PMCC PMCC

Search tips
Search criteria

Advanced
Results 1-2 (2)
 

Clipboard (0)
None

Select a Filter Below

Journals
Authors
Year of Publication
Document Types
author:("coentry, Luis")
1.  Cost Analysis of Hemodialysis and Peritoneal Dialysis Access in Incident Dialysis Patients 
♦ Background: Although several studies have demonstrated the economic advantages of peritoneal dialysis (PD) over hemodialysis (HD), few reports in the literature have compared the costs of HD and PD access. The aim of the present study was to compare the resources required to establish and maintain the dialysis access in patients who initiated HD with a tunneled cuffed catheter (TCC) or an arteriovenous fistula (AVF) and in patients who initiated PD.
♦ Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the 152 chronic kidney disease patients who consecutively initiated dialysis treatment at our institution in 2008 (HD-AVF, n = 65; HD-CVC, n = 45; PD, n = 42). Detailed clinical and demographic information and data on access type were collected for all patients. A comprehensive measure of total dialysis access costs, including surgery, radiology, hospitalization for access complications, physician costs, and transportation costs was obtained at year 1 using an intention-to-treat approach. All resources used were valued using 2010 prices, and costs are reported in 2010 euros.
♦ Results: Compared with the HD-AVF and HD-TCC modalities, PD was associated with a significantly lower risk of access-related interventions (adjusted rate ratios: 1.572 and 1.433 respectively; 95% confidence intervals: 1.253 to 1.891 and 1.069 to 1.797). The mean dialysis access-related costs per patient-year at risk were €1171.6 [median: €608.8; interquartile range (IQR): €563.1 - €936.7] for PD, €1555.2 (median: €783.9; IQR: €371.4 - €1571.7) for HD-AVF, and €4208.2 (median: €1252.4; IQR: €947.9 - €2983.5) for HD-TCC (p < 0.001). In multivariate analysis, total dialysis access costs were significantly higher for the HD-TCC modality than for either PD or HD-AVF (β = -0.53; 95% CI: -1.03 to -0.02; and β = -0.50; 95% CI: -0.96 to -0.04).
♦ Conclusions: Compared with patients initiating HD, those initiating PD required fewer resources to establish and maintain a dialysis access during the first year of treatment.
doi:10.3747/pdi.2011.00309
PMCID: PMC3862096  PMID: 23455977
Cost analysis; health economics; hemodialysis; dialysis access; vascular access; peritoneal catheter
2.  Effects of starting hemodialysis with an arteriovenous fistula or central venous catheter compared with peritoneal dialysis: a retrospective cohort study 
BMC Nephrology  2012;13:88.
Background
Although several studies have demonstrated early survival advantages with peritoneal dialysis (PD) over hemodialysis (HD), the reason for the excess mortality observed among incident HD patients remains to be established, to our knowledge. This study explores the relationship between mortality and dialysis modality, focusing on the role of HD vascular access type at the time of dialysis initiation.
Methods
A retrospective cohort study was performed among local adult chronic kidney disease patients who consecutively initiated PD and HD with a tunneled cuffed venous catheter (HD-TCC) or a functional arteriovenous fistula (HD-AVF) in our institution in the year 2008. A total of 152 patients were included in the final analysis (HD-AVF, n = 59; HD-TCC, n = 51; PD, n = 42). All cause and dialysis access-related morbidity/mortality were evaluated at one year. Univariate and multivariate analysis were used to compare the survival of PD patients with those who initiated HD with an AVF or with a TCC.
Results
Compared with PD patients, both HD-AVF and HD-TCC patients were more likely to be older (p<0.001) and to have a higher frequency of diabetes mellitus (p = 0.017) and cardiovascular disease (p = 0.020). Overall, HD-TCC patients were more likely to have clinical visits (p = 0.069), emergency room visits (p<0.001) and hospital admissions (p<0.001). At the end of follow-up, HD-TCC patients had a higher rate of dialysis access-related complications (1.53 vs. 0.93 vs. 0.64, per patient-year; p<0.001) and hospitalizations (0.47 vs. 0.07 vs. 0.14, per patient-year; p = 0.034) than HD-AVF and PD patients, respectively. The survival rates at one year were 96.6%, 74.5% and 97.6% for HD-AVF, HD-TCC and PD groups, respectively (p<0.001). In multivariate analysis, HD-TCC use at the time of dialysis initiation was the important factor associated with death (HR 16.128, 95%CI [1.431-181.778], p = 0.024).
Conclusion
Our results suggest that HD vascular access type at the time of renal replacement therapy initiation is an important modifier of the relationship between dialysis modality and survival among incident dialysis patients.
doi:10.1186/1471-2369-13-88
PMCID: PMC3476986  PMID: 22916962

Results 1-2 (2)