老年终末期肾病患者综合保守治疗与透析治疗的存活率比较:倾向得分分析。

IF 3 3区 医学 Q1 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Renal Failure Pub Date : 2024-12-01 Epub Date: 2024-08-30 DOI:10.1080/0886022X.2024.2396448
Kajohnsak Noppakun, Apichat Tantraworasin, Jiraporn Khorana, Surapon Nochaiwong, Surachet Vongsanim, Phoom Narongkiatikhun, Karn Pongsuwan, Prit Kusirisin, Chalongrat Manoree, Chidchanok Ruengorn
{"title":"老年终末期肾病患者综合保守治疗与透析治疗的存活率比较:倾向得分分析。","authors":"Kajohnsak Noppakun, Apichat Tantraworasin, Jiraporn Khorana, Surapon Nochaiwong, Surachet Vongsanim, Phoom Narongkiatikhun, Karn Pongsuwan, Prit Kusirisin, Chalongrat Manoree, Chidchanok Ruengorn","doi":"10.1080/0886022X.2024.2396448","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Initiating dialysis therapy in elderly patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) is a challenging decision. We aimed to examine the mortality rates among elderly patients who underwent hemodialysis, peritoneal dialysis, or comprehensive conservative care. This retrospective cohort study included elderly patients (≥70 years) with ESKD who selected their treatment options from January 2008 to December 2018. Patients were categorized into three groups: hemodialysis, peritoneal dialysis, and comprehensive conservative care. The outcome of interest was all-cause mortality analyzed using flexible parametric survival models. Propensity score analysis with inverse probability treatment weighting technique was performed, incorporating age, Charlson Comorbidity Index score, and estimated glomerular filtration rate. The study included 719 elderly ESKD patients with mean age of 78.2 ± 4.9 years, 52.3% were male, and 60.1% died during the median follow-up period of 22.1 months. In a fully adjusted model, patients receiving comprehensive conservative care (<i>n</i> = 50) had higher mortality rates than those receiving hemodialysis (<i>n</i> = 317) (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 5.60; 95% CI 2.26-13.84, <i>p</i> < 0.001). However, patients who received peritoneal dialysis (<i>n</i> = 352) had a similar mortality rate when compared to those who received hemodialysis (adjusted HR 1.38; 95% CI 0.78-2.44, <i>p</i> = 0.275). The higher mortality rate in the comprehensive conservative care group remained significantly higher than in the hemodialysis group among patients aged ≥80 years (adjusted HR 4.97; 95% CI 1.32-18.80, <i>p</i> = 0.018). Among elderly patients (≥70 years), treatment with dialysis was associated with longer survival rates. This survival advantage persisted in patients aged ≥80 years who chose hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis over comprehensive conservative care.</p>","PeriodicalId":20839,"journal":{"name":"Renal Failure","volume":"46 2","pages":"2396448"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11370684/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Survival rates in comprehensive conservative care compared to dialysis therapy in elderly end-stage kidney disease patients: a propensity score analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Kajohnsak Noppakun, Apichat Tantraworasin, Jiraporn Khorana, Surapon Nochaiwong, Surachet Vongsanim, Phoom Narongkiatikhun, Karn Pongsuwan, Prit Kusirisin, Chalongrat Manoree, Chidchanok Ruengorn\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/0886022X.2024.2396448\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Initiating dialysis therapy in elderly patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) is a challenging decision. We aimed to examine the mortality rates among elderly patients who underwent hemodialysis, peritoneal dialysis, or comprehensive conservative care. This retrospective cohort study included elderly patients (≥70 years) with ESKD who selected their treatment options from January 2008 to December 2018. Patients were categorized into three groups: hemodialysis, peritoneal dialysis, and comprehensive conservative care. The outcome of interest was all-cause mortality analyzed using flexible parametric survival models. Propensity score analysis with inverse probability treatment weighting technique was performed, incorporating age, Charlson Comorbidity Index score, and estimated glomerular filtration rate. The study included 719 elderly ESKD patients with mean age of 78.2 ± 4.9 years, 52.3% were male, and 60.1% died during the median follow-up period of 22.1 months. In a fully adjusted model, patients receiving comprehensive conservative care (<i>n</i> = 50) had higher mortality rates than those receiving hemodialysis (<i>n</i> = 317) (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 5.60; 95% CI 2.26-13.84, <i>p</i> < 0.001). However, patients who received peritoneal dialysis (<i>n</i> = 352) had a similar mortality rate when compared to those who received hemodialysis (adjusted HR 1.38; 95% CI 0.78-2.44, <i>p</i> = 0.275). The higher mortality rate in the comprehensive conservative care group remained significantly higher than in the hemodialysis group among patients aged ≥80 years (adjusted HR 4.97; 95% CI 1.32-18.80, <i>p</i> = 0.018). Among elderly patients (≥70 years), treatment with dialysis was associated with longer survival rates. This survival advantage persisted in patients aged ≥80 years who chose hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis over comprehensive conservative care.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20839,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Renal Failure\",\"volume\":\"46 2\",\"pages\":\"2396448\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11370684/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Renal Failure\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/0886022X.2024.2396448\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/8/30 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Renal Failure","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0886022X.2024.2396448","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

对终末期肾病(ESKD)老年患者启动透析治疗是一项具有挑战性的决定。我们旨在研究接受血液透析、腹膜透析或综合保守治疗的老年患者的死亡率。这项回顾性队列研究纳入了2008年1月至2018年12月期间选择治疗方案的ESKD老年患者(≥70岁)。患者被分为三组:血液透析、腹膜透析和综合保守治疗。相关结果为全因死亡率,采用灵活的参数生存模型进行分析。采用反概率治疗加权技术进行倾向评分分析,并纳入年龄、夏尔森综合症指数评分和估计肾小球滤过率。研究纳入了 719 名老年 ESKD 患者,平均年龄为 78.2 ± 4.9 岁,52.3% 为男性,60.1% 的患者在中位 22.1 个月的随访期间死亡。在完全调整模型中,接受综合保守治疗的患者(n = 50)死亡率高于接受血液透析的患者(n = 317)(调整后危险比 [HR] 5.60;95% CI 2.26-13.84,p n = 352),而接受血液透析的患者死亡率与接受综合保守治疗的患者相似(调整后危险比 1.38;95% CI 0.78-2.44,p = 0.275)。在年龄≥80 岁的患者中,综合保守治疗组的死亡率仍明显高于血液透析组(调整后 HR 4.97;95% CI 1.32-18.80,p = 0.018)。在老年患者(≥70 岁)中,透析治疗与较长的存活率相关。在选择血液透析或腹膜透析而非综合保守治疗的≥80岁患者中,这种生存优势依然存在。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Survival rates in comprehensive conservative care compared to dialysis therapy in elderly end-stage kidney disease patients: a propensity score analysis.

Initiating dialysis therapy in elderly patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) is a challenging decision. We aimed to examine the mortality rates among elderly patients who underwent hemodialysis, peritoneal dialysis, or comprehensive conservative care. This retrospective cohort study included elderly patients (≥70 years) with ESKD who selected their treatment options from January 2008 to December 2018. Patients were categorized into three groups: hemodialysis, peritoneal dialysis, and comprehensive conservative care. The outcome of interest was all-cause mortality analyzed using flexible parametric survival models. Propensity score analysis with inverse probability treatment weighting technique was performed, incorporating age, Charlson Comorbidity Index score, and estimated glomerular filtration rate. The study included 719 elderly ESKD patients with mean age of 78.2 ± 4.9 years, 52.3% were male, and 60.1% died during the median follow-up period of 22.1 months. In a fully adjusted model, patients receiving comprehensive conservative care (n = 50) had higher mortality rates than those receiving hemodialysis (n = 317) (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 5.60; 95% CI 2.26-13.84, p < 0.001). However, patients who received peritoneal dialysis (n = 352) had a similar mortality rate when compared to those who received hemodialysis (adjusted HR 1.38; 95% CI 0.78-2.44, p = 0.275). The higher mortality rate in the comprehensive conservative care group remained significantly higher than in the hemodialysis group among patients aged ≥80 years (adjusted HR 4.97; 95% CI 1.32-18.80, p = 0.018). Among elderly patients (≥70 years), treatment with dialysis was associated with longer survival rates. This survival advantage persisted in patients aged ≥80 years who chose hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis over comprehensive conservative care.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Renal Failure
Renal Failure 医学-泌尿学与肾脏学
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
13.30%
发文量
374
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Renal Failure primarily concentrates on acute renal injury and its consequence, but also addresses advances in the fields of chronic renal failure, hypertension, and renal transplantation. Bringing together both clinical and experimental aspects of renal failure, this publication presents timely, practical information on pathology and pathophysiology of acute renal failure; nephrotoxicity of drugs and other substances; prevention, treatment, and therapy of renal failure; renal failure in association with transplantation, hypertension, and diabetes mellitus.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信