Randomized Controlled Trial on Adjunctive Lavage for Severe Peritonitis.

Background:In severe peritoneal dialysis (PD)-related peritonitis, patients' response to antibiotic can be poor. We postulated that adjunctive lavage may improve the outcome in severe cases by enhancing the removal of bacteria and inflammatory cells from the peritoneum.Methods:Severe PD peritonitis was defined as poor clinical response to empirical cefazolin/ceftazidime and a PD effluent (PDE) leukocyte count > 1,090/mm3 on day 3. Enrolled patients were randomized into either the lavage group (n = 20) or control group (n = 20). In the lavage group, continuous lavage by an automated PD machine from day 3 to 5 or 6 was performed, whereas the usual PD schedule was maintained in the control group. The primary outcome was treatment success. Post hoc analysis was also performed to compare the outcome between subgroups with different severity.Results:Baseline parameters were similar in the lavage and control groups, including PDE leukocyte count on day 3 (4,871/mm3 vs 4,143/mm3, p = 0.46). Treatment success rates were high in both groups (75% vs 70%, p = 0.72). C-reactive protein (CRP) on day 3 was found to be the only predictor of treatment failure and was used to stratify all patients into tertiles of severity. Whilst a significant decline in treatment success was evident across the tertiles of increasing CRP in the control group (100% vs 85.7% vs 28.6%, p = 0.005), treatment success was relatively maintained in the lavage group (85.7% vs 71.4% vs 66.7%, p = 0.43).Conclusions:Adjunctive lavage did not improve the overall outcome, although it may be beneficial for the more severe peritonitis patients who have high CRP.

Extended Experience in the Use of Antibiotic Lock for Eradication of Biofilm Bacteria on Tenckhoff Catheter.

Whilst antibiotic lock is effective to eradicate biofilm bacteria on hemodialysis catheters, this adjunctive method has scarcely been tested in peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients. After our previous successful experience of its use to salvage two Tenckhoff catheters, we encountered another patient with problematic biofilm-associated PD peritonitis who strongly refused catheter removal. As a result, antibiotic lock was given once daily, initially, with continuation of the usual PD schedule. However, relapsing peritonitis could not be prevented until we administered antibiotic lock without dialysate in the abdomen, which led to successful eradication of biofilm bacteria. To investigate the significance of having "dry abdomen" during antibiotic lock treatment, we injected an equivalent amount of contrast into the Tenckhoff catheter under fluoroscopy. We observed that the catheter lock solution could be retained over a long period of time only with "dry abdomen," whereas rapid dissipation of the lock solution occurred in the presence of dialysate. We concluded that whilst antibiotic lock in a once-daily regimen can be highly effective against biofilm bacteria on a Tenckhoff catheter, it is essential to withhold PD exchanges during the dwell of antibiotic lock to prevent it from dissolving into the surrounding dialysate.

Clinical study on low-molecular weight heparin infusion as anticoagulation for nocturnal home haemodialysis.

AIM: This study was conducted to evaluate low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH) as anticoagulation for nocturnal home haemodialysis (NHHD). While its longer half-life may cause drug accumulation in frequent dialysis, the essential need of a supplementary intra-dialytic bolus for the sleeping patients also renders LMWH's use impractical. METHODS: The recruited patients, who were on alternate-day 8 h haemodialysis, were randomized to receive either nadroparin or unfractionated heparin (UFH) for a week. They underwent crossover to receive the alternate anticoagulant in the next week. A nadroparin infusion regimen was adopted to enhance its practicability, which consisted of a loading dose of 35 IU/kg and a continuous infusion of 10 IU/kg per hour for 6 h. RESULTS: A total of 12 NHHD patients were recruited. With nadroparin infusion, the mean anti-Xa levels at the 2nd , 4th , 6th and 8th hours of dialysis were 0.46 ± 0.11, 0.55 ± 0.14, 0.61 ± 0.15 and 0.45 ± 0.15 IU/mL respectively. Comparing to UFH, which offered satisfactory anticoagulation according to the activated partial thromboplastin time, nadroparin-treated dialysis achieved similar thrombus scores and dialyser urea/creatinine clearances at the end of haemodialysis. During the post-dialysis period, one patient demonstrated residual LMWH effect (anti-Xa level 0.09 IU/mL) on the next day, whereas none had detectable anti-Xa activities 2 days afterwards upon next dialysis. CONCLUSIONS: Low-molecular weight heparin infusion is practical and effective as anticoagulation for NHHD. It can be safely used in an alternate-day haemodialysis schedule. A close monitoring for LMWH accumulation is recommended if long dialysis is performed daily.

Correlation between activated partial thromboplastin time and anti-Xa activity in patients who received low-molecular weight heparin as anticoagulation for haemodialysis.

Plasma anti-Xa activity, the recommended test to monitor low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH) therapy, is not readily available in many laboratories. In our clinical trials on the use of LMWH as anticoagulation for haemodialysis, a consistent prolongation of APTT in addition to the elevated anti-Xa activity was observed in the patients after LMWH administration. Hence, the paired anti-Xa activity and APTT data were re-analyzed. The APTT ratio, which was the proportional change in APTT from the baseline value after LMWH administration, was found to have a strong correlation with anti-Xa activity (coefficient of determination, R 2 = 0.72, P < 0.001). In the receiver operating characteristic analysis, the APTT ratio was also found to be an excellent predictor of therapeutic anti-Xa activity ≧0.5 IU/mL (area under curve = 0.93, P < 0.001). The sensitivity was 88% and the specificity was 83.3% when an APTT ratio ≧1.4 was used as the cut point to predict the achievement of therapeutic anti-Xa activity. Our results illustrated that APTT is a potentially useful screening test to assess the degree of anticoagulation achieved by LMWH during haemodialysis, if the testing for plasma anti-Xa activity is not available.

Antibiotic Lock in Tenckhoff Catheter for Biofilm-Associated Peritonitis.

Biofilm bacteria in the Tenckhoff catheter are notoriously difficult to eradicate. They are the potential sources of relapsing or repeat peritonitis among peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients. Inadequate penetration into biofilms by standard intraperitoneal antibiotics, as well as a lack of effective adjunctive treatment, leads to a high rate of Tenckhoff catheter loss as a result of biofilm bacteria. In hemodialysis, on the other hand, catheter-related bloodstream infection caused by biofilm bacteria does not necessarily lead to a loss of catheter. Here, the use of antibiotic lock in conjunction with systemic antibiotics has been shown to be an effective treatment. In this case report, we present 2 cases of biofilm-associated PD peritonitis. The success in salvaging the Tenckhoff catheters by antibiotic lock suggested a potentially similar efficacy in PD patients using this adjunctive treatment, which has not been thoroughly investigated in the literature. Relevant clinical trials are necessary to evaluate whether antibiotic lock is also effective in eradicating biofilm bacteria in the Tenckhoff catheter.

Low-molecular weight heparin infusion as anticoagulation for haemodialysis.

BACKGROUND: Low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH) is commonly used as an anticoagulant for haemodialysis by a single-bolus injection. However, its application in extended haemodialysis has been infrequently studied. In particular, for nocturnal home haemodialysis patients sleeping throughout treatment, the need for additional intradialytic bolus might render the use of LMWH impractical. To overcome this limitation, we changed traditional bolus injections to continuous infusion. We first tested our method among in-centre 4-h haemodialysis patients to establish a feasible and safe infusion regimen before utilizing it in extended dialyses at home. METHODS: Recruited patients were given nadroparin (standardized at 65 IU/kg) as an anticoagulant for haemodialysis. They were first randomized to receive nadroparin either by bolus injection or infusion. Afterwards, the patients underwent crossover to receive the alternate method of LMWH anticoagulation. The degrees of anticoagulation and bleeding complications were compared. RESULTS: Sixteen haemodialysis patients were recruited. After nadroparin administration, anti-Xa levels at the first hour were significantly higher by the bolus than the infusion methods (0.68 ± 0.10 versus 0.49 ± 0.10 IU/mL, P < 0.001) and were similar by the second hour (0.56 ± 0.10 versus 0.55 ± 0.11 IU/mL, P = 0.64). At the sixth hour, anti-Xa levels by the infusion method were significantly higher (0.35 ± 0.13 versus 0.25 ± 0.10 IU/mL, P < 0.001), suggesting the infusion approach required a dosage reduction. There were no bleeding events reported in either method. CONCLUSIONS: LMWH infusion is feasible and safe. The method avoids early excessive anticoagulation caused by bolus injection and reduces the LMWH dose. Future studies should be conducted to evaluate LMWH infusion in extended haemodialysis treatment.