“…Such patients were often debilitated, post-surgical, malnourished, or hemodynamically unstable, and IPD offered the advantage that systemic anticoagulation was not needed, no blood loss occurred, and glucose was absorbed from the peritoneal solution. There was no need for highly trained personnel or for expensive and complex equipment, and the procedure could be initiated simply and quickly, whereas IPD was considered equal to intermittent HD (IHD), for ARF patients requiring dialysis (1). Compared to hemodialysis, however, peritoneal dialysis was less effective in severe acute illnesses such as pulmonary edema, poisonings or drug overdose, hyperkalemia, and extremely catabolic patients.…”