{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.0228734810578985, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.698564593301436, '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}}
[Choosing between peritoneal dialysis and haemodialysis: a critical appraisal of the literature].

In France, incidence and prevalence of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) are increasing, requiring a more rational use of available replacement therapies. To help practitioners make their choice between treatment modalities of peritoneal dialysis (PD) and haemodialysis (HD), critical appraisal of relevant literature has been conducted. Although few absolute or relative contraindications for PD and HD exist, arguments in favour of one versus the other dialysis technique can be made. When patients receive adequate and complete information, their preference is neutral between PD and HD. To date, no trial presenting a convincing level of evidence has been published which demonstrates the superiority of one technique compared to the other. Relative to mortality, it appears that no difference can be observed between the two modalities. However, in those instances where patients expect a rapid transplantation, PD is the preferred technique. This analysis suggests that peritoneal dialysis and haemodialysis are not competitive but rather complementary treatments. It is therefore interesting to identify the reasons supporting the various choices between the two different treatment modalities amongst France's regions. Access to transplant, economic or organizational factors must be considered.