PDI
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Perit Dial Int 14(2): 155-158 1994
© 1994 International Society for Peritoneal Dialysis
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Holley, J.
Right arrow Articles by Piraino, B
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Holley, J.
Right arrow Articles by Piraino, B
Peritoneal Dialysis International, Vol 14, Issue 2, 155-158
Copyright © 1994 by International Society for Peritoneal Dialysis


Articles

Careful patient selection and dialysis prescription are required for effective nightly intermittent peritoneal dialysis

JL Holley and B Piraino

Renal-Electrolyte Division, University of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the adequacy of dialysis in patients on nighttime intermittent peritoneal dialysis (NIPD). DESIGN: Retrospective review of prospectively collected data. PATIENTS: Seven patients on NIPD. MEASUREMENTS: The fast peritoneal equilibration test (PET) was used to determine peritoneal membrane permeability for small solutes. Adequacy of dialysis measured by 24-hour collections of dialysate and urine for weekly KT/V and creatinine clearance in liters/week/1.73 m2 was assessed in patients with (n = 3) and without (n = 4) residual renal function and evaluated in concert with the patient's clinical status. Outcome for each patient was also noted. RESULTS: Five of the patients had a high-average dialysate/serum creatinine by PET ( > 0.66). Despite a weekly KT/V of 1.7 or more, four of the seven patients on NIPD were uremic and either transferred to hemodialysis or continuous cycling peritoneal dialysis (CCPD). A fifth patient had a KT/V of 1.4 and was also uremic on NIPD. The patient who was clinically well and continued on NIPD had significant residual renal function. CONCLUSIONS: NIPD should be restricted to patients with high-average dialysate/serum creatinine as determined by PET and residual renal function or those with high dialysate/serum creatinine. Extended dialysis time and large volumes of dialysate are required for successful NIPD in patients without residual renal function. Accepted parameters of dialysis adequacy used for patients on continuous peritoneal dialysis are not appropriate for intermittent forms of peritoneal dialysis.







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Multimed Inc. logo
Copyright © 1994 by Multimed Inc.