Skip Navigation



NDT Advance Access published online on June 10, 2009
Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation, doi:10.1093/ndt/gfp244
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
24/10/3215    most recent
gfp244v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Fourtounas, C.
Right arrow Articles by Vlachojannis, J. G.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Fourtounas, C.
Right arrow Articles by Vlachojannis, J. G.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author [2009]. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of ERA-EDTA. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org


Intermittent peritoneal dialysis (IPD): an old but still effective modality for severely disabled ESRD patients

Costas Fourtounas, Andreas Hardalias, Periklis Dousdampanis, Eirini Savidaki and Jannis G. Vlachojannis

Department of Internal Medicine-Nephrology, University Hospital of Patras, Patras, Greece

Correspondence and offprint requests to: Costas Fourtounas; E-mail: cfourt{at}usa.net



  Abstract

Background. Hospital-based intermittent peritoneal dialysis (IPD) is an old PD modality applied for as long as 40 h per week using high volumes of PD fluid, but it has almost been abandoned due to its low solute clearances. However, IPD might be the only option for elderly dialysis patients with significant comorbidities, unable to undergo haemodialysis (HD) or PD at home without any assistance, for various reasons.

Methods. We describe our experience with 25 patients aged 71.2 ± 7.5 years with a previous history of HD for 55.4 ± 54 months, dialysed with IPD for more than 3 months. IPD was performed three times weekly for 8–10 h.

Results. Mean values for haematocrit, serum urea, creatinine, sodium, potassium and calcium were comparable with other ESRD populations, whereas there were significantly lower values for albumin (3.2 ± 0.3 mg/dL) and significantly higher values for phosphorus (7.1 ± 1.7 mg/dL) despite the use of phosphate binders. The patients survived for a mean of 16.8 ± 11.5 (3–43) months despite very low solute clearances, as expressed by Kt/V urea (1 ± 0.26) and weekly creatinine clearance (27.2 ± 7.6 L/week). However, by using 22.9 ± 4.5 L of various combinations of isotonic and hypertonic PD fluids, the mean ultrafiltrate was 1854 ± 326 mL per session. There were only two cases of peritonitis, unrelated to IPD per se.

Conclusions. Considering the underlying comorbidities, IPD remains a valuable and effective option with acceptable survival rates, for a special population of ESRD patients not able for various reasons to undergo HD, neither PD at home.

Keywords: peritoneal dialysis; peritoneal dialysis adequacy; peritoneal dialysis modalities; peritoneal dialysis outcomes; ultrafiltration

Received for publication: 6. 8.08
Accepted in revised form: 30. 4.09


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.