MO696INCREMENTAL PERITONEAL DIALYSIS: BENEFICIAL EFFECTS
Authors: Fernandes Adriana , Carvão João , Veríssimo Rita , Branco Patrícia , Matias Patricia , Calça Rita , Martins Ana Rita 
Published: May 2021

Background and Aims

Incremental peritoneal dialysis (Incr_Dial) is a renal replacement therapy strategy based on lower dose prescription rather than the standard “full dose” (Full_Dial). Individualized clearance goals were achieved combining residual renal function (RRF) and peritoneal clearance. Maintaining RRF is a crucial issue to peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients and the best PD strategy to preserve it is subject to debate. The aim of this study is to compare Incr_Dial and Full_Dial in terms of RRF preservation and other clinical outcomes.

Method

This was a single-center, retrospective descriptive study. We included a cohort of incident and prevalent adult PD patients in the PD Unit between January – December of 2020. Patients without a follow-up &lt; six months and who started PD at another center were excluded. Patients were assigned according to their first PD protocol in two groups – Group A: Incr_Dial protocol (continuous ambulatory PD: less than four dwells daily, less than 2 L dwell volumes, less than seven days a week treatment, or some combination of these; automated PD: without a long dwell, less than 10 L daily delivered by cycler and day dwells, treatment for less than 7 days a week or some combination of these); Group B: Full_Dial protocol. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 20.0. Statistical significance level p &lt;0.05.

Results

Among 84 PD patients, 68% underwent incremental PD (Group A) and 31% underwent conventional full-dose PD (Group B). The mean age was 55.9±15.4 years, 60.7% were male and 32.5% diabetic. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups regarding: demographic characteristics, comorbidities (diabetes, hypertension, cardiac insufficiency or ischemic heart disease) and drugs (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers and/or loop diuretics). The median Incr_Dial duration to achieve PD full dose was 10.2 months (IQ 5.1-17).

At the beginning of PD, there was no statistically significant difference in diuresis between both groups (A: 1.79L vs B: 1.2L, p=0.07), however after 6 months of PD there was a superior urinary output in Group A (A: 1.67L vs B: 1.1L, p=0.037). Group A (Incr_Dial) was also associated with a superior renal clearance of creatinine at the beginning (A: 81 L/sem/1.73m2 vs B: 56.8L/sem/1.73m2, p=0.021) and after 12 months (A: 70.7L/sem/1.73m2 vs B: 26.3 L/sem/1.73m2, p&lt;0.01); and superior Kt/V renal/week at the beginning (A: 1.48 vs B: 1.02, p=0.02) and after 12 months (A: 1.28 vs B: 0.49, p&lt;0.001).

There are no differences between mortality (A: 1.9% vs B: 12%, p=0.094), peritonitis-free time (A: 158 days vs B: 236 days, p=0.133) and the numbers of peritonitis per year (A: 0.32 vs B: 0.5, p=0.940). However, the rate of hospital admissions per year was lower in Group A (A: 0.22 vs B: 0.70, p=0.001).

Conclusion

Incremental PD is a safe strategy of renal replacement therapy to start PD. In our PD population, it showed similar patient survival rates and a significantly less hospital admissions. Incremental PD was also beneficial for preserving RRF when compared to full-dose PD.