Background:

There is an ongoing increasing focus on person‑centered individualized dialysis prescription. For this model, incremental peritoneal dialysis has been established as a strategy to start peritoneal dialysis, with an intention to increase the dose of peritoneal dialysis, as a consequence of renal clearance declines. In spite of being broadly accepted, the evidence of non‑inferiority of the incremental approach in comparison with full dose peritoneal dialysis is weak. To disclose the possibility and safety of an incremental approach in incident patients, we assessed patients and technique survival (main outcomes) between incremental and full dose peritoneal dialysis. We also compared the effects in the clinical parameters of adequacy, urinary output and peritonitis incidence in both approaches.

Methods:

Following a retrospective design, we undertook an observational study in our center over 20 years. We investigated 106 patients divided into two groups, according to initial peritoneal dialysis strategy (incremental or full dose). We used multivariate multinomial model to assess predictors of peritonitis. The main outcomes were studies using a competing risk model.

Results:

One year after peritoneal dialysis start, our data disclosed statistically significant differences of phosphatemia and solute removal between full dose and incremental approach, favoring the latter. In an incremental approach, two or more peritoneal infections and drop out to hemodialysis were less usual.

Conclusions:

Incremental peritoneal prescription seems to be a good choice to start peritoneal dialysis. Potential benefits and, above all, safety reinforce the adoption of incremental peritoneal dialysis in incident patients as a strategy of individualized care, in compliance with new guidelines.

        · text in English     · English ( pdf )