Dialysis as bridge therapy for renal transplantation single center experience, a comparison of hemodialysis and continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis

• Published in: Nihon Jinzo Gakkai shi Vol. 47; no. 7; pp. 813 - 820
• Main Authors: MITOME, Jun, YAMAMOTO, Hiroyasu, KATO, Naohiko, HAYAKAWA, Hiroshi, IKEDA, Masato, YOKOYAMA, Keitaro, NAKAYAMA, Masaaki, KAWAGUCHI, Yoshindo, HOSOYA, Tatsuo
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: Japanese
• Published: Japan Japanese Society of Nephrology 2005
• Subjects: Adult; Age Factors; Female; Graft Rejection - epidemiology; Graft Survival; Humans; Incidence; Kidney Failure, Chronic - therapy; kidney transplantation; Kidney Transplantation - adverse effects; Living Donors; Male; peritoneal dialysis; Peritoneal Dialysis, Continuous Ambulatory - statistics & numerical data; Prognosis; Renal Dialysis - statistics & numerical data
• ISSN: 0385-2385; 1884-0728
• DOI: 10.14842/jpnjnephrol1959.47.813

Background: Kidney transplantation is the most ideal treatment in renal replacement therapy for patients with end-stage renal disease. However, the prevalence of transplantation is extremely low and most patients with ESRD should continue dialysis for their whole life. Recently, high transposition rate of renal transplantation from peritoneal dialysis (PD) was reported, however, it was unclear whether a difference in dialytic modality can influence the outcome. Therefore, we evaluated the influence of dialytic modality on the rate of kidney transplantation and outcome in our single center. Methods: Forty-two kidney transplants were carried among 1, 573 dialysis patients from the years 1986 to 2004 in our center. Transposition rates from two modalities (HD and PD) and graft survival were compared. The incidence of acute rejection episode, complications after receiving transplantations, and coexisting diseases were also evaluated between the two modalities prior to transplantation. Result: The number of patients who received HD was larger than PD (HD 77.1%, PD 22.9%, respectively). Forty-two patients undergoing dialytic therapy received a living-donor kidney transplantation. Overall graft survival was 92% at 5 years and 75% at 10 years. Among these cases, dialytic modality prior to transplantation was 57.1% in HD, and 42.9% in PD. The transfer rate from PD to transplantation was significantly (p=0.0036) higher (4.7%) than that of HD (1.9%). The reason for the high transfer rate of PD patients might be cooperation with their family and the provision of relevant information by nephrologists during PD. There were no differences between the two modalities prior to transplantation in the graft survival rate, incidence of acute rejection, and complications before and after transplantation. Conclusion: Difference in pre-transplant dialysis modality did not affect the outcomes, however, the transfer rate from PD was significantly higher than from HD. Accordingly, PD is useful compared to HD as bridge therapy for kidney transplantation from the high feasibility of living donor kidney transplantation.