Peritoneal dialysis in patients 75 years of age and older--a 22-year experience.

Ana E Taveras, Amenuve M Bekui, Nancy Gorban-Brennan, Radu Raducu, Fredric O Finkelstein
{"title":"Peritoneal dialysis in patients 75 years of age and older--a 22-year experience.","authors":"Ana E Taveras,&nbsp;Amenuve M Bekui,&nbsp;Nancy Gorban-Brennan,&nbsp;Radu Raducu,&nbsp;Fredric O Finkelstein","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The role of peritoneal dialysis (PD) in the treatment of end-stage renal disease in elderly patients remains unclear. In the United States, PD is used only to a limited extent in that population. There are concerns about technique failure, including physical and psychosocial limitations and the risks of peritonitis. Thus, we retrospectively reviewed our 22 years of experience with patients 75 years of age and older who started on PD. Basic demographic data were collected, and mortality, technique failure, and peritonitis rates were determined. Quality of life (QOL) was assessed using the SF-36 questionnaire, a global QOL assessment, and a depression questionnaire. Among the 235 patients identified (mean age: 79 +/- 4 years; 51% white; 49% female; mean time on PD: 15.8 +/- 11.5 months), technique failure rates at 12 months were not significantly different for the patients 75 years of age older compared with the patients less than 75 years of age. Mortality rates were significantly higher in elderly patients. The peritonitis rate in patients 75 years of age and older was 1 episode in 23.6 patient-months compared with 1 episode in 23 patient-months in younger patients. The most common gram-positive organisms isolated were Staphylococcus epidermidis (38%0) and S. aureus (50%); gram-negative organisms accounted for 22%, and yeasts, 5% of peritonitis episodes. Reasons for transfer to hemodialysis included psychosocial problems (42%) and peritonitis (25%). Not surprisingly, physical component scores on the SF-36 were lower in the older than in the younger patients, but mental component scores on the SF-36 were slightly better in older than in younger patients, and global QOL and depression scores were not different between the groups. Our data suggest that PD is a reasonable modality for elderly patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":7361,"journal":{"name":"Advances in peritoneal dialysis. Conference on Peritoneal Dialysis","volume":"28 ","pages":"84-8"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in peritoneal dialysis. Conference on Peritoneal Dialysis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The role of peritoneal dialysis (PD) in the treatment of end-stage renal disease in elderly patients remains unclear. In the United States, PD is used only to a limited extent in that population. There are concerns about technique failure, including physical and psychosocial limitations and the risks of peritonitis. Thus, we retrospectively reviewed our 22 years of experience with patients 75 years of age and older who started on PD. Basic demographic data were collected, and mortality, technique failure, and peritonitis rates were determined. Quality of life (QOL) was assessed using the SF-36 questionnaire, a global QOL assessment, and a depression questionnaire. Among the 235 patients identified (mean age: 79 +/- 4 years; 51% white; 49% female; mean time on PD: 15.8 +/- 11.5 months), technique failure rates at 12 months were not significantly different for the patients 75 years of age older compared with the patients less than 75 years of age. Mortality rates were significantly higher in elderly patients. The peritonitis rate in patients 75 years of age and older was 1 episode in 23.6 patient-months compared with 1 episode in 23 patient-months in younger patients. The most common gram-positive organisms isolated were Staphylococcus epidermidis (38%0) and S. aureus (50%); gram-negative organisms accounted for 22%, and yeasts, 5% of peritonitis episodes. Reasons for transfer to hemodialysis included psychosocial problems (42%) and peritonitis (25%). Not surprisingly, physical component scores on the SF-36 were lower in the older than in the younger patients, but mental component scores on the SF-36 were slightly better in older than in younger patients, and global QOL and depression scores were not different between the groups. Our data suggest that PD is a reasonable modality for elderly patients.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
75岁及以上患者的腹膜透析- 22年的经验。
腹膜透析(PD)在老年终末期肾病患者治疗中的作用尚不清楚。在美国,PD仅在有限的范围内用于该人群。人们担心技术失败,包括身体和心理限制以及腹膜炎的风险。因此,我们回顾性地回顾了22年来75岁及以上开始接受PD治疗的患者的经验。收集基本人口统计数据,确定死亡率、技术失败率和腹膜炎率。生活质量(QOL)采用SF-36问卷、全球生活质量评估和抑郁问卷进行评估。在确定的235例患者中(平均年龄:79±4岁;51%的白人;49%的女性;平均PD时间:15.8 +/- 11.5个月),75岁以上患者与75岁以下患者在12个月时的技术失败率无显著差异。老年患者的死亡率明显更高。75岁及以上患者的腹膜炎发生率为23.6个患者月1次,而年轻患者为23个患者月1次。最常见的革兰氏阳性菌是表皮葡萄球菌(38%)和金黄色葡萄球菌(50%);革兰氏阴性菌占22%,酵母占5%。转行血液透析的原因包括心理社会问题(42%)和腹膜炎(25%)。毫不奇怪,老年人的SF-36的身体成分得分低于年轻患者,但老年人的SF-36的精神成分得分略好于年轻患者,两组之间的总体生活质量和抑郁评分没有差异。我们的数据表明PD是老年患者的一种合理的治疗方式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Changes in Peritoneal Transport and Peritoneal Damage in Japanese Patients Undergoing Peritoneal Dialysis Using Neutral-pH Dialysate: A Retrospective Cohort Study at Two Centers. Maintaining Peritoneal Dialysis Adequacy: The Process of Incremental Prescription. Comparison of Various Scaling Parameters and Energy Expenditure in Peritoneal Dialysis Patients. Prevention of Peritoneal Dialysis Drop-Out. Accuracy of a Newly-Introduced Oscillometric Device for the Estimation of Arterial Stiffness Indices in Patients on Peritoneal Dialysis: A Preliminary Validation Study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1