Login to MyKarger

New to MyKarger? Click here to sign up.

Login with Facebook

Forgot Password? Reset your password

Authors, Editors, Reviewers

For Manuscript Submission, Check or Review Login please go to Submission Websites List.

Submission Websites List

Institutional Login (Shibboleth)

For the academic login, please select your country in the dropdown list. You will be redirected to verify your credentials.

Journal Mobile Options
Table of Contents
Vol. 111, Suppl. 1, 2009
Issue release date: March 2009
Section title: Paper
Nephron Clin Pract 2009;111(suppl 1):c113–c139
(DOI:10.1159/000209996)

UK Renal Registry 11th Annual Report (December 2008): Chapter 7 Survival and causes of death of UK adult patients on Renal Replacement Therapy in 2007: national and centre-specific analyses

Ansell D.a · Roderick P.b · Hodsman A.a · Ford D.a · Steenkamp R.a · Tomson C.a
a UK Renal Registry, Bristol, UK; bInstitute of Public Health Medicine, Southampton General Hospital, UK
email Corresponding Author

David Ansell, UK Renal Registry, Southmead Hospital, Southmead Road, Bristol BS10 5NB, UK, Email: renalreg@renalreg.com

Do you have an account?

Login Information





Contact Information










I have read the Karger Terms and Conditions and agree.



Abstract

Introduction: These analyses examine survival from the start of renal replacement therapy (RRT), based on the total incident UK dialysis population reported to the Registry, including the 21% who started on PD and the 5% who received a pre-emptive transplant. Survival of prevalent patients and changes in survival between 1997–2006 are reported. The article includes a discussion on the technical definition for the date of start of both PD and HD. Methods: Survival was calculated for both incident and prevalent patients on RRT and compared between the UK countries after adjustment for age. Survival of incident patients (starting during 2006) was calculated with and without a 90 day RRT start cut off. Survival of incident patients is shown with and without censoring at transplantation. Both the Kaplan–Meier and Cox adjusted models were used to calculate survival. Causes of death were analysed for both groups. Relative risk of death was calculated compared with the general UK population. Results: The 2006 unadjusted 1 year after 90 day survival for patients starting RRT was 86%. In incident 18–64 year olds the unadjusted 1 year survival had risen from 85.9% in 1997 to 91.5% in 2006 and for those aged ≥ 65 it had risen from 63.8% to 72.9%. The age adjusted survival of prevalent dialysis patients rose from 85% in 2000 to 89% in 2007. Diabetic patient survival rose from 76.6% in 2000 to 84.0% in 2007. The relative risk of death on RRT compared with the general population was 30 at age 30 years compared with 3 at age 80 years. In the prevalent RRT dialysis population, cardiovascular disease accounted for 34% of deaths, infection 20% and treatment withdrawal 14%. Conclusions: Incident and prevalent patient survival on RRT in all the UK countries for all age ranges and also for patients with diabetes continued to improve. The relative risk of death on RRT compared with the general population has fallen since 2001. Death rates on dialysis in the UK remained lower than when compared with a similar aged population on dialysis in the USA.

© 2009 S. Karger AG, Basel


Article / Publication Details

First-Page Preview
Abstract of Paper

Published online: March 26, 2009
Issue release date: March 2009

Number of Print Pages: 1
Number of Figures: 0
Number of Tables: 0

ISSN: (Print)
eISSN: 1660-2110 (Online)

For additional information: http://www.karger.com/NEC


Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer

Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher or, in the case of photocopying, direct payment of a specified fee to the Copyright Clearance Center.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.