IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0196769.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Outcome of polycystic kidney disease patients on peritoneal dialysis: Systematic review of literature and meta-analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Vincent Dupont
  • Lukshe Kanagaratnam
  • Mickaël Sigogne
  • Clémence Bechade
  • Thierry Lobbedez
  • Jose Portoles
  • Philippe Rieu
  • Moustapha Drame
  • Fatouma Touré

Abstract

Background: Polycystic kidney disease (PKD) is the most frequent hereditary cause of chronic kidney disease. Peritoneal dialysis (PD) is often avoided for patients with PKD because of the suspected risk of mechanical and infectious complications. Only a few studies have analyzed the outcome of PKD patients on PD with sometimes conflicting results. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to investigate outcomes of patients with PKD treated by PD. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed examining all studies which included “Polycystic kidney disease” and “Peritoneal dialysis” in their titles, excluding commentaries, letters to the authors and abstracts. PubMed, Embase, Google scholar and Scopus were searched to December 31st 2017. The primary outcome was overall patient survival. Additional outcomes were PD technique survival, incidence of peritonitis and incidence of abdominal wall hernia. Results: 9 studies published between 1998 and 2016 were included for analysis with a total of 7,197 patients including 882 PKD patients. Overall survival of PKD patients was found to be better compared to non-PKD patients (HR = 0.70 [95% CI, 0.54–0.92]). There were no statistical differences between PKD and non-PKD patients in terms of peritonitis (OR = 0.86 [95% CI, 0.66–1.12]) and technical survival (HR = 0.98 [95% CI, 0.83–1.16]). There was an increased risk of hernia in PKD patients (OR = 2.28 [95% CI, 1.26–4.12]). Conclusions: PKD is associated with a better global survival, an increased risk of abdominal hernia, but no differences in peritonitis rate or technical survival were found. PD is a safe dialysis modality for PKD patients. Properly designed controlled studies are needed to determine whether all PKD patients are eligible for PD or whether some specific criteria should be determined.

Suggested Citation

  • Vincent Dupont & Lukshe Kanagaratnam & Mickaël Sigogne & Clémence Bechade & Thierry Lobbedez & Jose Portoles & Philippe Rieu & Moustapha Drame & Fatouma Touré, 2018. "Outcome of polycystic kidney disease patients on peritoneal dialysis: Systematic review of literature and meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(5), pages 1-12, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0196769
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0196769
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0196769
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0196769&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0196769?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0196769. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.