NCT03754361

The Study of Efficacy and Safety of Automated PD in Urgent Start Dialysis

The Study of Efficacy and Safety of Automated Peritoneal Dialysis in Urgent Start Dialysis as Compared With Intermittent Hemodialysis in ESRD Patients,a Multi-center, Non-blind and Controlled Clinical Trial

• Status: Terminated
• Phase: N/A
• Study type: Interventional
• Enrollment: 34 (actual)
• Sponsor: Peking Union Medical College Hospital · Academic / Other
• Sex: All
• Age: 18 Years – 75 Years
• Healthy volunteers: Not accepted

Summary

This is a multi-center, controlled clinical trial study. The purpose of this study is to examine the efficacy and safety of automated peritoneal dialysis as compared with intermittent haemodialysis for ESRD patients with indications for urgent start dialysis.

Detailed description

Hemodialysis（HD） and peritoneal dialysis (PD) are both the main methods to treat with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) uremia patients. The first 3-month mortality and hospitalization rate of new dialysis patient is much higher than that of regular dialysis's. So it is very important to set up dialysis pathway and from inducing dialysis into regular dialysis smoothly. But in the global 50-70%, more than 70% of the patients in China can not establish the dialysis pathway in advance according to the plan. With the common, a temporary deep venous catheter would be used first, then the fistula established later, as the final transition for hemodialysis. Urgent peritoneal dialysis can be established 24 hours after the establishment of permanent access dialysis, simply and easily, it can protect the residual kidney function; reduce treatment costs, hemodynamic stability, no anticoagulant is its unique advantages, At the same time, also avoid the temporary deep venous pathway prone to local bleeding, infection, venous thrombosis, central venous stenosis, direct impact on the future of the mature of fistula , or transplanted kidney vascular conditions. Automatic peritoneal dialysis (APD) in the treatment of urgent dialysis patients can save more manpower and resources, and improve the efficiency of peritoneal dialysis. The study on the efficacy and safety of urgent dialysis lacks the precisely designed multi-center, prospective and controlled clinical trial, and APD only induces 3 days, it is difficult to really reflect the safety and effectiveness of APD. Therefore, it is of great practical significance to study the difference of safety, efficacy and cost-effectiveness between urgent PD and HD in a prospective, control and multicenter clinical trial. 206 ESRD uremia patients will involve in this multi-center, prospective and controlled clinical trial, the mode of urgent dialysis will choose by patient guided by nephrologist, the HD group will receive the standard traditional treatment: from induction HD to regular HD. The PD group will receive the APD daily. All patient will be monitor the physiological and biochemical marker for 14 day, and all adverse events and dead within 90days will collected to evaluated the safety, efficacy of the two urgent dialysis modes.

Conditions

• ESRD

Interventions

Type	Name	Description
PROCEDURE	automated peritoneal dialysis	peritoneal dialysis administered by a cycler
PROCEDURE	IHD	HD 4hour 2-3times per week

Timeline

• Start date: 2019-01-01
• Primary completion: 2022-07-31
• Completion: 2022-12-28
• First posted: 2018-11-27
• Last updated: 2025-06-08

Locations

5 sites across 1 country: China