Advanced Search

Home > Journals > Minerva Urologica e Nefrologica > Past Issues > Minerva Urologica e Nefrologica 2012 September;64(3) > Minerva Urologica e Nefrologica 2012 September;64(3):173-82

ISSUES AND ARTICLES   MOST READ   eTOC

CURRENT ISSUEMINERVA UROLOGICA E NEFROLOGICA

A Journal on Nephrology and Urology


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

 

Minerva Urologica e Nefrologica 2012 September;64(3):173-82

A NEW YEAR IN DIALYSIS 

Dialysis in diabetic patients: hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis. Pros and cons

Biesenbach G., Pohanka E.

2nd Departement of Internal Medicine, General Hospital, Linz, Austria

Both hemodialysis (HD) as well as peritoneal dialysis (PD), are efficient renal replacement therapies in uremic patients with and without diabetes. PD is less expensive dialysis modality and may provide a survival advantage over hemodialysis in first 2 to 4 years of treatment. Chronic ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) as well as Continuous Cycler-Assisted Peritoneal Dialysis (CCPD) have additional advantages in patients with diabetes. PD therapy will be better tolerated than HD, the blood pressure is more stable and vascular access is not necessary. Preserving residual renal function (RRF) is of paramount importance to prolong the survival outcomes in PD patients. In insulin-dependent diabetic patients intraperitoneal insulin substitution can be used. The development of new, more biocompatible PD solutions holds promise for the future. Nevertheless, in many countries HD is further more favoured in the treatment of patients with ESRD.

language: English


FULL TEXT  REPRINTS

top of page