Propensity-Matched Mortality Comparison of Incident Hemodialysis and Peritoneal Dialysis Patients
Weinhandl ED, Foley RN, Gilbertson DT, Arneson TJ, Snyder JJ, Collins AJ. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2010 Mar;21(3):499-506
Since an RCT comparing survival on hemodialysis vs peritoneal dialysis will likely never be done, this article warrants highlighting. This matched-pair cohort study compared survival of incident hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis patients by intention-to-treat analysis. 6337 patient pairs from a retrospective cohort of 98,875 adults who initiated dialysis in 2003 in the United States were matched. The authors concluded that despite hazard ratio heterogeneity across patient subgroups and nonconstant hazard ratios during the follow-up period, the overall intention-to-treat mortality risk after dialysis initiation was 8% lower for peritoneal dialysis than for matched hemodialysis patients.
Related Articles:
- Similar survival on automated peritoneal dialysis and continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis in a large prospective cohort.
- Survival among Nocturnal home Haemodialysis Patients Compared to Kidney Transplant Recipients.
- Superior survival of high transporters treated with automated versus continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis
Abstract:
Contemporary comparisons of mortality in matched hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis patients are lacking. We aimed to compare survival of incident hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis patients by intention-to-treat analysis in a matched-pair cohort and in subsets defined by age, cardiovascular disease, and diabetes. We matched 6337 patient pairs from a retrospective cohort of 98,875 adults who initiated dialysis in 2003 in the United States. In the primary intention-to-treat analysis of survival from day 0, cumulative survival was higher for peritoneal dialysis patients than for hemodialysis patients (hazard ratio 0.92; 95% CI 0.86 to 1.00, P = 0.04). Cumulative survival probabilities for peritoneal dialysis versus hemodialysis were 85.8% versus 80.7% (P < 0.01), 71.1% versus 68.0% (P < 0.01), 58.1% versus 56.7% (P = 0.25), and 48.4% versus 47.3% (P = 0.50) at 12, 24, 36, and 48 months, respectively. Peritoneal dialysis was associated with improved survival compared with hemodialysis among subgroups with age <65 years, no cardiovascular disease, and no diabetes. In a sensitivity analysis of survival from 90 days after initiation, we did not detect a difference in survival between modalities overall (hazard ratio 1.05; 95% CI 0.96 to 1.16), but hemodialysis was associated with improved survival among subgroups with cardiovascular disease and diabetes. In conclusion, despite hazard ratio heterogeneity across patient subgroups and nonconstant hazard ratios during the follow-up period, the overall intention-to-treat mortality risk after dialysis initiation was 8% lower for peritoneal dialysis than for matched hemodialysis patients. These data suggest that increased use of peritoneal dialysis may benefit incident ESRD patients.
Recent Comments