| Title |
Survival and time-to-transplantation of peritoneal dialysis versus hemodialysis for end-stage renal disease patients: competing-risks regression model in a single Italian center experience
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Nephrology, November 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s40620-016-0366-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Marta Rigoni, Emanuele Torri, Giandomenico Nollo, Diana Zarantonello, Alessandro Laudon, Laura Sottini, Giovanni Maria Guarrera, Giuliano Brunori |
| Abstract |
Despite several studies reporting similar outcomes for peritoneal dialysis (PD) and hemodialysis (HD), the former is underused worldwide, with a PD prevalence of 15% in Italy. In 2008, the Unit of Nephrology and Dialysis of the Healthcare Trust of the Autonomous Province of Trento implemented a successful PD program which has increased the proportion of PD incident patients from 7 to 47%. We aimed to assess the effect of this extensive use of PD by comparing HD and PD in terms of survival and time-to-transplantation. A total of 334 HD and 153 PD incident patients were enrolled between January 2008 and December 2014. After screening for exclusion criteria and propensity score matching, 279 HD and 132 PD patients were analyzed. Survival and time-to-transplantation were assessed by competing-risks regression models, using death and transplantation as primary and competing events. Crude and adjusted regression models for survival revealed the absence of significant differences between HD and PD cumulative incidence functions (subhazard ratio: 1.09, p = 0.62 and 1.34, p = 0.10, respectively). Differently, crude and adjusted regression models for transplantation revealed a lower time-to-transplantation for PD versus HD patients (subhazard ratio: 2.34, p < 0.01, and 2.57, p < 0.01, respectively). The waiting time for placement in the transplant waiting list was longer in HD than PD patients (330 vs. 224 days, p < 0.01). The extensive use of PD did not lead to any statistically significant difference in mortality. Furthermore, PD was associated with lower time to transplantation. PD may be a viable option for large-scale dialytic treatment in the advanced chronic kidney disease population. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 44 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 10 | 23% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 7% |
| Researcher | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 19 | 43% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 11 | 25% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 23% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 2% |
| Psychology | 1 | 2% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 2 | 5% |
| Unknown | 18 | 41% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 June 2017.
All research outputs
#21,498,958
of 23,999,200 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Nephrology
#867
of 1,003 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#358,044
of 423,325 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Nephrology
#7
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,999,200 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,003 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.9. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 423,325 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.