4.2 Article

Peritoneal Dialysis for Potential Kidney Transplant Recipients: Pride or Prejudice?

期刊

MEDICINA-LITHUANIA
卷 58, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/medicina58020214

关键词

kidney transplantation; peritoneal dialysis; hemodialysis; patient survival; allograft survival; renal function; delayed graft function; quality of life; outcomes

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Kidney transplantation is the best treatment option for end-stage renal disease, but limited organ supply leads to prolonged dialysis for most candidates. A personalized and flexible approach may be more appropriate, and current data supports the use of peritoneal dialysis over hemodialysis in patients awaiting kidney transplantation.
Kidney transplantation (KT) is recognized as the gold-standard of treatment for patients with end-stage renal disease. Additionally, it has been demonstrated that receiving a pre-emptive KT ensures the best recipient and graft survivals. However, due to an overwhelming discrepancy between the organs available and the patients on the transplant waiting list, the vast majority of transplant candidates require prolonged periods of dialysis before being transplanted. For many years, peritoneal dialysis (PD) and hemodialysis (HD) have been considered competitive renal replacement therapies (RRT). This dualistic vision has recently been questioned by evidence suggesting that an individualized and flexible approach may be more appropriate. In fact, tailored and cleverly planned changes between different RRT modalities, according to the patient's needs and characteristics, are often needed in order to achieve the best results. While home HD is still under scrutiny in this particular setting, current data seems to favor the use of PD over in-center HD in patients awaiting a KT. In this specific population, the demonstrated advantages of PD are superior quality of life, longer preservation of residual renal function, lower incidence of delayed graft function, better recipient survival, and reduced cost.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据