Proceedings of Singapore Healthcare (Jun 2012)

The Singapore General Hospital Peritoneal Dialysis Programme from 2000–2008

  • Jason Chon Jun Choo MRCP (UK), MMed (S'pore), FAMS,
  • Shin Yeu Ong MSc (US),
  • Thanaletchumi Krishnasamy BN (AUS),
  • Marjorie Wai Yin Foo MRCP (UK), FRCP (Glas), FAMS

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/201010581202100207
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 21

Abstract

Read online

Introduction: There is lack of data regarding outcomes of peritoneal dialysis (PD) in Singapore. The aim of this study is to retrospectively evaluate the patient characteristics, technique survival, and patient survival in a single centre. Methods: The retrospective review included 1,015 adults (47.3% female, 72.6% Chinese, mean age 58±12.4 years, mean follow-up 39.7±27.7 months) initiated on PD at the Singapore General Hospital from January 2000 to December 2008. Baseline characteristics, including cause of end-stage renal disease (ESRD), comorbid conditions, and endpoints (ie. death, transfer to HD or transplantation, renal recovery or until last follow-up on 31 December 2010) were collected. Demographic variables and patient and technique survival rates were analysed. Results: The main causes of ESRD were diabetes mellitus (DM) (58.0%), glomerulonephritis (GN) (23.3%) and hypertension (15.4%). The 1, 2, 5 and 10-year patient survival rates were 88.7%, 77.7%, 39.8% and 15.4%, respectively. Causes of death were related to infection (43.1%) and cardiac (37.8%). Patient survival rates were significantly better in PD patients with ESRD due to GN, compared with DM (5-year survival rates of 70.2% versus 22.3%, P <0.001). Patients aged 65 years and older had lower survival rates compared with those aged less than 65 years ( P <0.001). The 1, 2, 5 and 10-year technique survival rates were 92.9%, 85.0%, 64.8% and 32.9%, respectively. Peritonitis was the main cause of technique failure (63.5%), and caused 13.8% of deaths. Technique survival rates were better in patients with ESRD due to GN, compared with DM (5-year survival rates of 70.9% versus 62.0%, P <0.05). Conclusion: In our single-centre retrospective review, technique survival was comparable to other East Asian centres. The poorer patient survival observed in this study may be due to older age and higher comorbidity.