Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Scopus Web of Science® Altmetric
Type: Journal article
Title: Multicenter registry analysis of center characteristics associated with technique failure in patients on incident peritoneal dialysis
Author: Htay, H.
Cho, Y.
Pascoe, E.
Darssan, D.
Nadeau-Fredette, A.
Hawley, C.
Clayton, P.
Borlace, M.
Badve, S.
Sud, K.
Boudville, N.
McDonald, S.
Johnson, D.
Citation: Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology, 2017; 12(7):1090-1099
Publisher: American Society of Nephrology
Issue Date: 2017
ISSN: 1555-9041
Statement of
Htay Htay, Yeoungjee Cho, Elaine M. Pascoe, Darsy Darssan, Annie-Claire Nadeau-Fredett, Carmel Hawley, Philip A. Clayton, Monique Borlace, Sunil V. Badve, Kamal Sud, Neil Boudville, Stephen P. McDonald, David W. Johnson
Abstract: Background and objectives: Technique failure is a major limitation of peritoneal dialysis. Our study aimed to identify center- and patient-level predictors of peritoneal dialysis technique failure. Design, setting, participants & measurements: All patients on incident peritoneal dialysis in Australia from 2004 to 2014 were included in the study using data from the Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry. Center- and patient-level characteristics associated with technique failure were evaluated using Cox shared frailty models. Death-censored technique failure and cause-specific technique failure were analyzed as secondary outcomes. Results: The study included 9362 patients from 51 centers in Australia. The technique failure rate was 0.35 (95% confidence interval, 0.34 to 0.36) episodes per patient-year, with a sevenfold variation across centers that was mainly associated with center-level characteristics. Technique failure was significantly less likely in centers with larger proportions of patients treated with peritoneal dialysis (>29%; adjusted hazard ratio, 0.83; 95% confidence interval, 0.73 to 0.94) and more likely in smaller centers (<16 new patients per year; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.10; 95% confidence interval, 1.00 to 1.21) and centers with lower proportions of patients achieving target baseline serum phosphate levels (<40%; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.15; 95% confidence interval, 1.03 to 1.29). Similar results were observed for death-censored technique failure, except that center target phosphate achievement was not significantly associated. Technique failure due to infection, social reasons, mechanical causes, or death was variably associated with center size, proportion of patients on peritoneal dialysis, and/or target phosphate achievement, automated peritoneal dialysis exposure, icodextrin use, and antifungal use. The variation of hazards of technique failure across centers was reduced by 28% after adjusting for patient-specific factors and an additional 53% after adding center-specific factors. Conclusions: Technique failure varies widely across centers in Australia. A significant proportion of this variation is related to potentially modifiable center characteristics, including peritoneal dialysis center size, proportion of patients on peritoneal dialysis, and proportion of patients on peritoneal dialysis achieving target phosphate level.
Keywords: Anti-bacterial agents; Australia; glucans; glucose; hemoglobins; hospitalization; humans; New Zealand; peritoneal dialysis; peritonitis; phosphates; registries; renal dialysis; icodextrin
Rights: Copyright © 2017 by the American Society of Nephrology
DOI: 10.2215/CJN.12321216
Appears in Collections:Aurora harvest 3
Medicine publications

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.