首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>other >Comparative Outcomes Between Continuous Ambulatory and Automated Peritoneal Dialysis: A Narrative Review
【2h】

Comparative Outcomes Between Continuous Ambulatory and Automated Peritoneal Dialysis: A Narrative Review

机译:连续门诊和自动腹膜透析的比较结果:叙事回顾。

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Automated methods for delivering peritoneal dialysis (PD) to persons with end-stage renal disease continue to gain popularity worldwide, particularly in developed countries. However, the endeavor to automate the PD process has not been advanced on the strength of high-level evidence for superiority of automated over manual methods. This article summarizes available studies that have shed light on the evidence that compares the association of treatment with continuous ambulatory PD or automated PD (APD) with clinically meaningful outcomes. Published evidence, primarily from observational studies, has been unable to demonstrate a consistent difference in residual kidney function loss rate, peritonitis rate, maintenance of euvolemia, technique survival, mortality, or health-related quality of life in individuals undergoing continuous ambulatory PD versus APD. At the same time, the future of APD technology appears ripe for further improvement, such as the incorporation of voice commands and expanded use of telemedicine. Given these considerations, it appears that patient choice should drive the decision about PD modality.
机译:向终末期肾病患者进行腹膜透析(PD)的自动化方法在世界范围内继续流行,特别是在发达国家。然而,由于高水平的证据表明自动执行程序比手动方法的优越性还没有推动自动执行PD过程。本文总结了现有研究,这些研究阐明了将连续非卧床PD或自动PD(APD)的治疗方案与具有临床意义的结果进行比较的证据。主要来自观察性研究的已发表证据未能证明持续进行动态非卧床PD与APD的个体的残余肾功能丧失率,腹膜炎率,维持血流量,技术存活率,死亡率或与健康相关的生活质量存在一致差异。同时,APD技术的未来似乎已经成熟,可以进一步改进,例如合并语音命令和扩大远程医疗的使用。考虑到这些考虑因素,似乎患者的选择应该驱动关于PD方式的决定。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号