Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Scopus Web of Science® Altmetric
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorJohnson, D.-
dc.contributor.authorBrown, F.-
dc.contributor.authorClarke, M.-
dc.contributor.authorBoudville, N.-
dc.contributor.authorElias, T.-
dc.contributor.authorFoo, M.-
dc.contributor.authorJones, B.-
dc.contributor.authorKulkarni, H.-
dc.contributor.authorLangham, R.-
dc.contributor.authorRanganathan, D.-
dc.contributor.authorSchollum, J.-
dc.contributor.authorSuranyi, M.-
dc.contributor.authorTan, S.-
dc.contributor.authorVoss, D.-
dc.identifier.citationJournal of the American Society of Nephrology, 2012; 23(6):1097-1107-
dc.description.abstractThe clinical benefits of using "biocompatible" neutral pH solutions containing low levels of glucose degradation products for peritoneal dialysis compared with standard solutions are uncertain. In this multicenter, open-label, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial, we randomly assigned 185 incident adult peritoneal dialysis patients with residual renal function to use either biocompatible or conventional solution for 2 years. The primary outcome measure was slope of renal function decline. Secondary outcome measures comprised time to anuria, fluid volume status, peritonitis-free survival, technique survival, patient survival, and adverse events. We did not detect a statistically significant difference in the rate of decline of renal function between the two groups as measured by the slopes of GFR: -0.22 and -0.28 ml/min per 1.73 m(2) per month (P=0.17) in the first year in the biocompatible and conventional groups, respectively, and, -0.09 and -0.10 ml/min per 1.73 m(2) per month (P=0.9) in the second year. The biocompatible group exhibited significantly longer times to anuria (P=0.009) and to the first peritonitis episode (P=0.01). This group also had fewer patients develop peritonitis (30% versus 49%) and had lower rates of peritonitis (0.30 versus 0.49 episodes per year, P=0.01). In conclusion, this trial does not support a role for biocompatible fluid in slowing the rate of GFR decline, but it does suggest that biocompatible fluid may delay the onset of anuria and reduce the incidence of peritonitis compared with conventional fluid in peritoneal dialysis.-
dc.description.statementofresponsibilityDavid W. Johnson, Fiona G. Brown, Margaret Clarke, Neil Boudville, Tony J. Elias, Marjorie W.Y. Foo, Bernard Jones, Hemant Kulkarni, Robyn Langham, Dwarakanathan Ranganathan, John Schollum, Michael Suranyi, Seng H. Tan and David Voss on behalf of the balANZ Trial Investigators-
dc.publisherLippincott Williams & Wilkins-
dc.rightsCopyright © 2012 by the American Society of Nephrology-
dc.subjectbalANZ Trial Investigators-
dc.subjectKidney Failure, Chronic-
dc.subjectBiocompatible Materials-
dc.subjectDialysis Solutions-
dc.subjectKidney Function Tests-
dc.subjectGlomerular Filtration Rate-
dc.subjectTreatment Outcome-
dc.subjectPeritoneal Dialysis-
dc.subjectSeverity of Illness Index-
dc.subjectConfidence Intervals-
dc.subjectRisk Assessment-
dc.subjectSurvival Analysis-
dc.subjectFollow-Up Studies-
dc.subjectCross-Over Studies-
dc.subjectHydrogen-Ion Concentration-
dc.subjectTime Factors-
dc.subjectReference Values-
dc.subjectMiddle Aged-
dc.subjectKaplan-Meier Estimate-
dc.titleEffects of biocompatible versus standard fluid on peritoneal dialysis outcomes-
dc.typeJournal article-
Appears in Collections:Aurora harvest 4
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.