Download PDF
Dialyse aktuell 2018; 22(09): 398-402
DOI: 10.1055/a-0760-3754
Schwerpunkt | Dialyse
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Die Nutzung der Peritonealdialyse

Freie Entscheidung für ein Dialyseverfahren
Lukas Gerber
Klinik für Nephrologie, Dialyse und Transplantation, Kantonsspital Aarau, Aarau, Schweiz
,
Stephan Segerer
Klinik für Nephrologie, Dialyse und Transplantation, Kantonsspital Aarau, Aarau, Schweiz
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
23 November 2018 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Zusammenfassung

Die Peritonealdialyse (PD) ist die häufigste Form der Heimdialyse und wird weltweit bei etwa 10 % der Dialysepatienten verwendet. Der Anteil der PD-Patienten variiert sowohl zwischen einzelnen Ländern als auch zwischen Zentren innerhalb desselben Landes sehr stark. In dieser Übersicht diskutieren wir, welche Faktoren die PD-Nutzung beeinflussen und wie diese potenziell verbessert werden könnte.

 

  • Literatur

  • 1 Heaf JG, Wehberg S. Relative survival of peritoneal dialysis and haemodialysis patients: effect of cohort and mode of dialysis initiation. PloS One 2014; 9: e90119 doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0090119
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 van de Luijtgaarden MW, Jager KJ, Segelmark M. et al. Trends in dialysis modality choice and related patient survival in the ERA-EDTA Registry over a 20-year period. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2016; 31: 120-128 doi:10.1093/ndt/gfv295
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Li PK, Chow KM, Van de Luijtgaarden MW. et al. Changes in the worldwide epidemiology of peritoneal dialysis. Nat Rev Nephrol 2017; 13: 90-103 doi:10.1038/nrneph.2016.181
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Lameire N, Van Biesen W. Epidemiology of peritoneal dialysis: a story of believers and nonbelievers. Nat Rev Nephrol 2010; 6: 75-82 doi:10.1038/nrneph.2009.210
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 UK Renal Registry (UKRR). UK Renal Registry, 19th Annual Report 2016. Im Internet: www.renalreg.org/reports/2016-nineteenth-annual-report/ Stand: 18.10.2018
    Google Scholar
  • 6 Australia & New Zealand, Dialysis & Transplant Registry. The 39th Annual ANZDATA Report 2016. Im Internet: www.anzdata.org.au/v1/annual_reports_download.html Stand: 18.10.2018
    Google Scholar
  • 7 Schweizerische Gesellschaft für Nephrologie (SGN). Swiss renal registry and quality assessment program (srrqap). Im Internet: http://www.swissnephrology.ch/pages/en/srrqap.php Stand: 18.10.2018
    Google Scholar
  • 8 Covic A, Bammens B, Lobbedez T. et al. Educating end-stage renal disease patients on dialysis modality selection. NDT Plus 2010; 3: 225-233 doi:10.1093/ndtplus/sfq059
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Jager KJ, Korevaar JC, Dekker FW. et al. The effect of contraindications and patient preference on dialysis modality selection in ESRD patients in The Netherlands. Am J Kidney Dis 2004; 43: 891-899
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Little J, Irwin A, Marshall T. et al. Predicting a patient’s choice of dialysis modality: experience in a United Kingdom renal department. Am J Kidney Dis 2001; 37: 981-986
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Brown EA, Finkelstein FO, Iyasere OU. et al. Peritoneal or hemodialysis for the frail elderly patient, the choice of 2 evils?. Kidney Int 2017; 91: 294-303 doi:10.1016/j.kint.2016.08.026
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Lyasere OU, Brown EA, Johansson L. et al. Quality of life and physical function in older patients on dialysis: a comparison of assisted peritoneal dialysis with hemodialysis. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2016; 11: 423-430 doi:10.2215/CJN.01050115
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Brown EA, Bargman JM, Li PK. Managing older patients on peritoneal dialysis. Perit Dial Int 2015; 35: 609-611 doi:10.3747/pdi.2015.00159
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Ankawi GA, Woodcock NI, Jain AK. et al. The use of incremental peritoneal dialysis in a large contemporary peritoneal dialysis program. Can J Kidney Health Dis 2016; 3: 2054358116679131 doi:10.1177/2054358116679131
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Persönliche Kommunikation (SVK).
    Google Scholar
  • 16 Blake PG, Golper TA, Saxena AB. A critical shortage of solution threatens unprecedented growth in peritoneal dialysis. Nephrol News Issues 2014; 28: 14-16
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Bechade C, Lobbedez T, Ivarsen P. et al. Assisted peritoneal dialysis for older people with end-stage renal disease: the French and Danish experience. Perit Dial Int 2015; 35: 663-666 doi:10.3747/pdi.2014.00344
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Ledebo I, Ronco C. The best dialysis therapy? Results from an international survey among nephrology professionals. NDT Plus 2008; 1: 403-408 doi:10.1093/ndtplus/sfn148
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Piraino B, Minev E, Bernardini J. et al. Does experience with PD matter?. Perit Dial Int 2009; 29: 256-261
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Koch M, Kohnle M, Trapp R. et al. Comparable outcome of acute unplanned peritoneal dialysis and haemodialysis. Nephrol Dial Tranplant 2012; 27: 375-380 doi:10.1093/ndt/gfr262
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Manns BJ, Taub K, Vanderstraeten C. et al. The impact of education on chronic kidney disease patients’ plans to initiate dialysis with self-care dialysis: a randomized trial. Kidney Int 2005; 68: 1777-1783 doi:10.1111/j.1523–1755.2005.00594.x
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Balas EA, Boren SA, Hicks LL. et al. Effect of linking practice data to published evidence. A randomized controlled trial of clinical direct reports. Med Care 1998; 36: 79-87
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar