{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.036178861788617886, 'fraction_numerical': 0.03008130081300813, 'mean_word_length': 4.831753554502369, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 2, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Outcome of autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease patients on peritoneal dialysis: a national retrospective study based on two French registries (the French Language Peritoneal Dialysis Registry and the French Renal Epidemiology and Information Network)

Background
Pathological features of autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) include enlarged kidney volume, higher frequency of digestive diverticulitis and abdominal wall hernias. Therefore, many nephrologists have concerns about the use of peritoneal dialysis (PD) in ADPKD patients. We aimed to analyse survival and technique failure in ADPKD patients treated with PD.


Methods
We conducted two retrospective studies on patients starting dialysis between 2000 and 2010. We used two French registries: the French Renal Epidemiology and Information Network (REIN) and the French language Peritoneal Dialysis Registry (RDPLF). Using the REIN registry, we compared the clinical features and outcomes of ADPKD patients on PD (n = 638) with those of ADPKD patients on haemodialysis (HD) (n = 4653); with the RDPLF registry, those same parameters were determined for ADPKD patients on PD (n = 797) and compared with those of non-ADPKD patients on PD (n = 12 059).


Results
A total of 5291 ADPKD patients and 12 059 non-ADPKD patients were included. Analysis of the REIN registry found that ADPKD patients treated with PD represented 10.91% of the ADPKD population. During the study period, PD was used for 11.2% of the non-ADPKD population. Compared with ADPKD patients on HD, ADPKD patients on PD had higher serum albumin levels (38.8 ± 5.3 versus 36.8 ± 5.7 g/dL, P < 0.0001) and were less frequently diabetic (5.31 versus 7.71%, P < 0.03). The use of PD in ADPKD patients was positively associated with the occurrence of a kidney transplantation but not with death [hazard ratio 1.15 (95% confidence interval 0.84-1.58)]. Analysis of the RDPLF registry found that compared with non-ADPKD patients on PD, ADPKD patients on PD were younger and had fewer comorbidities and better survival. ADPKD status was not associated with an increased risk of technique failure or an increased risk of peritonitis.


Conclusions
According to our results, PD is proposed to a selected population of ADPKD patients, PD does not have a negative impact on ADPKD patients' overall survival and PD technique failure is not influenced by ADPKD status. Therefore PD is a reasonable option for ADPKD patients.