{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.020158387329013677, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.017316017316017, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?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}}
Long-Term Outcomes in Automated Peritoneal Dialysis: Similar or Better than in Continuous Ambulatory Peritoneal Dialysis?

In many parts of the world, a progressively larger proportion of chronic peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients are being treated with automated PD (APD). Increasingly, the decision to use APD is being dictated by patient and physician preference rather than being based on medical considerations. It is important to determine if the PD modality has any effect on long-term patient outcomes. Studies examining the effects of APD on residual renal function have been inconsistent, and the effect of cycler use on native renal clearances, if any, is small and probably not clinically significant. The preponderance of the evidence suggests that peritonitis rates are somewhat lower in APD patients than in patients treated with continuous ambulatory PD (CAPD). Two of three recent studies indicated that the risk for transfer to maintenance hemodialysis may be lower in APD patients, particularly in the early period after starting chronic PD. However, the risk for death in patients treated with CAPD and APD appears to be similar in most of the studies that have looked at that question. In summary, the long-term outcomes of CAPD and APD appear to be similar, and patient and physician preference are likely to increase the utilization of APD in many parts of the world.