Advanced Search

Home > Journals > Minerva Urologica e Nefrologica > Past Issues > Minerva Urologica e Nefrologica 2001 June;53(2) > Minerva Urologica e Nefrologica 2001 June;53(2):75-9



A Journal on Nephrology and Urology

Indexed/Abstracted in: EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch), Scopus
Impact Factor 0,536

Frequency: Bi-Monthly

ISSN 0393-2249

Online ISSN 1827-1758


Minerva Urologica e Nefrologica 2001 June;53(2):75-9


Peritoneal dialysis situation in Piedmont

Giachino G., Saltarelli M., Chiappero F., Monardo P., Hamido M., Alfieri V., Iadarola A. M., Anania P., Salomone M. *

Ospedale di Rivoli Servizi di Nefrologia e Dialisi
*Ospedale CTO - Torino

Background. The aim of the study is to examine the situation of chronic uremia sobstitutive treatment by means of peritoneal dialysis in Piedmont on December 31, 1997 using data from the Piedmont regional dialysis and transplant register.
Methods. Starting from the year 1981, data are reported (absolute, per million population, and according to different patient’s anagraphic ages) about peritoneal dialysis prevalence and incidence; about basic nephropathies; drop-out from treatment; patient’s rehabilitation; complications incidence, particularly peritonitis; patient’s survival compared with survival of patients treated, during the same years with extracorporeal techniques.
Results. The data demonstrate, during these years, an increase of peritoneal dialysis incidence and prevalence; patients’ survival curves, compared with those of patients treated with extracorporeal techniques, are very similar during the first years of treatment and worse afterwards, but never reaching statistical significance.
Conclusions. They support Peritoneal Dialysis as a very good kind of substitutive treatment for some years, but this opinion deserves further examination and investigation on a longer period of time.

language: Italian


top of page