Gustavo Laham, Gervasio Soler Pujol, Jenny Guzman, Natalia Boccia, Anabel Abib, Carlos H Diaz
{"title":"早期开始使用导管进行血液透析可能与更高的死亡率相关:倾向评分分析。","authors":"Gustavo Laham, Gervasio Soler Pujol, Jenny Guzman, Natalia Boccia, Anabel Abib, Carlos H Diaz","doi":"10.1111/sdi.13157","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Deciding when and how to initiate hemodialysis (HD) is still controversial. An early start (ES) seems to show a lack of benefit. \"Lead time bias\" and comorbidities have been associated with different outcomes in ES groups. On the other hand, it is well accepted that the impact the type of vascular access (VA) has on patient survival. Our aim was to evaluate survival with early start (ES) versus late start (LS) on HD, taking into account the vascular access (VA) used.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Between 01/1995 and 06/2018, 503 incidental patients initiated HD at our Dialysis Unit. eGFR was estimated by the CKD-EPI equation. Diabetes mellitus (DM), coronary disease (CD), and peripheral vascular disease (PVD) were considered comorbid conditions. According to eGFR and VA, patients were divided into four groups: G1: ES (eGFR > 7 mL/min) with catheter (ES + C), G2: ES with fistula or graft (F/G) (ES + F/G), G3: LS (eGFR< 7 mL/min) with catheter (LS + C), and G4: LS with F/G (LS + F/G). The cut-off value to define ES or LS was based on median eGFR for these 503 patients. We compared patient's survival rates by Kaplan-Meier and log-rank test. The four groups were compared before and after matching with propensity scores (PS). Cox analysis was performed to determine the impact of predictors of mortality.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Median eGFR was 7 (5.3-9.5) mL/min/1.73 m<sup>2</sup> , median follow-up time was 30.9 (13-50) months, 52.1% had F/G access at entry, and 46.9% died during the observation period. Among the four groups, the ES + C were significantly older, and there were more diabetics and comorbid conditions, while phosphatemia, iPTH, albumin, and hemoglobin were significantly higher in the LS groups. Before propensity score (PS) matching, the ES + C group had a poor survival rate (p < 0.0001), while LS + F/G access had the best survival. After PS, a total of 180 patients were selected in the same four groups and ES + C kept showing a statistically significant poorer survival. Multivariate analysis revealed that ES + C was an independent predictor of mortality.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In this retrospective study, ES + C on HD was associated with a higher mortality rate than LS. This association persisted after PS matching.</p>","PeriodicalId":21675,"journal":{"name":"Seminars in Dialysis","volume":"36 4","pages":"294-302"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Early start hemodialysis with a catheter may be associated with greater mortality: A propensity score analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Gustavo Laham, Gervasio Soler Pujol, Jenny Guzman, Natalia Boccia, Anabel Abib, Carlos H Diaz\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/sdi.13157\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Deciding when and how to initiate hemodialysis (HD) is still controversial. An early start (ES) seems to show a lack of benefit. \\\"Lead time bias\\\" and comorbidities have been associated with different outcomes in ES groups. On the other hand, it is well accepted that the impact the type of vascular access (VA) has on patient survival. Our aim was to evaluate survival with early start (ES) versus late start (LS) on HD, taking into account the vascular access (VA) used.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Between 01/1995 and 06/2018, 503 incidental patients initiated HD at our Dialysis Unit. eGFR was estimated by the CKD-EPI equation. Diabetes mellitus (DM), coronary disease (CD), and peripheral vascular disease (PVD) were considered comorbid conditions. According to eGFR and VA, patients were divided into four groups: G1: ES (eGFR > 7 mL/min) with catheter (ES + C), G2: ES with fistula or graft (F/G) (ES + F/G), G3: LS (eGFR< 7 mL/min) with catheter (LS + C), and G4: LS with F/G (LS + F/G). The cut-off value to define ES or LS was based on median eGFR for these 503 patients. We compared patient's survival rates by Kaplan-Meier and log-rank test. The four groups were compared before and after matching with propensity scores (PS). Cox analysis was performed to determine the impact of predictors of mortality.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Median eGFR was 7 (5.3-9.5) mL/min/1.73 m<sup>2</sup> , median follow-up time was 30.9 (13-50) months, 52.1% had F/G access at entry, and 46.9% died during the observation period. Among the four groups, the ES + C were significantly older, and there were more diabetics and comorbid conditions, while phosphatemia, iPTH, albumin, and hemoglobin were significantly higher in the LS groups. Before propensity score (PS) matching, the ES + C group had a poor survival rate (p < 0.0001), while LS + F/G access had the best survival. After PS, a total of 180 patients were selected in the same four groups and ES + C kept showing a statistically significant poorer survival. Multivariate analysis revealed that ES + C was an independent predictor of mortality.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In this retrospective study, ES + C on HD was associated with a higher mortality rate than LS. This association persisted after PS matching.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21675,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Seminars in Dialysis\",\"volume\":\"36 4\",\"pages\":\"294-302\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Seminars in Dialysis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/sdi.13157\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/4/23 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Seminars in Dialysis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/sdi.13157","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/4/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Early start hemodialysis with a catheter may be associated with greater mortality: A propensity score analysis.
Introduction: Deciding when and how to initiate hemodialysis (HD) is still controversial. An early start (ES) seems to show a lack of benefit. "Lead time bias" and comorbidities have been associated with different outcomes in ES groups. On the other hand, it is well accepted that the impact the type of vascular access (VA) has on patient survival. Our aim was to evaluate survival with early start (ES) versus late start (LS) on HD, taking into account the vascular access (VA) used.
Methods: Between 01/1995 and 06/2018, 503 incidental patients initiated HD at our Dialysis Unit. eGFR was estimated by the CKD-EPI equation. Diabetes mellitus (DM), coronary disease (CD), and peripheral vascular disease (PVD) were considered comorbid conditions. According to eGFR and VA, patients were divided into four groups: G1: ES (eGFR > 7 mL/min) with catheter (ES + C), G2: ES with fistula or graft (F/G) (ES + F/G), G3: LS (eGFR< 7 mL/min) with catheter (LS + C), and G4: LS with F/G (LS + F/G). The cut-off value to define ES or LS was based on median eGFR for these 503 patients. We compared patient's survival rates by Kaplan-Meier and log-rank test. The four groups were compared before and after matching with propensity scores (PS). Cox analysis was performed to determine the impact of predictors of mortality.
Results: Median eGFR was 7 (5.3-9.5) mL/min/1.73 m2 , median follow-up time was 30.9 (13-50) months, 52.1% had F/G access at entry, and 46.9% died during the observation period. Among the four groups, the ES + C were significantly older, and there were more diabetics and comorbid conditions, while phosphatemia, iPTH, albumin, and hemoglobin were significantly higher in the LS groups. Before propensity score (PS) matching, the ES + C group had a poor survival rate (p < 0.0001), while LS + F/G access had the best survival. After PS, a total of 180 patients were selected in the same four groups and ES + C kept showing a statistically significant poorer survival. Multivariate analysis revealed that ES + C was an independent predictor of mortality.
Conclusion: In this retrospective study, ES + C on HD was associated with a higher mortality rate than LS. This association persisted after PS matching.
期刊介绍:
Seminars in Dialysis is a bimonthly publication focusing exclusively on cutting-edge clinical aspects of dialysis therapy. Besides publishing papers by the most respected names in the field of dialysis, the Journal has unique useful features, all designed to keep you current:
-Fellows Forum
-Dialysis rounds
-Editorials
-Opinions
-Briefly noted
-Summary and Comment
-Guest Edited Issues
-Special Articles
Virtually everything you read in Seminars in Dialysis is written or solicited by the editors after choosing the most effective of nine different editorial styles and formats. They know that facts, speculations, ''how-to-do-it'' information, opinions, and news reports all play important roles in your education and the patient care you provide.
Alternate issues of the journal are guest edited and focus on a single clinical topic in dialysis.