糖尿病终末期肾病患者透析方式的探讨

目的比较腹膜透析（PD）及血液透析（HD）对糖尿病终末期肾病患者长期预后的影响,以便为临床选取适当治疗方法提供参考。方法将131例糖尿病终末期肾病患者分为HD组（58例）和PD组（73例）,比较两组患者的血液生化指标、生存率和死亡原因。结果两组患者年龄比较无显著性差异,但大于65岁的老年糖尿病患者PD组明显增多（P〈0．01）。透析第1、第2年两组患者死亡率比较无显著性差异,第3、4年PD组死亡率大幅上升,显著高于HD组（P〈0．01）。HD组18例死亡患者中,年龄大于65岁者4例（22．2％）;PD组29例死亡患者中,年龄大于65岁者17例（58．6％）,两组比较有显著性差异（P〈0．01）。HD组死亡主要原因为脑血管病变（占38．9％）,PD组死亡主要原因为感染（占34．5％）。PD组空腹血糖、甘油三酯、胆固醇均高于HD组,两组比较差异有显著性（P〈0．01）。PD组患者血浆白蛋白、血钾明显低于HD组（P〈0．01）。结论糖尿病终末期肾病患者适于PD,但PD组患者2年以上远期生存率明显低于HD组,尤其是大于65岁高龄糖尿病患者PD死亡率明显上升。腹膜透析相对于血液透析仍存在局限性。     

腹膜透析在终末期糖尿病肾病治疗中的应用

腹膜透析(PD)是终末期糖尿病肾病(ESDN)患者肾脏替代治疗方式之一。但由于使用含糖透析液,透析过程中蛋白丢失、容量超负荷等问题,导致糖尿病肾病PD患者较非糖尿病肾病PD患者更易出现血糖控制不佳、脂代谢紊乱、心血管事件、营养不良、感染和微炎症等并发症。因此在ESDN患者中使用PD并不优于血液透析。     

接受血液透析、腹膜透析治疗的终末期肾病患者左心结构和功能对比观察及左心室肥厚危险因素分析

目的 对比观察接受血液透析（HD）和腹膜透析（PD）的终末期肾病患者左心结构及功能的差异性,分析接受HD和PD的终末期肾病患者左心室肥厚的危险因素。方法 将接受维持性透析的终末期肾病患者分为HD组和PD组,比较两组左心结构指标（LAD、IVST、LVDd、PWT、LVMI）、功能指标（LVEF、E/A）、左心室肥厚患病率,用二元Logistic回归分析接受HD和PD的终末期肾病患者左心室肥厚的危险因素。结果 与PD组比较,HD组LAD、LVDd、PWT、LVMI高（P均<0.05）,左心室肥厚患病率高（P均<0.05）。低甘油三酯、高收缩压是接受HD的终末期肾病患者左心室肥厚的独立危险因素（P均<0.05）;低血清白蛋白、高舒张压、女性是接受PD的终末期肾病患者左心室肥厚的独立危险因素（P均<0.05）。结论 接受维持性透析的终末期肾病患者左心房及左心室均存在心肌重塑;与接受PD的终末期肾病患者比较,接受HD的终末期肾病患者左心室舒张功能减退更严重,左心室肥厚患病率高。接受HD的终末期肾病患者左心室肥厚的独立危险因素是低甘油三酯、高收缩压;接受PD的终末期肾病患...     

血液及腹膜透析对肾性骨病患者血清生化指标的影响

目的探讨血液透析（HD）及腹膜透析（PD）对终末期肾病患者骨代谢血清生化指标的影响。方法将患者按所采用的透析方式随机分为HD组及PD组,分别检测两组患者血清骨碱性磷酸酶（BALP）、抗酒石酸酸性磷酸酶（TRAP5b）、钙、磷、全段甲状旁腺激素（iPTH）及骨密度。结果 HD组及PD组之间钙、磷及iPTH、BALP差异均无统计学意义;与PD组比较,HD组血清TRAP5b水平高,在腰椎部位的骨密度低（P〈0.05）。结论 PD治疗对于肾性骨病血清破骨细胞活性的指标及腰椎骨密度控制情况优于HD治疗。     

59例老年透析患者心血管并发症的危险因素

目前维持性血液透析(HD)和腹膜透析(PD)已成为终末期糖尿病肾病(DN)的有效治疗手段.一般认为对老年糖尿病患者来说,PD较HD好,但近年有研究发现,DN患者接受PD治疗的远期死亡危险性较接受HD治疗者高,其原因尚不清楚.缺血性心脏病、充血性心衰、动脉粥样硬化性心血管病统称为动脉粥样硬化性心血管疾病(ASCVD)[1],是影响透析患者远期生存率的重要因素之一.     

老年糖尿病终末期肾病血液透析和腹膜透析的比较

目的 比较老年糖尿病终末期肾病（DNESRD）血液透析（HD）和腹膜透析（PD）的疗效。方法 观察51例老年DNESRD（HD31例和PD20例）治疗前后血压、心功能、血脂、体重、尿量、超滤量、肾功能变化，分析透析充分性及临床转归。结果 两组治疗后体重、尿量、血压均下降，其中体重和尿量下降以HD组明显（P〈0．05）；治疗后两组心功能均明显改善，但组间比较无差异；治疗后两组BUN、Cr、K、P下降，以HD组BUN、Cr下降更明显（P〈0．05）；PD组治疗后血脂升高；两组治疗后RBC、Hb、TP、ALB上升，其中PD组RBC、Hb上升更明显（P〈0．05）；HD组透析充分性（KT／V）更佳，每周超滤量较PD组多，但残余肾功能下降更快；HD组存活时间较PD组长，但脑出血、心脏病发病率较PD组高。结论 HD和PD是治疗DNESRD的两种有效方法，两者各有优缺点，其中HD较PD治疗更充分，但对于有严重心脏病或脑出血的病人应首选PD。     

终末期糖尿病肾病患者持续性非卧床腹膜透析与血液透…

目的：研究糖尿病终末期肾病（ＥＳＲＤ）患者的透析治疗，选择血液透析（ＨＤ）好还是持续性非卧床腹膜透析（ＣＡＰＤ）好。 方法：观察了８例接受透析治疗的糖尿病ＥＳＲＤ患者，其中５２例进行ＨＤ治疗，１６例进行ＣＡＰＤ治疗。对比两组患者透析前后的血液生化指标、生存率、死亡原因、血糖的控制、透析后主要并发症。 结果：６０岁以下ＨＤ或ＣＡＰＤ治疗患者３年生存率均达７５％以上。但透析前合并有高血压、心脏肥大、冠     

腹膜透析联合血液透析对老年终末期肾病患者心功能的影响

目的探讨腹膜透析联合血液透析对老年终末期肾病(ESRD)患者心功能的影响。方法 ESRD患者50例依据治疗方法不同分为腹膜透析组、血液透析组各16例,联合组18例。观察三组治疗前后心功能、尿素清除指数(KT/V)、肾脏形态大小、各项生化指标及并发症发生情况等。结果治疗前三组左心室射血分数(LVEF)、肾脏形态大小、白蛋白(ALB)、血红蛋白(Hb)、血清尿素氮(BUN)、血清肌酐(Scr)、三酰甘油(TG)、高密度脂蛋白胆固醇(HDL-C)水平差异无统计学意义(P0.05);治疗后联合组LVEF、KT/V显著优于血液透析组、腹膜透析组,同时联合组肾脏形态大小显著优于血液透析组(P0.05);治疗后联合组ALB、Hb水平显著优于血液透析组,同时联合组ALB、Hb、BUN、Scr、TG、HDL-C测定结果均显著优于腹膜透析组(P0.05);联合组相关并发症发生率显著低于腹膜透析组、血液透析组(P0.05)。结论腹膜透析与血液透析联合治疗利于改善老年ESRD患者心功能,延缓肾衰竭,降低相关并发症,对延缓病症进展与提升生存率影响重大。     

维持性血液透析治疗糖尿病肾病的临床疗效分析

目的探究维持性血液透析对于治疗糖尿病肾病的临床疗效。方法选取2014年6月—2015年8月来该院进行肾脏替代治疗的96例糖尿病肾病患者作为研究对象,随机将其分为观察组(48例)和对照组(48例),观察组采用维持性血液透析治疗,对照组采用腹膜透析治疗。对两组患者的临床治疗效果及并发症的发生情况进行比较。结果观察组患者的总有效率同对照组相等,差异无统计学意义(P0.05);观察组患者并发症的发生率显著低于对照组(P0.05)。结论同腹膜透析治疗相比,维持性血液透析治疗改善患者肾功能和临床症状的效果同样值得肯定,且患者的并发症发生率低,因而值得在糖尿病肾病的晚期治疗中推广应用。     

腹膜透析联合血液透析治疗终末期肾病:一种新的治疗模式

残余肾功能(RRF)对持续不卧床腹膜透析(CAPD)治疗患者(RRF)生存质量及生存率至关重要.随着透析时间的延长,腹膜透析(PD)患者的RRF逐渐下降或丢失使患者出现透析不充分的临床症状.此外,腹膜超滤功能衰竭也是导致患者退出PD的主要原因之一.此时,如选择每日PD联合1次/周血液透析(HD)的治疗方案,既可达到清除毒素和水分的目的,也能提高患者生活质量、减少医疗费用.本文就PD联合HD治疗终末期肾病这一新疗法作一简述.     

Clinical outcome of diabetic peritoneal dialysis patients and evaluation of factors affecting mortality: a single centre's experience from Turkey

The purpose of this study is to analyse the outcome of the diabetic peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients and compare the findings of those remaining on treatment with those who withdrew from treatment. Participants were 61 patients starting PD between 2001 and 2009, data were evaluated retrospectively. PD treatment was withdrawn in 48 patients forming Group 1 = drop-out; 26 F, mean age 59 ± 13 years; 13 patients in Group 2 = treatment; 4 F, mean age 50 ± 10 years, still receiving PD therapy. Demographics, laboratory and blood pressure data were compared in both groups. The causes for withdrawal were: death (54%), transfer to HD (33%), other causes (13%). Most frequent cause of death: cardiac events (57.7%), peritonitis and/or sepsis (38,4%). Transfer to HD - peritonitis (50%), insufficient PD (50%). Most frequent cause of peritonitis was Staph. Aureus in 42 instances in Group 1. We found positive correlation between mortality and age (p:0.008, r:0,345) and negative correlation between mortality and follow-up time, pretreatment albumin, calcium and PTH, systolic and diastolic BP in the last follow-up appointment. Cardiovascular events and peritonitis were the most important causes of withdrawal of patients. The presence of hypo-parathyroidaemia, hypocalcaemia and hypo-albuminaemia were associated with mortality.     

血液透析和腹膜透析患者死亡原因分析及比较

目的:分析血液净化患者的死亡原因,并比较血液透析(HD)和腹膜透析(PD)患者的死因差异.方法:纳入2005-01-01至2008-12-31期间新进入透析的患者,随访至2009-03-31.结果:460例透析患者中,247例起始采用HD治疗,213例起始采用PD治疗.HD组男性比例和血肌酐显著较高,而PD组基础疾病为高血压肾病比例显著较高,其余基线资料包括透始年龄、体重指数、透析前已知的肾功能不全病程、首次透析治疗前eGFR、平均动脉压、心脑血管事件、Charlson并发症指数等两组间均无明显统计学差异.共87例死亡患者,其中HD患者40例,PD患者47例.HD总体死亡率低于PD患者(0.102和0.171/患者年,P＜0.01).HD 1年死亡率与PD患者无显著差异(0.133和0.196/患者年,P＞0.05),HD 2年死亡率低于PD患者(0.101和0.170/患者年,P＜0.05),HD 3年死亡率低于PD患者(0.101和0.165/患者年,P＜0.05).透析患者的主要死亡原因为心血管疾病(31.0%)、脑血管疾病(21.8%)、感染(16.1%).PD患者心血管病因死亡率显著高于HD患者(0.064和0.022/患者年,P＜0.01),而两组的脑血管疾病、感染、多脏器衰竭和恶性肿瘤导致的死亡率均无显著差异.年龄＜65岁患者中,HD总体死亡率与PD无显著差异,两组患者的心血管疾病、脑血管疾病、感染、多脏器衰竭和恶性肿瘤死亡率均无显著差异.年龄≥65岁患者中,HD总体死亡率低于PD(0.179和0.378/患者年,P＜0.05),PD患者心血管疾病死亡率高于HD患者(0.164和0.004/患者年,P＜0.05),两组患者的脑血管疾病、感染、多脏器衰竭和恶性肿瘤死亡率均尤显著差异.透析龄≤1年患者中,HD总体死亡率与PD患者无显著差异;PD患者多脏器衰竭导致的死亡率显著高于HD患者(0.082和0.000/患者年,P＜0.05),而两组的心血管疾病、脑血管疾病、感染和恶性肿瘤导致的死亡率均无显著差异.透析龄＞1年患者中,HD总体死亡率与PD患者无显著差异;PD患者心血管病因死亡率高于HD患者(0.026和0.006/患者年,P＜0.05),感染导致的死亡率显著高于HD患者(0.013和0.000/患者年,P＜0.05),两组的脑血管疾病、多脏器衰竭、恶性肿瘤导致的死亡率均无显著差异.结论:透析患者最主要的死因为心、脑血管疾病和感染.HD总体死亡率可能低于PD,尤其是心血管疾病和感染导致的死亡率.应该强调透析患者的心脑血管并发症和感染的防治,以提高透析质量,改善长期预后.     

Peritonealdialyse

Peritoneal dialysis (PD) is a modern kidney replacement option capable of meeting the high demands placed on the desired quality of life in a home therapy setting. Survival probability is comparable between hemodialysis (HD) and PD and some retrospective analyses have even proven lower mortality in the first years of PD. Especially diabetics benefit from PD as the initial dialysis treatment because it offers a better quality of life, better preservation of residual renal function, less electrolyte disorders, no complications due to fistulas for HD and less hypotensive periods. Higher peritoneal glucose absorption needs to be treated with equivalent insulin therapy according to the specific regimen to achieve adequate blood sugar control. It is recommended to treat diabetics with a stable PD regimen and especially in case of diabetes patients may benefit from modern glucose-free PD solutions. Oral antidiabetics play a minor role due to renal elimination and the risk of hyoglycemia. Standard therapy for diabetics is subcutaneous insulin rather than intraperitoneal administration.     

Kontinuierliche ambulante und automatisierte Peritonealdialyse

Peritoneal dialysis (PD) and hemodialysis (HD) are different but equivalent dialysis methods. Several studies have shown better survival using PD compared to HD in the first 2–3 years of treatment. After several years, mortality increases for PD compared to HD patients. Several recent studies support the concept of integrated care (starting with PD and switching to HD). Better preservation of residual renal function using PD and sparing of the veins of the arm for later use for a shunt, and lack of cardiac stress with an AV-shunt are important arguments for starting dialysis with PD. It is very important to find the right time for switching to HD for each individual patient. Criteria for switching are inadequate ultrafiltration and clearance of uremic toxins. There are few contra-indications for PD.     

Nierenersatztherapie bei Diabetes mellitus

Diabetes patients with advanced renal failure profit from a structured care combining early referral to a nephrologist with different options of renal replacement therapy. Kidney transplantation (preemptively) is currently only available in exceptional cases. Decision-making for dialysis includes patient preferences, medical and social aspects. Peritoneal dialysis (PD) is an option in cases with limited life expectancy, initial treatment before hemodialysis (HD) and as a bridging to transplantation. Integrated care includes a timely switch from PD to HD while using the initial advantages of PD (improved survival of initial treatment period, better quality of life and prolonged residual renal function). Supportive care to avoid disease-specific complications, such as amputation, infection, cardiac infarction, stroke and depression, is a cornerstone in the improvement of survival for diabetic patients undergoing renal replacement therapy.     

Peripheral artery disease in peritoneal dialysis and hemodialysis patients: single-center retrospective study in Taiwan

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Peripheral artery disease (PAD) is a condition characterized by restricted blood flow to the extremities, and is especially common in the elderly. PAD increases the risk for mortality and morbidity in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD), especially those on hemodialysis (HD). METHODS: The records of 484 patients with end-stage renal disease who were on HD or peritoneal dialysis (PD) were reviewed. PAD was diagnosed based on the ankle-brachial pressure index (ABI). Demographic and clinical characteristics were analyzed. RESULTS: PAD had an overall prevalence of 18.2% and was significantly more common in HD patients (21.8%) than in PD patients (4.8%). Advanced age, diabetes mellitus, smoking, low parathyroid hormone level, elevated serum ferritin, elevated serum glucose, and low serum creatinine levels increased the risk for PAD. PAD was independently associated with advanced age, diabetes mellitus, duration of dialysis, low serum creatinine, and hyperlipidemia. PD patients had a significantly lower prevalence of PAD than HD patients, maybe due to their younger age and lower prevalence of diabetes mellitus in this present study. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of PAD was greater in the HD group than the PD group. Most of the risk factors for PAD were specific to HD, and no analyzed factor was significantly associated with PAD in PD patients.     

Nodular glomerular lesion: a later stage of diabetic nephropathy?

BACKGROUND: Two typical pathological changes can develop in the type 2 diabetic nephropathy: one is diffuse glomerulosclerosis (DIF) and the other is nodular glomerular lesion (NOD). The aim of this study is to retrospectively investigate these two types of diabetic nephropathy and compare the characteristics of clinical findings and prognosis. METHODS: One hundred and twenty-four patients with biopsy-proven diabetic nephropathy, including 58 DIF and 66 NOD were investigated in this study. Clinical data were registered for each patient: age, sex, diabetes duration, hypertension duration, body mass index (BMI), and laboratory tests included: glycosylated hemoglobin, plasma albumin, plasma cholesterol and triglycerides, serum creatinine, proteinuria, urine osmole, urine N-acetyl-beta-D-glucosaminidase (NAG) enzyme and creatinine clearance rate (Ccr). Furthermore, the 1- and 5-year renal survival rates were analysed and compared. RESULTS: (1) Compared with DIF patients, NOD patients had a longer duration of diabetic mellitus, and higher levels of proteinuria and NAG enzyme, along with lower BMI, Ccr and plasma albumin levels (p<0.01). (2) In the NOD cases, there were 90% presented diabetic retinopathy; while in the DIF cases, there were 14% presented diabetic retinopathy. (3) In the DIF patients, the 1- and 5-year renal survival rates were 96 and 78%, respectively, while in the NOD patients, the rates were 86 and 18%, respectively (p<0.01). CONCLUSION: The NOD patients had longer diabetic durations, more severe renal damage, and exhibit a poorer renal prognosis. Furthermore, the NOD patients revealed more frequently evidence of diabetic retinopathy.     

A comparative assessment of survival between propensity score-matched patients with peritoneal dialysis and hemodialysis in Taiwan

Studies comparing mortality for Asian populations with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) on hemodialysis (HD) and peritoneal dialysis (PD) are limited. We compared mortality between patients treated with PD and HD in Taiwan, the population with the highest incidence of ESRD worldwide. Using the population-based insurance claims data of Taiwan from 1997 to 2006, we identified 4721 patients treated with PD and randomly selected 4721 patients treated with HD who were frequency-matched to the PD patients based on their propensity scores. In follow-up analyses we measured mortalities and hazard ratios associated with comorbidities in 2 different 5-year cohorts (1997-2001 and 2002-2006).In the 10-year period from 1997 to 2006, the overall mortality rates were similar in patients treated with PD and in patients treated with HD (12.0 vs. 11.7 per 100 person-years, respectively), with a PD-to-HD hazard ratio of 1.02 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.96-1.08). In the first 5-year period (1997-2001), the hazard ratio for mortality was higher for PD (1.33; 95% CI, 1.21-1.46), but there was no difference between PD and HD in the 2002-2006 cohort. Of note, younger patients who received PD had better survival than younger patients who received HD; this was especially true for patients aged younger than 40 years.In summary, in this Asian population, no significant survival differences were noted between propensity score-matched PD and HD patients. The selection of a dialysis modality must be tailored to the individual patient. Studies in which patients who are appropriate for either modality are randomly assigned to HD or PD may provide helpful information to clinicians and patients.     

维生素C对糖尿病肾病大鼠肾功能保护的作用机制

目的 探讨维生素C对糖尿病肾病（DN）大鼠肾功能的保护作用机制。方法 利用链脲佐菌素腹腔注射法诱导建立DN大鼠模型,将其随机分为维生素C治疗组（A组）、不用维生素C治疗组（B组）;并与正常对照组比较。观察治疗期间大鼠的一般状况、血糖、尿素氮（BUN）、血肌酐（SCr）、肾小球滤过率（GFR）、24h尿白蛋白排泄率（UAE）。结果 ①造模组大鼠均出现肾脏功能损害。②维生素C对血糖无影响,但能降低DN大鼠的BUN、SCr、24hUAE,增加GFR。结论 维生素C无糖作用,但有确切的肾脏功能保护作用。