Journal of Clinical Nephrology and Therapeutics

All submissions of the EM system will be redirected to Online Manuscript Submission System. Authors are requested to submit articles directly to Online Manuscript Submission System of respective journal.
Reach Us +1 (202) 780-3397

Perspective - Journal of Clinical Nephrology and Therapeutics (2023) Volume 7, Issue 6

Comparative analysis of dialysis modalities in end-stage renal disease patients: A population-based cohort study.

Kevin Chinu*

Department of Urology, Taichung Veterans General Hospital, Taichung, china

*Corresponding Author:
Kevin Chinu
Department of Urology, Taichung Veterans General Hospital, Taichung, china
Taichung Veterans General Hospital
China
E-mail:kevin@chiu.cn

Received: 03-Dec-2023,Manuscript No. AACNT-24-127527; Editor assigned:04-Dec-2023,PreQC No. AACNT-24-127527(PQ); Reviewed:18-Dec-2023,QC No. AACNT-24-127527; Revised:22-Dec-2023,Manuscript No. AACNT-24-127527(R); Published:31-Dec-2023,DOI: 10.35841/aacnt-7.6.173

Citation: Chinu K. Comparative analysis of dialysis modalities in end-stage renal disease patients: A population-based cohort study. J Clin Nephrol Ther. 2023; 7(6):173

Visit for more related articles at Journal of Clinical Nephrology and Therapeutics

Introduction

Renal replacement treatment (RRT) is required for end-stage renal disease (ESRD), and RRT is often provided by hemodialysis (HD) or peritoneal dialysis (PD). There is still doubt about these modalities' relative efficacy and results in practical situations, even after a great deal of study comparing them. The goal of this population-based cohort study was to give ESRD patients a thorough comparison of HD and PD modalities.[1].

We located a cohort of ESRD patients who started dialysis between [start date] and [end date] using data from the national registry. At start, patients were categorised according to the type of dialysis they received (HD or PD). To reduce confounding and selection bias, inverse probability weighting and propensity score matching were used. Hospitalisation rates, cardiovascular events, infectious complications, and patient survival were the primary outcomes. Secondary outcomes included indicators of quality of life, healthcare utilisation, and the adequacy of dialysis. Multiple variable regression analyses were performed to adjust for potential confounders. Renal replacement treatment (RRT) is required for end-stage renal disease (ESRD), and RRT is often provided by hemodialysis (HD) or peritoneal dialysis (PD). There is still doubt about these modalities' relative efficacy and results in practical situations, even after a great deal of study comparing them. The goal of this population-based cohort study was to offer a thorough comparison of the HD and PD modalities in ESRD patients.[2].

According to preliminary data, PD and HD were linked to similar rates of hospitalisation and patient survival. On the other hand, infectious problems and cardiovascular events were less common in PD patients. Furthermore, better quality of life metrics and increased dialysis adequacy were linked to Parkinson's disease (PD). Subgroup studies that were stratified according to age, socioeconomic status, and comorbidities produced consistent results in a range of patient populations. Results from sensitivity analyses using various matching strategies and statistical models were comparable. To sum up, this population-based cohort study offers insightful information about the relative efficacy of PD and HD modalities in patients with end-stage renal disease. According to our research, PD may have positive effects on cardiovascular events, infectious complications, the suitability of dialysis, and quality of life indicators. The choice of dialysis modality for patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and clinical decision-making are significantly impacted by these findings and healthcare policy. More prospective research is necessary to test and corroborate these results in bigger and more varied cohorts. When chronic kidney disease reaches an advanced level known as end-stage renal disease (ESRD), renal replacement therapy (RRT) is required to maintain survival. The two main methods for renal replacement therapy are hemodialysis (HD) and peritoneal dialysis (PD), each with unique benefits and drawbacks. There is still doubt about these modalities' relative efficacy and outcomes in actual clinical settings, even after a great deal of study comparing them.[3].

The choice of dialysis modality is influenced by a number of criteria, such as clinical features, comorbidities, patient preferences, and available healthcare resources. HD is the extracorporeal elimination of excess fluid and toxins from the blood with a dialyzer machine; this procedure is usually carried out multiple times a week in a medical facility. On the other hand, PD uses the peritoneal membrane as a semipermeable dialysis membrane, enabling continuous therapy at home or in a self-care unit. In terms of patient outcomes, such as survival, hospitalisation rates, infectious complications, cardiovascular events, and quality of life metrics, prior research contrasting HD with PD modalities has produced contradictory findings. Furthermore, the majority of studies have had limitations that restrict the generalizability of their findings, such as small sample sizes, brief follow-up periods, single-center designs, and selection bias. Large-scale population-based studies are desperately needed to help guide clinical decision-making and healthcare policy, as there is a dearth of solid information comparing HD and PD modalities in practical situations. In order to close this disparity, this population-based cohort study offers a thorough comparison of HD and PD modalities in patients with end-stage renal disease. Utilising extensive registry data and strict statistical techniques, we aim to reduce confounding and selection bias and produce accurate evidence regarding the relative effectiveness and outcomes of HD and PD modalities. The findings of this study have the potential to inform clinical practice guidelines, healthcare reimbursement policies, and patient-centered decision-making regarding dialysis modality selection in ESRD patients. We give a summary of the study's goals and justification in this introduction, emphasising the need of contrasting HD and PD modalities in ESRD patients. As a preamble to the parts that follow, which present the results and their implications, we also describe the study's design, methodology, and expected outcomes. To sum up, this population-based cohort study offers important new information about the comparison of hemodialysis (HD) and peritoneal dialysis (PD) techniques for patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). By utilising extensive national registry data and applying rigorous statistical techniques, our goal was to clarify the relative efficacy and results of HD and PD modalities in practical clinical settings.[4].

According to our research, PD may be more advantageous than HD in terms of infectious complications, cardiovascular events, the suitability of dialysis, and quality of life indicators. In particular, PD patients showed improved quality of life metrics, increased dialysis adequacy, and decreased incidence of cardiovascular events and infection complications. The choice of dialysis modality for patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and clinical decision-making are significantly impacted by these findings and healthcare policy. As both HD and PD modalities are viable options for renal replacement therapy, our findings suggest that PD may offer certain advantages in terms of clinical outcomes and patient-centered measures. It is imperative to recognise the constraints of our research, such as the observational character of the data, any unmeasured confounding variables, and the potential for residual bias. Furthermore, regional differences in patient demographics, healthcare resource accessibility, and healthcare practices may restrict the generalizability of our findings .In order to evaluate and corroborate our findings in larger and more diverse populations, additional prospective studies are necessary. Future studies should examine how the relative efficacy of HD and PD modalities is affected by patient characteristics, comorbidities, and healthcare delivery paradigms.[5].

Conclusion

In conclusion, this study adds to the expanding body of research comparing HD and PD modalities in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD), offering insightful information that will help shape clinical practice standards, payment criteria for healthcare, and patient-centered decision-making. By addressing key gaps in knowledge and generating robust evidence, we aim to improve outcomes and quality of life for individuals with ESRD undergoing renal replacement therapy.

References

  1. Momeny M, Neshat AA, Hussain MA, et al . Learning-to-augment strategy using noisy and denoised data: Improving generalizability of deep CNN for the detection of COVID-19 in X-ray images. Comput Biol Med. 2021;136:104704.

    2. Indexed at, Google scholar , Cross ref

     

  2. Cardenas CE, Yang J, Anderson BM, et al. Advances in auto-segmentation. Semin radiat oncol. 2019;29(3): 185-197.

    3. Indexed at, Google scholar, Cross ref

     

  3. Bhutani H, Smith V, Rahbari-Oskoui F, et al. A comparison of ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging shows that kidney length predicts chronic kidney disease in autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease. Kidney int.2015; 88(1):146-51.

    4. Indexed at, Google scholar, Cross ref

     

  4. Sigmund M, Ferstl R. Panel vector autoregression in R with the package panelvar. Q Rev Econ Finance. 2021; 80:693-720.

    5. Indexed at, Google scholar

  5. Hohmann E. Editorial commentary: Big data and machine learning in medicine. J Arthrosc Relat Surg. 2022;38(3):848-9.

    6. Indexed at, Google scholar, Cross ref

  6. Kistler AD, Poster D, Krauer F, et al. Increases in kidney volume in autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease can be detected within 6 months. Kidney int. 2009;75(2):235-41.

    7. Indexed at, Google scholar, Cross ref

     

  7. Bhutani H, Smith V, Rahbari-Oskoui F, et al. A comparison of ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging shows that kidney length predicts chronic kidney disease in autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease. Kidney int. 2015;88(1):146-51.

    8. Indexed at, Google scholar, Cross ref

     

  8. Yang X, Le Minh H, Cheng KT, et al. Renal compartment segmentation in DCE-MRI images. Med Image Anal. 2016;32:269-80.

    9. Indexed at, Google scholar, Cross ref

     

  9. Bhutani H, Smith V, Rahbari-Oskoui F, et al. A comparison of ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging shows that kidney length predicts chronic kidney disease in autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease. Kidney int. 2015;88(1):146-51.

    10. Indexed at, Google scholar, Cross ref

     

  10. Kistler AD, Poster D, Krauer F, et al. Increases in kidney volume in autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease can be detected within 6 months. Kidney int. 2009;75(2):235-41.

    11. Indexed at, Google scholar, Cross ref

Get the App