TY - JOUR
T1 - Multicenter registry analysis of center characteristics associated with technique failure in patients on incident peritoneal dialysis
AU - Htay, Htay
AU - Cho, Yeoungjee
AU - Pascoe, Elaine M.
AU - Darssan, Darsy
AU - Nadeau-Fredette, Annie Claire
AU - Hawley, Carmel
AU - Clayton, Philip A.
AU - Borlace, Monique
AU - Badve, Sunil V.
AU - Sud, Kamal
AU - Boudville, Neil
AU - McDonald, Stephen P.
AU - Johnson, David W.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2017 by the American Society of Nephrology.
PY - 2017/7/7
Y1 - 2017/7/7
N2 - 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 treatedwith peritoneal dialysis (>29%; adjusted hazard ratio, 0.83; 95%confidence interval, 0.73 to 0.94) andmore likely insmaller centers (<16newpatientsper year; adjustedhazard 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, automatedperitoneal dialysis exposure, icodextrin use, andantifungal use. The variation of hazards of technique failure across centerswas reducedby 28%after adjusting forpatient-specific factors andan additional 53% after adding center-specific factors. Conclusions Technique failurevarieswidelyacross centers inAustralia.Asignificantproportionof thisvariationis 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.
AB - 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 treatedwith peritoneal dialysis (>29%; adjusted hazard ratio, 0.83; 95%confidence interval, 0.73 to 0.94) andmore likely insmaller centers (<16newpatientsper year; adjustedhazard 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, automatedperitoneal dialysis exposure, icodextrin use, andantifungal use. The variation of hazards of technique failure across centerswas reducedby 28%after adjusting forpatient-specific factors andan additional 53% after adding center-specific factors. Conclusions Technique failurevarieswidelyacross centers inAustralia.Asignificantproportionof thisvariationis 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.
KW - Anti-bacterial agents
KW - Australia
KW - Glucans
KW - Glucose
KW - Hemoglobins
KW - Hospitalization
KW - Humans
KW - Icodextrin
KW - New Zealand
KW - Peritoneal dialysis
KW - Peritonitis
KW - Phosphates
KW - Registries
KW - Renal dialysis
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85022069043
U2 - 10.2215/CJN.12321216
DO - 10.2215/CJN.12321216
M3 - Article
C2 - 28637862
AN - SCOPUS:85022069043
SN - 1555-9041
VL - 12
SP - 1090
EP - 1099
JO - Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology
JF - Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology
IS - 7
ER -