Comparative Effectiveness of Dialyzers: A Longitudinal, Propensity Score-Matched Study of Incident Hemodialysis Patients

透析器疗效比较:一项针对新发血液透析患者的纵向倾向评分匹配研究

阅读:1

Abstract

Differences in dialyzer design may have consequences for patient outcomes. We evaluated the comparative effectiveness of commonly used dialyzers with respect to measures of dialysis treatment, anemia management, inflammation, and dialyzer clotting. Patients receiving hemodialysis between January 1, 2009, and December 31, 2013, and using polyarylethersulfone-polyvinylpyrrolidone (PAS-PVP; Polyflux Revaclear) or polysulfone (PS; Optiflux 160 or Optiflux 180) dialyzers were followed for 1 year or until end of study or censoring for dialyzer switch, modality change, or loss to follow-up. For each comparison, eligible patients were propensity score-matched 1:1 on a range of baseline characteristics. Outcomes were assessed using generalized linear mixed models. Dialysis adequacy was similar in both dialyzer groups. Erythropoiesis-stimulating agent (ESA) doses were lower for patients using PAS-PVP versus patients using PS-160 (difference range: 75-589 units/treatment; statistically significant in months 1-5 and 7) and for patients using PAS-PVP versus patients using PS-180 (difference range: 27-591 unit/treatment; statistically significant in months 1-9). Intravenous iron doses trended lower for patients using PAS-PVP versus patients using PS, but hemoglobin concentrations were equivalent. In conclusion, use of PAS-PVP versus PS dialyzers was associated with equivalent dialysis adequacy, lower ESA doses, modestly lower Intravenous iron doses, and equivalent hemoglobin concentrations.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。