Tidal peritoneal dialysis for home-treated patients: should it be preferred?

Tidal peritoneal dialysis (TPD) was introduced to increase the efficacy of peritoneal dialysis. We measured peritoneal clearances of small solutes and beta2-microglobulin, peritoneal protein loss, and efficacy of ultrafiltration in 30 patients during TPD and intermittent peritoneal dialysis (IPD) with low-dialysate flow (1.7 L/h) and, in addition, in 17 of these patients using a high-dialysate flow (3 L/h). Using a low-dialysate flow, patients with low/low average peritoneal transport rates showed significantly better peritoneal creatinine and urea nitrogen clearances during IPD compared with TPD, whereas there was no difference between these two treatment modalities in high/high average transporters. With high-dialysate flow, peritoneal clearances of creatinine and urea nitrogen were similar between TPD and IPD independent of peritoneal transport type. Clearances of phosphate and beta2-microglobulin were similar between TPD and IPD independent of dialysate flow or peritoneal transport type. Increasing the dialysate flow rate led to a significant increase in small-solute clearances, but not beta2-microglobulin clearances, in both peritoneal transport types. Total peritoneal protein and albumin losses were similar between TPD and IPD only with low-dialysate flow. However, using a high-dialysate flow, total protein losses tended to increase in both transport types during IPD compared with TPD. In conclusion, up to a dialysate flow of 3 L/h, TPD did not provide better small-solute or middle-molecule clearances compared with IPD. Moreover, using a low-dialysate flow, IPD was superior to TPD in low/low average transporters.