NDT Advance Access originally published online on April 6, 2004
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Nephrol Dial Transplant (2004) 19: 1587-1593
Nephrol Dial Transplant Vol. 19 No. 6 © ERA-EDTA 2004; all rights reserved
Original Article
Low vs standard calcium dialysate in peritoneal dialysis: differences in treatment, biochemistry and bone histomorphometry. A randomized multicentre study
1Department of Nephrology, 2Department of Pathology and 3Biochemical Division of University Hospital ‘La Paz’ and 4Nephrology Division of University Hospital ‘La Princesa’, Madrid, Spain
Correspondence and offprint requests to: M. Carmen Sánchez, MD, Servicio de Nefrología, Hospital Universitario la Paz, Paseo Castellana 261, E-28046 Madrid, Spain. Email: csanchez.hulp{at}salud.madrid.org. Collaborators of the Multicentre Study Group include Ma Teresa González, MD PhD, University Hospital, Bellvitge (Barcelona); Josep Teixidó, MD PhD, University Hospital Germans Trias i Pujol (Badalona); Antonio Molina, MD PhD, University Hospital ‘Rio Hortega’ (Valladolid); Mercè Borràs Sans, MD, Hospital ‘Arnau de Vilanova’ (Lleida); César García, MD, ‘Hospital Insular’ Las Palmas de Gran Canaria; Rafael García, MD, Hospital ‘Clínico Universitario’ (Valencia); Aniana Oliet, MD PhD, Hospital ‘Severo Ochoa’ (Leganés).
Background. In patients undergoing peritoneal dialysis (PD), low-calcium dialysate (LCD) has been proposed as the first choice for a better control of renal osteodystrophy. Our aim was to compare the effects on bone metabolism of LCD (calcium: 1.25 mmol/l) with that of a standard calcium dialysate (SCD; calcium: 1.75 mmol/l).
Methods. Forty-four PD patients were randomized to receive LCD or continue on SCD for a period of 12 months. Bone biopsies were taken at baseline and at 12 months. Biochemical data and treatment were evaluated every 3 months.
Results. Twenty-four patients completed the study. In the SCD group (n = 10), nine out of the 10 patients were initially diagnosed with adynamic bone lesion (ABL). After 1 year, six continued having ABL and three patients moved to high-turnover bone lesion (HTBL). The other patient, initially diagnosed with HTBL, changed to ABL. In the LCD group (n = 14), 10 patients were initially diagnosed with ABL. At 1 year, six of them continued having ABL and four patients changed to HTBL. Four patients were initially diagnosed with HTBL and did not change. Comparison between LCD and SCD groups showed an increase in serum parathyroid hormone (PTH) levels starting at month 3 and a higher intake of calcium salts in the former group (P<0.01). Serum calcium, phosphate levels and bone histological outcome did not differ between the two groups.
Conclusions. LCD use for 1 year was associated with an increase in PTH levels, but did not lead to histological changes different from those observed in SCD group. The LCD solution allowed a higher oral intake of calcium salts with a satisfactory control of the serum Calcium–Phosphorus product.
Keywords: bone biopsy; bone histomorphometry; low-calcium dialysate; peritoneal dialysis; renal osteodystrophy; standard calcium dialysate