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


     


Perit Dial Int 9(3): 165-168 1989
© 1989 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 Viglino, G
Right arrow Articles by et, al.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Viglino, G
Right arrow Articles by et, al.
Peritoneal Dialysis International, Vol 9, Issue 3, 165-168
Copyright © 1989 by International Society for Peritoneal Dialysis


Clinical Trial

Prospected randomized study of two Y devices in continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD)

G Viglino, A Colombo, A Scalamogna, PL Cavalli, L Guerra, G Renzetti, C Gandolfo, A De Vecchi, V Barzaghi, P Balteau, and al. et

Servizio di Nefrologia e Dialisi, Ospedale S. Lazzaro, Alba, Italy.

To evaluate acceptability, safety, and efficacy of a Y set with two short branches (TAS) filled with electrolytic chloroxidizer solution during the dwell time, 60 patients were randomly allocated to be treated with the traditional Y set (TCS) or with the TAS. Twenty-three were new patients whereas the remaining 37 were patients already on continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) with the TCS. The follow-up was 416.5 months in the control group and 387.4 months in the test group. During the study period there were 6 peritonitis episodes in each group with an incidence of 1 episode every 69.4 patient-months in the control group and 1 episode every 64.6 patient-months in the test group. Twenty-four patients (80%) in the control group and 27 (90%) in the test group were free from peritonitis. The probability to remain free from peritonitis was respectively 87% and 83% in the test group and in control group after 12 months, 70% and 78% after 21 months. Seventy-nine percent of the patients who used both systems preferred the TAS for better handling, lower encumbrance, and major safety. One patient preferred the TCS, three patients did not find any differences between the two devices.







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Multimed Inc. logo
Copyright © 1989 by Multimed Inc.