Associations between renal function, volume status and endotoxaemia in chronic kidney disease patients.

Inflammation is an important predictor of increased cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD), but the mechanisms behind the chronic activation of the immune system are not clearly understood. CKD patients develop fluid overload, which has been proposed to be a stimulus for inflammatory activation due to the translocation of macromolecules from the gut. We hypothesize that fluid overload is associated with signs of systemic inflammation and endotoxaemia in stages 1-5 CKD patients. The aim of this prospective study was to evaluate the associations between renal function, fluid status [evaluated by the inferior vena cava diameter (IVCD) and the collapsibility index (CI)], systemic inflammation [plasma levels of C-reactive protein (CRP), fibrinogen and albumin] and endotoxaemia (through the Limulus amebocyte lysate enzymatic assay) in a group of CKD patients in our out-patient clinic. The population consisted of 74 (mean of 57; range 23-83 years of age; 47% males) CKD patients with glomerular filtration rate (based on the mean of urea and creatinine clearances) of 34 ml/min. Both albumin (Rho = 0.25; P = 0.05) and fibrinogen (Rho= - 0.48; P < 0.0001) were significantly correlated to glomerular filtration rate (GFR). According to the IVCD, 84% of the patients were fluid overloaded, while 83% were considered overloaded by the CI. Signs of endotoxaemia were detected in all patients. Endotoxin levels were higher in patients with signs of fluid overload (0.85 +/- 0.11ng/l) when compared with patients with normal values of IVCD (0.61 +/- 0.05 ng/l; P < 0.05). Endotoxin levels correlated to both IVCD (Rho=0.33, P < 0.005) and CI (Rho = -0.25, P < 0.05). There was no correlation between endotoxin levels and GFR, CRP or fibrinogen. In summary, although most CKD patients presented signs of fluid overload that was associated with endotoxaemia, there was no association between endotoxaemia and systemic inflammation, suggesting the endotoxaemia may not be the main determinant of the inflammatory status in this group of patients.

The recommendations from the International Society for Peritoneal Dialysis for Peritonitis Treatment: a single-center historical comparison.

The antibiotic treatment currently recommended by the International Society for Peritoneal Dialysis (ISPD) for peritonitis consists of a combination of a first- and a third-generation cephalosporin. The schedule formerly recommended combined a first-generation cephalosporin and an aminoglycoside. No comparison between the treatment schedules has been performed until now. We compared the effectiveness of these two regimens in peritoneal dialysis-related peritonitis at our center. From January 1999 to April 2000, we followed 107 patients in our PD clinic (period 1: 47% men; 32% with diabetes; mean age: 52 +/- 13 years). We followed a similar number of patients from January 2002 to July 2003 (period 2: 109 patients; 54% men; 51% with diabetes; mean age: 56 +/- 18 years). In each period, diagnosis and treatment of peritonitis were based on the recommendations of the ISPD as earlier described. Negative culture rates were similar in period 1 and period 2 (32% vs. 30%). In both study groups, the bacteria that most commonly caused peritonitis were Staphylococcus epidermidis (period 1: 41%; period 2: 39%) and S. aureus (period 1: 27%; period 2: 18%). Gram-positive infections occurred in 59% of patients during period 1 and in 57% during period 2. Gram-negative infections occurred in 16% of patients during period 1 and in 18% during period 2. We observed no significant difference in the peritonitis cure rate from period 1 to period 2 (78% vs. 83%; chi-square: 0.98; p = 0.3), but changes in the primary antibiotic schedule were necessary in 4 patients in period 1 as compared with 1 patient in period 2. The rates of catheter removal were not significantly different during the two periods (period 1: 14%; period 2: 5%; chi-square: 2.5; p = 0.11). Mortality was also not significantly different during the two periods (period 1: 7%; period 2: 5%; chi-square: 0.23; p = 0.62). The two antibiotic schedules were equally effective in the treatment of peritonitis. Cost-effectiveness, impact on residual renal function, and potential development of bacterial resistance must be considered when selecting the antibiotic schedule for peritonitis treatment.