occur after an episode of peritonitis, despite successful treatment by i.p. antibiotics. The effect of i.p. cefazolin plus netilmicin, or i.p. cefazolin plus ceftazidime on RRF in CAPD patients with peritonitis does not appear to be different. Our findings do not support the routine use of cefazolin and ceftazidime as the empirical treatment for CAPD peritonitis.
Objective We compared outcomes for catheters with different configurations: conventional straight, swan-neck straight tip, and swan-neck curled tip. Design The study was conducted as a prospective randomized controlled trial in the continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) unit of a university center. Patients and Methods We randomized 93 new regular CAPD patients without prior peritoneal dialysis (PD) catheter insertion to receive a conventional straight, double-cuffed catheter (CS), a swan-neck straight catheter (SNC), or a swan-neck curled tip catheter (SNC) in 2:1:1 ratio. Results The exit-site infection (ESI) rate was slightly lower with swan-neck catheters as compared with straight catheters, but the difference was not statistically significant. The peritonitis rate and overall catheter survival were similar. In Staphylococcus aureus nasal non carriers as compared with carriers, ESI-free catheter survival was significantly better with swan-neck catheters ( p = 0.0302 and p = 0.82 respectively). As compared with SC catheters, SNC catheters had a significantly higher migration rate ( p = 0.022). Conclusions Swan-neck catheters were associated with a slightly better ESI rate, but SNC catheters are not routinely recommended because of a high migration rate. The SNS catheter is therefore recommended as the first-line catheter of choice, particularly in populations with a low rate of S. aureus nasal carriage.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.