PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Alan S Kliger

Publications and source records attributed to Alan S Kliger.

8 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2003

Depression and its association with peritonitis in long-term peritoneal dialysis patients.

BACKGROUND: Depression is the most common psychological disorder among patients with end-stage renal disease and has been associated with mortality in patients maintained on hemodialysis therapy. Peritonitis is the leading cause of technique failure among long-term peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients. This prospective study is designed to examine the relationship between depression and peritonitis. METHODS: All patients on long-term PD therapy in our unit between January 1, 1997, and January 31, 2002, completed a Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) assessment at 6-month intervals. BDI scores were analyzed 2 ways. First, patients were placed into either group I (BDI score < 10) or group II (BDI score > or = 11) and were reclassified based on subsequent scores. Second, multivariable analysis was performed looking at initial BDI score as a risk factor for peritonitis, adjusting for age older than 65 years, diabetes, coronary artery disease, and race. RESULTS: One hundred sixty-two patients were enrolled, and 281 individual BDI assessments were completed. There was a significantly greater incidence of diabetes and coronary artery disease in group II. Rates for overall and gram-positive peritonitis were significantly greater in group II patients compared with group I patients. Using Cox regression, only BDI score of 11 or greater was associated with the development of peritonitis (hazard ratio, 2.7; 95% confidence interval, 1.2 to 6.0). CONCLUSION: There is an association between BDI score of 11 or greater and the development of peritonitis. Whether treatment of depression can impact on the rate of peritonitis remains to be examined.

Aged↗
PubMed2002

Treatment of osteoporosis and osteopenia in long-term renal transplant patients with alendronate.

Bone mineral density (BMD) and biochemical markers of bone-turnover were evaluated in a 2-year study in 58 long-term renal transplant recipients with good renal function. In the first year of study, data were collected and patients with osteoporosis and parameters of high bone turnover were classified as being at high risk for on-going bone loss (Group A; n = 29). Patients with lesser degrees of bone loss or without biochemical parameters of high bone turnover were followed longitudinally (Group B; n = 29). Group A patients were then placed on alendronate 10mg/day and both groups were followed for an additional year. Changes in regional BMD and bone-turnover markers between the first and second year within each group were analyzed using paired tests. BMD in Group A, which had declined at the lumbar spine (- 1.6 +/- 0.5%) and total femur (-1.5 +/- 0.4%) during the first year of the study, increased on alendronate therapy at both the lumbar spine (+3.4 +/- 0.6%, p = 0.001) and total femur (+1.6 +/- 0.6%, p <0.001). These patients also experienced a significant decline in levels of serum alkaline phosphatase, osteocalcin, urinary levels of deoxypyridinoline and pyridinoline. In contrast, neither BMD nor biochemical markers changed significantly over 2 years in Group B. The current results demonstrate that renal transplant patients with osteoporosis and biochemical parameters of high bone turnover are at continued risk for bone loss. Therapy with a bisphosphonate can reverse this bone loss and even increase bone mass in these patients. Whether patients with lesser degrees of bone loss and/or patients without parameters of high bone turnover can also benefit from bisphosphonate therapy deserves further study.

Alendronate↗
PubMedDate not supplied

APD in the elderly.

Few elderly patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) are treated with peritoneal dialysis (PD). Among dialysis patients >or=65 years of age reported by the U.S. Renal Data System (USRDS), the percentage treated with chronic peritoneal dialysis (CPD) is lower than in any other age group. To evaluate the effectiveness of automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) in the elderly, we compared several outcome measures in cohorts of different ages maintained on APD. The outcome measures we examined included mortality and technique failure rates, peritonitis rates, outcomes of peritonitis, and quality of life measures. We found that while patients >or=65 years of age have a higher mortality rate than younger patients, technique failure rates, overall peritonitis rates, and most quality of life measures are not different than for younger patients. However, patients >or=65 years of age have higher gram-negative peritonitis rates and lower scores on the physical component score of the SF-36 than younger patients. The present study suggests that APD is a reasonable treatment modality for elderly patients with ESRD and that elderly patients with progressive renal failure should be considered as candidates for APD.

Aged↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Patients' descriptions of specific factors leading to modality selection of chronic peritoneal dialysis or hemodialysis.

OBJECTIVES: There has been increasing interest in understanding how patients with chronic renal failure choose between chronic peritoneal dialysis (CPD) and hemodialysis (HD) for renal replacement therapy. The purpose of the present study was to examine the influences and specific factors that patients identify as significant in choosing a specific dialysis modality for treatment of their end-stage renal disease (ESRD). PATIENTS AND DESIGN: 40 patients (20 CPD, 20 HD) who had started dialysis within the preceding 6 months were randomly selected to participate in the study. A structured interview was conducted with the patients, discussing and exploring what factors patients thought were important in helping them decide their treatment modality. The format of the interview was open-ended. Based on patients' comments, a taxonomy of the specific factors that influenced the patients' decisions was developed. SETTING: The study was conducted in a freestanding CPD unit and two freestanding HD units. RESULTS: All 20 CPD patients reported choosing their treatment modality; only 8 of the 20 HD patients reported having a choice of treatment modality. 18 of the 22 patients who participated in predialysis educational programs opted for CPD. 83% of the patients reported that their physician was important in influencing their treatment choice; however, the CPD patients relied more on written material and the opinions of their spouse/significant other or other family members in making their decisions. Issues of autonomy and control were important for 95% of patients choosing CPD. Both CPD and HD patients cited a variety of treatment-specific factors. The three most frequently cited reasons for choosing CPD were (1) flexibility of schedule (19 patients), (2) convenience of performing CPD in their own home (19 patients), and (3) the option of doing dialysis at night while sleeping (8 patients). The 8 HD patients who selected their treatment modality cited the desirability of having a planned schedule (7 patients) and letting nurses or other take care of them (5 patients). CONCLUSIONS: The present study explored factors perceived by patients as being important in determining their choice of renal replacement therapy. A taxonomy of patient influences and concerns has been developed to provide caregivers with a framework to structure their educational strategies and assist patients with progressive renal failure in making an informed choice of therapeutic modality for their ESRD treatment.

Decision Making↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Increasing the dialysis volume and frequency in a fixed period of time in CPD patients: the effect on Kpt/V and creatinine clearance.

BACKGROUND: The National Kidney Foundation Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (K/DOQI) has evidence- and opinion-based recommendations for weekly Kt/V(urea) and weekly total creatinine clearance (CC) in chronic peritoneal dialysis (CPD) patients. Using standard continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis technique, it is often difficult to achieve the suggested targets in anuric patients with large body mass. Thus, the use of automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) has been increasingly utilized to achieve adequate clearances. Automated dialysis is usually performed at night over an 8- to 10-hour period. The role of increases in dialysate volume and frequency of exchanges during this time period to achieve these target K/DOQI recommendations remains uncertain. We decided to study the effects of increasing the volume and number of exchanges in a fixed period of time in CPD patients. METHODS: In the New Haven CAPD unit, 29 patients maintained on APD were considered eligible for the study and 11 agreed to participate. The patients were characterized according to standard peritoneal equilibration test criteria. The patients were placed into two groups: group 1 included high (H) and high-average (HA), and group 2 low-average (LA) transporters. The patients were dialyzed at night for 9 hours with standard cycling technique, using 2.5% Dianeal (Baxter Healthcare, Deerfield, Illinois, USA) solution, with a cycle volume of 2,500 mL, and a 2,000-mL daytime dwell. Three studies were done on each patient using a total dialysis volume of 9.5 L (3 cycles), 14.5 L (5 cycles), and 19.5 L (7 cycles). Daily Kpt/V(urea) and daily CCp (peritoneal) (L/day/1.73 m2) were obtained. RESULTS: Six patients were H or HA (group 1) and 5 were LA transporters (group 2). For the group 1 patients, mean weight was 86.6 +/- 13.5 kg; Kpt/V(urea) was 1.68 +/- 0.21 using 9.5 L, 2.03 +/- 0.28 for 14.5 L (p < 0.05 compared to 10 L), and 2.28 +/- 0.28 with 19.5 L (p < 0.05 compared to 10 L and 15 L); mean weekly CCp was 45.43 +/- 7.63 L/1.73 m2 for 9.5 L (p < 0.05 compared to 14.5 L and 19.5 L), 51.17 +/- 7.07 with 14.5 L, and 54.67 +/- 10.08 for 19.5 L; ultrafiltration rates were not different in the three studies. For the group 2 patients, mean weight was 74.3 +/- 17.7 kg; mean weekly Kpt/V(urea) was 1.68 +/- 0.35 using 9.5 L, 2.10 +/- 0.42 for 14.5 L (p < 0.05 compared to 9.5 L), and 2.31 +/- 0.56 for 19.5 L (p < 0.05 compared to 9.5 L and 14.5 L); mean weekly CCp was 42.56 +/- 10.64 L/1.73 m2 for 9.5 L (p < 0.05 compared to 14.5 L and 19.5 L), 50.89 +/- 12.66 for 14.5 L, and 51.94 +/- 11.20 for 19.5 L; ultrafiltration was lower in the 9.5-L study than in the 14.5-L and 19.5-L studies, but was not different in the 14.5-L and 19.5-L studies. CONCLUSIONS: In both H/HA and LA transporters, Kpt/V(urea) and CCp rise significantly when the frequency of exchanges and total volume of dialysate are increased. Thus, the use of larger volumes of dialysate with cycling peritoneal dialysis may result in increased clearances of urea and creatinine.

Adolescent↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Recovery of renal function and the discontinuation of dialysis in patients treated with continuous peritoneal dialysis.

OBJECTIVE: Previous studies have shown that patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) treated with continuous peritoneal dialysis (CPD) have better preservation of endogenous renal function than patients treated with hemodialysis (HD). We wondered if this better preservation of endogenous renal function seen with CPD patients translates into the improved likelihood of recovery of endogenous renal function in those patients with potentially reversible causes of renal failure. METHODS: To evaluate this question, we reviewed the records of all 1200 patients that completed CPD training at a large, freestanding peritoneal dialysis center in New Haven, Connecticut, between 1979 and 1999, and the records of all patients completing CPD training in New England between 1993 and 1998. In New Haven, about half the new patients with ESRD were started on CPD compared to only 15% in New England. We then compared the chances of recovery of renal function in these two cohorts of CPD patients to the chances of recovery of renal function in two groups of HD patients. The first group consisted of all patients that started on HD in New England between 1993 and 1998. The second group consisted of all patients that started HD in our HD unit in New Haven, Connecticut, between 1993 and 1999. The data on the New England patients were provided by the ESRD Network of New England. All patients entered into the present study had to have been on dialysis for a minimum of 3 months, as in the United States Renal Data System database, and had to have recovered sufficient renal function to be able to be maintained off dialysis for a minimum of 30 days. RESULTS: 29 of 1,200 CPD patients (2.4%) trained in New Haven recovered sufficient renal function to permit the discontinuation of dialysis for a minimum of 30 days. In comparison, only 305 of 19,032 patients (1.6%) managed with HD in New England (p < 0.05 compared to New Haven CPD patients) and 3 of 430 patients (0.7%) in our HD center (p < 0.05 compared to New Haven CPD patients) recovered sufficient glomerular filtration rate (GFR) to allow the discontinuation of dialysis for at least 30 days. If only those CPD patients that initiated dialysis between 1993 and 1999 in New Haven were analyzed, 15 of 369 (4.1%) recovered sufficient GFR to allow discontinuation of dialysis for at least 30 days (p < 0.025 compared to both groups of HD patients). Of the 2,924 patients completing CPD training in New England, 60 (2.1%) recovered renal function; this percentage is not significantly different from the percent of HD patients in New England recovering renal function. CONCLUSION: Although the present study is a retrospective study and the actual criteria for selection of CPD and HD therapy are not controlled for, the data raise the question of whether there may be a therapeutic advantage to treating newly diagnosed ESRD patients, that have a potentially reversible cause of renal failure, with CPD.

Adult↗