Indian Journal of Nephrology Home 

REVIEW ARTICLE
[Download PDF]
Year : 2021  |  Volume : 31  |  Issue : 5  |  Page : 425--434

Continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis peritonitis guidelines – Consensus statement of peritoneal dialysis society of India - 2020

Tarun K Jeloka1, Georgi Abraham2, AK Bhalla3, J Balasubramaniam4, A Dutta5, Gokulnath6, Amit Gupta7, V Jha8, Umesh Khanna9, Sandeep Mahajan10, KS Nayak11, KN Prasad12, Narayan Prasad7, Manish Rathi13, Sreebhushan Raju14, Anusha Rohit15, Manisha Sahay16, K Sampathkumar17, V Sivakumar18, Santosh Varughese19,  
1 Department of Nephrology, Aditya Birla Memorial Hospital, Pune, Maharashtra, India
2 Department of Nephrology, Madras Medical Mission, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
3 Department of Nephrology, Sir Ganga Ram Hospital, New Delhi, India
4 Department of Nephrology, Kidney Care Centre, Tirunelveli, Tamil Nadu, India
5 Department of Nephrology, Fortis Hospital and Kidney Institute, Kolkata, West Bengal, India
6 Department of Nephrology, Apollo Hospital, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India
7 Department of Nephrology, Sanjay Gandhi Post Graduate Institute, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India
8 The George Institute for Global Health, New Delhi, India
9 Department of Nephrology, Lancelot Kidney and GI Centre, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
10 Department of Nephrology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India
11 Department of Nephrology, Virinchi Hospitals, Hyderabad, Telangana, India
12 Department of Microbiology, Sanjay Gandhi Post Graduate Institute, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India
13 Department of Nephrology, Post Graduate Institute, Chandigarh, India
14 Department of Nephrology, Nizam's Institute of Medical Sciences, Hyderabad, Telangana, India
15 Department of Microbiology, Madras Medical Mission, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
16 Department of Nephrology, Osmania Hospital, Hyderabad, Telangana, India
17 Department of Nephrology, Meenakshi Mission Hopsital and Research Centre, Madurai, Tamil Nadu, India
18 Department of Nephrology, SriVenkateshwara Institute of Medical sciences, Tirupati, Andhra Pradesh, India
19 Department of Nephrology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Tarun K Jeloka
Department of Nephrology, Aditya Birla Memorial Hospital, Thergaon, Chinchwad, Pune - 411 033, Maharashtra
India

Abstract

Continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) related peritonitis is a major cause of technique failure, morbidity, and mortality in patients on CAPD. Its prevention and management is key to success of CAPD program. Due to variability in practice, microbiological trends and sensitivity towards antibiotics, there is a need for customized guidelines for management of CAPD related peritonitis (CAPDRP) in India. With this need, Peritoneal Dialysis Society of India (PDSI) organized a structured meeting to discuss various aspects of management of CAPDRP and formulated a consensus agreement which will help in management of patients with CAPDRP.

How to cite this article:
Jeloka TK, Abraham G, Bhalla A K, Balasubramaniam J, Dutta A, Gokulnath, Gupta A, Jha V, Khanna U, Mahajan S, Nayak K S, Prasad K N, Prasad N, Rathi M, Raju S, Rohit A, Sahay M, Sampathkumar K, Sivakumar V, Varughese S. Continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis peritonitis guidelines – Consensus statement of peritoneal dialysis society of India - 2020.Indian J Nephrol 2021;31:425-434

How to cite this URL:
Jeloka TK, Abraham G, Bhalla A K, Balasubramaniam J, Dutta A, Gokulnath, Gupta A, Jha V, Khanna U, Mahajan S, Nayak K S, Prasad K N, Prasad N, Rathi M, Raju S, Rohit A, Sahay M, Sampathkumar K, Sivakumar V, Varughese S. Continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis peritonitis guidelines – Consensus statement of peritoneal dialysis society of India - 2020. Indian J Nephrol [serial online] 2021 [cited 2021 Nov 28 ];31:425-434
Available from: https://www.indianjnephrol.org/text.asp?2021/31/5/425/326313

Full Text

 Introduction



It has been observed that the practice patterns of management of continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis related peritonitis (CAPDRP) is highly variable in India. Culture positive rates in India are also variable and mostly below the acceptable recommendations.[1] We know that microbiological information is critical in optimal management of CAPDRP and is an important determinant of clinical outcome. A working group with representation from all zones of the country came together to formulate guidelines for treatment of CAPDRP after review of published literature and exhaustive debate on the subject.

This guideline for treatment of CAPDRP is intended to help practicing nephrologists in decision making while treating patients with CAPDRP. It does not define a standard of care of CAPDRP and the group acknowledges the variations in practice based on individual patients' needs, available resources, and limitations faced by clinicians. The working group also acknowledges the lack of high quality evidence on this issue from our country and hence the guideline is based on recommendations of International Society of Peritoneal dialysis (ISPD)[2] with modifications suitable and applicable for India.

Nomenclature and Description for rating guideline recommendations

We have used the terminology similar to Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) guidelines [Table 1]. In view of paucity of literature from India, further subdivision into A, B, C and D is avoided.{Table 1}

 Summary of Recommendations and Suggestions



Keys to successful PD program are dedicated team, appropriate training of patient and/or care giver, preventive measures for infection, appropriate culture methods, appropriate empiric antibiotics, preservation of peritoneum and periodic auditing. The selection of patient is also important, as utilization of PD as a last resort after failure of other modalities have compromised outcomes. CAPDRP is the most important and preventable cause of morbidity and mortality in peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients. High peritonitis rates can be a severe setback to any CAPD program.[3]

This guideline is aimed to serve as a quick recap in the management of CAPDRP and is based on evidence-based recommendations of International Society of Peritoneal Dialysis guidelines for peritonitis, suggestions and expert consensus statements available in literature.

Overview of the guidelines

Prevention of CAPDRP

We recommend that systemic prophylactic antibiotic should be given prior to catheter insertionWe recommend that the disconnect system with 'flush before fill' bags should be used for continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD)We recommend that PD training should be conducted by a qualified nurse, preferably at the center, and reviewed for each patient by the nephrologist before certified to be completeWe suggest that prophylactic antibiotic should be given to all PD patients before any invasive procedure like dental, gynecological or intestinalWe recommend that topical antibiotic cream or ointment should be applied to the catheter exit site daily after bathWe recommend that catheter exit site or tunnel infections should be treated adequately so as to prevent subsequent peritonitisWe recommend that antifungal prophylaxis should be given whenever antibiotics are given to a CAPD patient to decrease fungal peritonitis.

Initial presentation and management of peritonitis

We recommend that peritonitis should be diagnosed when at least 2 of the 3 features are present:

Clinical features consistent with peritonitis like abdominal pain, cloudy dialysis effluent;Dialysis effluent white cell count >100/μL (after a dwell time of at least 2 hours), with >50% polymorphonuclear leucocytes; andPositive dialysis effluent culture.

We recommend that all cloudy effluent should be considered peritonitis and treated accordingly till excluded.We suggest sending the entire bag to the microbiology laboratory for analysis.We recommend that PD effluent, when suspected of peritonitis, should be tested for total cell count, differential cell count, Gram stain, and culture.We suggest initial testing for bacterial and fungal culture and if possible, in suspected, or in non-responding cases for mycobacterial cultures.

Empiric Antibiotic selection

We recommend that empiric antibiotic should be started as soon as possible when peritonitis is suspected, preferably after sending effluent for testingWe recommend that the choice of empiric antibiotic should be to cover both Gram positive and negative organism and better guided by local antibiogramWe recommend that Gram positive organism should be covered by Vancomycin and Gram negative by Piperacillin-Tazobactam or Aminoglycoside, unless local antibiogram suggest other antibiotics susceptibilityWe recommend that preferred route of antibiotic administration should be intra-peritoneal (IP), unless there is evidence of severe systemic sepsisWe recommend that antibiotic should be deescalated once the antibiotic sensitivity pattern is availableWe recommend that PD catheter should be removed in cases of refractory peritonitis, defined by failure of the PD effluent to clear up after 5 days of appropriate antibioticsWe suggest that peritonitis should be treated depending upon the bacteria isolated, at least for 2-3 weeks with appropriate antibioticWe suggest that coagulase-negative Staphylococci should be treated for 2 weeks with appropriate antibioticsWe suggest Enterococcal peritonitis should be treated for 3 weeks. We also suggest adding an Aminoglycoside for severe infection. For Vancomycin Resistant Enterococci (VRE), we suggest 3 weeks of IP Ampicillin if it is sensitive or Linezolid, Daptomycin or Teicoplanin as per sensitivity, if ampicillin resistantWe suggest that Streptococcal peritonitis should be treated for 2 weeksWe suggest that Staphylococcus aureus peritonitis should be treated for 3 weeksWe suggest that Corynebacterial peritonitis should be treated for 3 weeksWe suggest that Pseudomonas peritonitis should be treated for 3 weeks with 2 susceptible antibioticsWe suggest that non-Pseudomonas Gram negative peritonitis should be treated for 3 weeksWe suggest that peritonitis associated with exit site and/or tunnel infection should be managed with catheter removalWe suggest that polymicrobial Gram negative peritonitis should be managed with surgical evaluation and antibiotics for 3 weeksWe suggest that culture negative peritonitis, if responding within 3 days, should be continued with same antibiotics, for 2 weeks. If no response, special culture techniques should be resorted toWe suggest that catheter should be removed for fungal peritonitis and anti-fungals to be given for 2 weeksWe suggest that tuberculous peritonitis should be treated appropriately with anti-Tuberculous drugs and catheter removal is suggested if there is no response.

Catheter removal and re-insertion

We recommend that PD catheter should be removed for refractory, relapsing and fungal peritonitis. Catheter should also be removed for non-tuberculous mycobacterial infections and individualized for tuberculous peritonitisWe suggest that re-insertion of catheter can be considered after 2-4 weeks of bacterial and 4-6 weeks of fungal peritonitis along with complete resolution of peritoneal symptomsWe recommend that each PD center should have a continuous quality improvement (CQI) program to reduce the rates of peritonitis.

Guidelines for CAPD related peritonitis

Prevention of PDRP

We recommend that one dose of systemic prophylactic antibiotic should be given just prior to catheter insertion.

Every center should determine the choice of antibiotic as per their spectrum of sensitivity towards skin and soft tissue antibiogram. Three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) showed reduction in early peritonitis with use of perioperative antibiotic.[4],[5],[6] One trial showed no benefit.[7] Systematic review of these trials shows benefit of prophylactic antibiotic.[8]

We recommend that the disconnect system with 'flush before fill' bags should be used for continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD).

The risk of developing peritonitis is reduced to 1/3rd with the use of Y system.[9],[10] Also, there is no difference between the double bag or the Y system. There are conflicting results of comparison of peritonitis rates between CAPD and APD and peritonitis rate cannot be the basis of choice of any of these two modalities.

We recommend that PD training should be conducted by a qualified trainer, preferably at the center, and reviewed for each patient by the nephrologist before certified to be complete.

Training has great influence on incidence of peritonitis.[11],[12],[13],[14],[15],[16],[17],[18],[19],[20],[21],[22] Though strong evidence is lacking on who should be the trainer,[22] a well-trained nurse can dedicate time enough to train and monitor the exchange process. It is suggested to ensure proper training before making them independent, which can be done by the nephrologist (or other trained nurse, preferably not the same trainer). It is also suggested that retraining should be done periodically and after each episode of peritonitis.[17],[19]

We suggest that single dose prophylactic antibiotic should be given to all PD patients before any invasive procedure like dental, gynecological or intestinal.

Invasive procedure like colonoscopy has been shown to increase the risk of peritonitis.[23] Prophylactic antibiotic before an invasive procedure except upper gastroscopy, reduces the risk of peritonitis.[24] However, the choice of prophylactic antibiotic has not been studied and is left to the discretion of the local physician.

We recommend that topical antibiotic cream or ointment should be applied to the catheter exit site daily after bath.We recommend that catheter exit site or tunnel infections should be treated adequately so as to prevent subsequent peritonitis.

There is an association between exit site infection (ESI) and subsequent peritonitis and hence appropriate management will reduce the risk of peritonitis.[25],[26],[27] Though one of the systematic review did not show benefit of topical povidone-iodine in reducing peritonitis,[28] another meta-analysis showed that topical mupirocin reduced rates of overall S. aureus infection by 72% and S. aureus peritonitis by 40%.[29] Mupirocin resistance is of concern but is reported more with intermittent rather than daily use.[30],[31],[32],[33] With extensive use of mupirocin ointment to reduce S aureus infections, Pseudomonas infection rates increased as a cause of catheter infections.[34] An RCT showed topical gentamicin cream to the exit site was effective in reducing ESIs caused by Pseudomonas species as well as S aureus.[35] However, other studies showed increased ESIs by Enterobacteriaceae, Pseudomonas species and non-tuberculous mycobacteria with use of gentamicin cream.[36],[37] It is believed that topical gentamicin, however, is an acceptable alternative to mupirocin.

No definite anti-microbial guidelines are available for non-Tuberculous mycobacteria infections, but consensus is to treat with multiple antibiotics and remove the catheter.

We recommend that antifungal prophylaxis should be given whenever antibiotics are given to a PD patient to decrease fungal peritonitis. Antifungal prophylaxis should be continued for a week beyond antibiotics.

Fungal peritonitis is increased after antibiotic courses.[38],[39],[40] Two randomized trials[41],[42] and a systematic review[8] showed benefits of prophylactic anti-fungals during antibiotic course in preventing subsequent fungal peritonitis.

Initial presentation and management of peritonitis

We recommend that peritonitis should be diagnosed when at least 2 of the 3 features are present:

Clinical features consistent with peritonitis like abdominal pain, cloudy dialysis effluent;Dialysis effluent white cell count >100/μL (after a dwell time of at least 2 hours), with >50% polymorphonuclear leucocytes; andPositive dialysis effluent culture.

We recommend that all cloudy effluent should be considered peritonitis and treated accordingly till excluded.We recommend that PD effluent, when suspected of peritonitis, should be tested for total and differential cell count, Gram stain, and culture.

Cloudy effluent should be treated as peritonitis unless proven otherwise. There are non infectious causes of cloudy effluent which should be considered in non classical presentations [Table 2].[43] Patients presenting with abdominal pain should also be evaluated for peritonitis even when effluent is clear.{Table 2}

When peritonitis is suspected, dialysis effluent should be drained, inspected for cloudiness, and sent for total and differential cell count, Gram stain, and culture.[44] An effluent cell count with white blood cells (WBC) >100/μL (after a dwell time of at least 2 hours), with >50% PMN, is highly suggestive of peritonitis.[45] Appropriate antibiotic therapy (see below) should be initiated once the dialysis effluent specimens have been collected for analysis, without waiting for the results of laboratory testing. For patients on APD, percentage of PMN rather than the absolute WBC count should be used to diagnose peritonitis and a proportion above 50% PMN is strong evidence of peritonitis, even if the absolute WBC count is less than 100/μL.[45]

For patients in remote areas, they can keep the effluent bag refrigerated till they bring the bag for analysis and start intra peritoneal antibiotics as soon as possible. If possible, specimen should be processed within 6 hours of collection. Alternatively, they can send the effluent for analysis at local center or, if trained and available can inoculate into blood culture bottles, which should be provided to them. The inoculated culture bottles should be incubated at 37°C.

Gram stain of PD effluent should be performed, preferably after centrifugation. Appropriate culture method is a key to positive results. After collection, 50 ml of effluent should be centrifuged at 3000 g for 15 minutes, followed by resuspension of the sediment in 3-5 ml supernatant and inoculation on solid culture media or standard blood culture media. If cultures remain negative after 3-5 days, PD effluent should be sent for repeat cell count, fungal and mycobacterial cultures.

A number of novel diagnostic techniques have been explored for the early diagnosis of peritonitis, including leukocyte esterase reagent strips, biomarker assays (matrix metalloproteinase-8 and -9, neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin and procalcitonin), polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for bacterial-derived DNA fragments, 16S rRNA gene sequencing, matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization-time of flight (MALDI-TOF), and pathogen-specific “immune fingerprints”.[46],[47],[48],[49],[50],[51],[52],[53],[54],[55],[56],[57],[58] However, none of them has been proved to be superior to conventional culture techniques.

Empiric Antibiotic selection

We recommend that empiric antibiotic should be started as soon as possible when peritonitis is suspected, preferably after sending effluent for testing.We recommend that the choice of empiric antibiotic should be to cover both Gram positive and negative organism and better guided by local antibiogram.We recommend that Gram positive organism should be covered by Vancomycin and Gram negative by Piperacillin-Tazobactam or Aminoglycosides unless local antibiogram suggest other susceptibility.

In the recent data analysis, gram-positive organisms are more commonly encountered across the country but almost close to gram-negative organisms.[2] However, center wise difference have also been noted. It is suggested to start with antibiotics covering for both positive and negative organisms. In a meta-analysis,[55] the combination of a glycopeptide (vancomycin or teicoplanin) and ceftazidime was superior to other regimens. However, the sensitivity pattern across all zones in India suggest resistance towards cephalosporins and better sensitivity to piperacillin-tazobactam. Cefepime or imipenem/cilastatin can be used as monotherapy. Once the culture results are available, antibiotics can be adjusted and deescalated to avoid future antibiotic resistance.

We recommend that preferred route of antibiotic administration should be intra-peritoneal (IP), unless there is evidence of severe systemic sepsis.We recommend that antibiotic should be deescalated once the antibiotic sensitivity pattern is available.

Intraperitoneal dosing results in high IP drug levels and is preferable to IV administration. Intraperitoneal antibiotics can be given as continuous (in each exchange) or intermittent dosing (once daily).[59],[60],[61],[62],[63],[64] In intermittent dosing, the antibiotic-containing dialysis solution must be allowed to dwell for at least six hours to allow adequate absorption. The role of monitoring serum vancomycin levels is controversial.[65],[66] In general, a dosing interval of every 4 to 5 days would keep serum trough levels above 15 μg/mL, but there is substantial inter-individual variability.[65],[67] Re-dosing is probably appropriate when serum vancomycin levels are below 15 μg/mL.[67],[68],[69] There is no firm evidence that monitoring aminoglycoside levels mitigates toxicity risk or enhances efficacy.[69]

Antibiotic dosing in APD is of concern because of rapid exchanges. However, intermittent dosing given at long day dwell is effective. Alternatively, if possible, patients may switch to CAPD till completion of the treatment. The recommended dosage of antibiotics for the treatment of PD related peritonitis is summarized in [Table 3] and [Table 4].[2]{Table 3}{Table 4}

We recommend that PD catheter should be removed in cases of refractory peritonitis.

Refractory peritonitis is defined as failure of the PD effluent to clear up after 5 days of appropriate antibiotics. If there is failure to respond to empiric antibiotic in culture negative or to susceptible antibiotic in culture positive peritonitis in 3 days, a trial of higher / susceptible antibiotic is recommended for another 2 days before labelling it as refractory. Catheter removal is indicated in cases of refractory peritonitis. Delay in catheter removal leads to extended hospital stay, peritoneal membrane damage, increased risk of fungal peritonitis and excessive mortality.[70] Catheter should also be removed if patient's condition is deteriorating.

We suggest that coagulase-negative Staphylococci (CONS) should be treated for 2 weeks with appropriate antibiotics.

CONS is mostly due to touch contamination. Intraperitoneal vancomycin or cephalosporins can be advised for 2 weeks. Relapsing CONS peritonitis suggests colonization and bio-film formation, when catheter removal may be considered.

We suggest Enterococcal peritonitis should be treated for 3 weeks. We also suggest adding an Aminoglycoside for severe infection. For Vancomycin Resistant Enterococci (VRE), we suggest 3 weeks of IP Ampicillin if it is sensitive or Linezolid, Daptomycin or Teicoplanin as per sensitivity, if ampicillin resistant.

Enterococci infection suggests intra-abdominal source of infection. Identification of species is important as many are resistant to penicillins and carbapenems.

We suggest that Streptococcal peritonitis should be treated for 2 weeks.

Streptococci frequently originate from the mouth,[71] although S bovis comes from the colon.[72] Streptococcus viridans are more likely to be refractory.

We suggest that Staphylococcus aureus peritonitis should be treated for 3 weeks.

S aureus is often secondary to touch contamination, exit site or tunnel infection. Data suggests 3 weeks treatment[73],[74] with appropriate antibiotic. Concomitant exit site or tunnel infection may need catheter removal.

We suggest that Corynebacterial peritonitis should be treated for 3 weeks.We suggest that Pseudomonas peritonitis should be treated for 3 weeks with 2 susceptible antibiotics.

Pseudomonas peritonitis is associated with higher rates of hospitalizations, catheter removal and transfer to hemodialysis. The outcome is reported to be better with 2 anti-pseudomonal antibiotics.[75]

We suggest that non Pseudomonas Gram negative peritonitis should be treated for 3 weeks.

The SPICE organisms (Serratia, Pseudomonas, indole positive organisms like Proteus and Providentia, Citrobacter, and Enterobacter) have amp C beta lactamases which can inactivate cephalosporins and have an increased risk of relapse. There are observational studies which shows treatment with 2 antibiotics for 3 to 4 weeks have better results.[76]

We suggest that peritonitis associated with exit site and/or tunnel infection should be managed with catheter removal.

It is believed that peritonitis associated with ESI or tunnel infection is because of peri-catheter translocation of bacteria. The outcome of such infections are poor and catheter removal with appropriate antibiotic helps in decreasing the morbidity.

We suggest that polymicrobial Gram negative peritonitis should be managed with surgical evaluation and antibiotics for 3 weeks.

When multiple enteric organisms are isolated, intra-abdominal pathology is a possibility and should be evaluated. The choice of antibiotic becomes metronidazole with vancomycin with cephalosporin or aminoglycoside. Carbapenems or piperacillin/tazobactam are an alternative.

We suggest that culture negative peritonitis, if responding within 3 days, should be treated with same antibiotics for 2 weeks. Early response usually is due to CONS, but several centers have reported equal or higher incidence of gram negative organisms and the consensus was to continue both the empiric antibiotics for 2 weeks. If no response within 5 days, special culture techniques should be resorted to.

Inappropriate culture technique is the most common cause of 'culture negative' peritonitis. Recent antibiotic usage also leads to culture negative peritonitis. Predominantly, these are due to gram positive organisms and hence, if responded within 3 days, should be managed for 2 weeks.[77],[78],[79]

We suggest that catheter should be removed for fungal peritonitis and anti-fungals to be given for 2 weeks.

Fungal peritonitis is associated with higher rates of hospitalization, transfer to hemodialysis, and death.[80],[81],[82],[83] Catheter removal is suggested once diagnosis is confirmed to reduce mortality and preserve the peritoneum. Anti-fungal agents are continued for 2 weeks after catheter removal. The choice of anti-fungals are a combination of amphotericin B and flucytosine. However, IP amphotericin may cause chemical peritonitis and IV has poor peritoneal bioavailability. Flucytosine is not widely available. Other agents include fluconazole (for Candida and cryptococcus), echinocandins (for Aspergillus and non-albicans Candida), posconazole, and voriconazole (for filamentous fungi).

We suggest that Tuberculous peritonitis should be treated appropriately with anti-tuberculous drugs and catheter removal is considered if there is no response.

Patient with refractory or relapsing peritonitis with negative bacterial cultures should be suspected of tuberculous peritonitis. Routine testing for tuberculosis like Ziehl Neelsen stain or conventional culture are not sufficiently sensitive. Culture in fluid medium like MGIT or BactAlert or mycobacterial DNA PCR (Gene Xpert) can be better in diagnosing tuberculous peritonitis. Laproscopic peritoneal or omental biopsy can be diagnostic in suspicious cases.[84] Catheter removal is required only if patient is sick or is non-responding to drug therapy.

Catheter removal and re-insertion

We recommend that PD catheter should be removed for refractory, relapsing and fungal peritonitis. Catheter should also be removed for non-tuberculous mycobacterial infections and individualized for tuberculous peritonitis.We suggest that re-insertion of catheter can be considered after 2-4 weeks of bacterial and 4-6 weeks of fungal peritonitis along with complete resolution of peritoneal symptoms.

There is enough evidence of poor outcome while salvaging catheters in refractory, relapsing and fungal peritonitis. However, for non-tuberculous mycobacterial infections, there are case reports and series which suggest catheter removal[85] along with multi-agent antibiotic therapy.

We recommend that each PD center should have a continuous quality improvement (CQI) program to reduce the rates of peritonitis. Satellite centers may strengthen the patient management and the PD program.

Monitoring of peritonitis rates and outcomes annually gives an insight on culture negative peritonitis rates, incidence of peritonitis and its outcome. This may reveal the cause of failure of cultures and measures to improve culture positive rates. Incidence rates may also help establish the lacunae in training or re-training needs of patients. Comparing the incidence and outcome of peritonitis and discussions with other centers may help improving the overall outcome of PD patients.

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to Dr. S. K. Agarwal, who has given valuable inputs and guidance in the preparation and finalization of this guideline.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.

References

1Abraham G, Gupta A, Prasad KN, Rohit A, Billa V, Chakravarthy R, et al. Microbiology, clinical spectrum and outcome of peritonitis in patients undergoing peritoneal dialysis in India: Results from a multicentric, observational study. J Trop Dis 2016;4:1-8.
2Li PK, Szeto CC, Piraino B, de Arteaga J, Fan S, Figueiredo AE, et al. ISPD peritonitis recommendations: 2016 update on prevention and treatment. Perit Dial Int 2016;36:481-508.
3Abraham G, Thiagarajan T, Mathew M. Prevention of peritoneal dialysis related infections as a means to prevent dropout. Indian J Nephrol 2005;15:S10-3.
4Wikdahl AM, Engman U, Stegmayr BG, Sörenssen JG. One-dose cefuroxime i.v. and i.p. reduces microbial growth in PD patients after catheter insertion. Nephrol Dial Transplant 1997;12:157-60.
5Bennet-Jones DN, Martin JB, Barratt AJ, Duffy TJ, Naish PF, Aber GM. Prophylactic gentamicin in the prevention of early exit-site infections and peritonitis in CAPD. Adv Perit Dial 1988;4:147-50.
6Gadallah MF, Ramdeen G, Mignone J, Patel D, Mitchell L, Tatro S. Role of preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis in preventing postoperative perito-nitis in newly placed peritoneal dialysis catheters. Am J Kidney Dis 2000;36:1014-9.
7Lye WC, Lee EJ, Tan CC. Prophylactic antibiotics in the insertion of Tenck-hoff catheters. Scand J Urol Nephrol 1992;26:177-80.
8Strippoli GFM, Tong A, Johnson D, Schena FP, Craig JC. Antimicrobial agents to prevent peritonitis in peritoneal dialysis: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Am J Kidney Dis 2004;44:591-603.
9Strippoli GF, Tong A, Johnson D, Schena FP, Craig JC. Catheter-related interventions to prevent peritonitis in peritoneal dialysis: A system-atic review of randomized, controlled trials. J Am Soc Nephrol 2004;15:2735-46.
10Daly C, Cody JD, Khan I, Rabindranath KS, Vale L, Wallace SA. Double bag or Y-set versus standard transfer systems for continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis in end-stage kidney disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014;8:CD003078.
11Figueiredo AE, Bernardini J, Bowes E, Hiramatsu M, Price V, Su C, et al. ISPD guideline / recommendations: A syllabus for teaching peritoneal dialysis to patients and caregivers. Perit Dial Int 2016. doi: 10.3747/pdi.2015.00277 (Epub ahead of print).
12Bernardini J, Price V, Figueiredo A. Peritoneal dialysis patient training, 2006. Perit Dial Int 2006;26:625-32.
13Bender FH, Bernardini J, Piraino B. Prevention of infectious complications in peritoneal dialysis: Best demonstrated practices. Kidney Int Suppl 2006;103:S44-54.
14Hall G, Bogan A, Dreis S, Duffy A, Greene S, Kelley K, et al. New directions in peritoneal dialysis patient training. Nephrol Nurs J 2004;31:149-63.
15Holloway M, Mujais S, Kandert M, Warady BA. Pediatric peritoneal dialysis training: Characteristics and impact on peritonitis rates. Perit Dial Int 2001;21:401-4.
16Chow KM, Szeto CC, Law MC, Fung JS, Li PK. Influence of peritoneal dialysis training nurses' experience on peritonitis rates. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2007;2:647-52.
17Russo R, Manili L, Tiraboschi G, Amar K, De Luca M, Alberghini E, et al. Patient re-training in peritoneal dialysis: Why and when it is needed. Kidney Int Suppl 2006;103:S127-32.
18Ballerini L, Paris V. Nosogogy: When the learner is a patient with chronic kidney failure. Kid Int 2006;70:S122-6.
19Arndt J. From compliance and false memory. J Exp Psych 2010;36:66-9.
20Bordin G, Cassati M, Sicolo N, Zuccherato N, Eduati V. Patient education in peritoneal dialysis: An observational study in Italy. J Ren Care 2007;33:165-71.
21Dong J, Chen Y. Impact of the bag exchange procedure on risk of peri-tonitis. Perit Dial Int 2010;30:440-7.
22Zhang L, Hawley CM, Johnson DW. Focus on peritoneal dialysis training: Working to decrease peritonitis rates. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2016; 31:214-22.
23Yip T, Tse KC, Lam MJ, Cheng SW, Lui SL, Tang S, et al. Risks and outcomes of peritonitis after flexible colonoscopy in CAPD patients. Perit Dial Int 2007;27:560-4.
24Wu HH, Li IJ, Weng CH, Lee CC, Chen YC, Chang MY, et al. Prophylactic antibiotics for endoscopy-associated peritonitis in peritoneal dialysis patients. PLoS One 2013;8:e71532.
25van Diepen AT, Tomlinson GA, Jassal SV. The association between exit site infection and subsequent peritonitis among peritoneal dialysis patients. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2012;7:1266-71.
26van Diepen AT, Jassal SV. A qualitative systematic review of the literature supporting a causal relationship between exit-site infection and subse-quent peritonitis in patients with end-stage renal disease treated with peritoneal dialysis. Perit Dial Int 2013;33:604-10.
27Lloyd A, Tangri N, Shafer LA, Rigatto C, Perl J, Komenda P, et al. The risk of peritonitis after an exit site infection: A time-matched, case-control study. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2013;28:1915-21.
28Strippoli GF, Tong A, Johnson D, Schena FP, Craig JC. Antimicrobial agents for preventing peritonitis in peritoneal dialysis patients. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2004;4:CD004679.
29Xu G, Tu W, Xu C. Mupirocin for preventing exit-site infection and perito-nitis in patients undergoing peritoneal dialysis. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2010;25:587-92.
30Lobbedeez T, Gardam M, Dedier H, Burdzy D, Chu M, Izatt S, et al. Routine use of mupirocin at the peritoneal catheter exit site and mupirocin resis-tance: Still low after 7 years. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2004;19:3140-3.
31Perez-Fontan M, Rosales M, Rodriguez-Carmona A, Falcon TG, Valdes F. Mupirocin resistance after long-term use for Staphylococcus aureus colonization in patients undergoing chronic peritoneal dialysis. Am J Kidney Dis 2002;39:337-41.
32Annigeri R, Conly J, Vas S, Dedier H, Prakashan KP, Bargman JM, et al. Emergence of mupirocin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in chronic peritoneal dialysis patients using mupirocin prophylaxis to prevent exit-site infection. Perit Dial Int 2001;21:554-9.
33Al-Hwiesh AK, Abdul-Rahman IS, Al-Muhanna FA, Al-Sulaiman MH, Al-Jondebi MS, Divino-Filho JC. Prevention of peritoneal dialysis cath-eter infections in Saudi peritoneal dialysis patients: The emergence of high-level mupirocin resistance. Int J Artif Organs 2013;36:473-83.
34Piraino B, Bernardini J, Florio T, Fried L. Staphylococcus aureus prophylaxis and trends in gram negative infections in peritoneal dialysis patients. Perit Dial Int 2003;23:456-9.
35Bernardini J, Piraino B, Holley J, Johnston JR, Lutes R. A randomized trial of Staphylococcus aureus prophylaxis in peritoneal dialysis patients: Mupirocin calcium ointment 2% applied to the exit site versus cyclic oral rifampicin. Am J Kidney Dis 1996;27:695-700.
36Pierce DA, Williamson JC, Mauck VS, Russell GB, Palavecino E, Burkart JM. The effect on peritoneal dialysis pathogens of changing topical antibiotic prophylaxis. Perit Dial Int 2012;32:525-30.
37Lo MW, Mak SK, Wong YY, Lo KC, Chan SF, Tong GM, et al. Atypical mycobacterial exit site infection and peritonitis in peritoneal dialysis patients on prophylactic exit site gentamicin cream. Perit Dial Int 2013;33:267-72.
38Prasad KN, Prasad N, Gupta A, Sharma RK, Verma AK, Ayyagari A. Fungal peritonitis in patients on continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis: A single centre Indian experience. J Infect 2004;48:96-101.
39Wang AY, Yu AW, Li PK, Lam PK, Leung CB, Lai KN, et al. Factors predicting outcome of fungal peritonitis in peritoneal dialysis: Analysis of a 9-year experience of fungal peritonitis in a single center. Am J Kidney Dis 2000;36:1183-92.
40Goldie SJ, Kiernan-Troidle L, Torres C, Gorban-Brennan N, Dunne D, Kliger AS, et al. Fungal peritonitis in a large chronic peritoneal dialysis population: A report of 55 episodes. Am J Kidney Dis 1996;28:86-91.
41Lo WK, Chan CY, Cheng SW, Poon JF, Chan DT, Cheng IK. A prospective randomized control study of oral nystatin prophylaxis for Candida peri-tonitis complicating continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis. Am J Kidney Dis 1996;28:549-52.
42Restrepo C, Chacon J, Manjarres G. Fungal peritonitis in peritoneal dialy-sis patients: Successful prophylaxis with fluconazole, as demonstrated by prospective randomized control trial. Perit Dial Int 2010;30:619-25.
43Rocklin MA, Teitelbaum I. Noninfectious causes of cloudy peritoneal dialysate. Semin Dial 2001;14:37-40.
44Gould IM, Casewell MW. The laboratory diagnosis of peritonitis during continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis. J Hosp Infect 1986;7:155-60.
45Flanigan MJ, Freeman RM, Lim VS. Cellular response to peritonitis among peritoneal dialysis patients. Am J Kidney Dis 1985;6:420-4.
46Park SJ, Lee JY, Tak WT, Lee JH. Using reagent strips for rapid diagnosis of peritonitis in peritoneal dialysis patients. Adv Perit Dial 2005;21:69-71.
47Akman S, Uygun V, Guven AG. Value of the urine strip test in the early diagnosis of bacterial peritonitis. Pediatr Int 2005;47:523-7.
48Nguyen-Khac E, Cadranel JF, Thevenot T, Nousbaum JB. Review article: The utility of reagent strips in the diagnosis of infected ascites in cirrhotic patients. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2008;28:282-8.
49Yoo TH, Chang KH, Ryu DR, Kim JS, Choi HY, Park HC, et al. Usefulness of 23S rRNA amplification by PCR in the detection of bacteria in CAPD peritonitis. Am J Nephrol 2006;26:115-20.
50Johnson G, Wilks M, Warwick S, Millar MR, Fan SL. Comparative study of diagnosis of PD peritonitis by quantitative polymerase chain reaction for bacterial DNA vs culture methods. J Nephrol 2006;19:45-9.
51Ro Y, Hamada C, Io H, Hayashi K, Hirahara I, Tomino Y. Rapid, simple, and reliable method for the diagnosis of CAPD peritonitis using the new MMP-9 test kit. J Clin Lab Anal 2004;18:224-30.
52Ota K, Maruyama H, Iino N, Nakamura G, Shimotori M, Tanabe Y, et al. Rapid detection of causative pathogen of peritonitis using in-situ hybrid-ization in a patient with continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis. J Infect Chemother 2007;13:273-5.
53Kim SH, Jeong HS, Kim YH, Song SA, Lee JY, Oh SH, et al. Evaluation of DNA extraction methods and their clinical application for direct detec-tion of causative bacteria in continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis culture fluids from patients with peritonitis by using broad-range PCR. Ann Lab Med 2012;32:119-25.
54Chang YT, Wang HC, Wang MC, Wu AB, Sung JM, Sun HS, et al. Rapid identification of bacteria and Candida pathogens in peritoneal dialysis effluent from patients with peritoneal dialysis-related peritonitis by use of multilocus PCR coupled with electrospray ionization mass spectrom-etry. J Clin Microbiol 2014;52:1217-9.
55Ahmadi SH, Neela V, Hamat RA, Goh BL, Syafinaz AN. Rapid detection and identification of pathogens in patients with continuous ambula-tory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) associated peritonitis by 16s rRNA gene sequencing. Trop Biomed 2013;30:602-7.
56Lin CY, Roberts GW, Kift-Morgan A, Donovan KL, Topley N, Eberl M. Pathogen-specific local immune fingerprints diagnose bacterial infec-tion in peritoneal dialysis patients. J Am Soc Nephrol 2013;24:2002-9.
57Bieber SD, Anderson AE, Mehrotra R. Diagnostic testing for peritonitis in patients undergoing peritoneal dialysis. Semin Dial 2014;27:602-6.
58Prasad N, Singh K, Gupta A, Prasad KN. Isolation of bacterial DNA followed by sequencing and differing cytokine response in peritoneal dialysis effluent help in identifying bacteria in culture negative peritonitis. Nephrology 2018;23:148-54.
59Barretti P, Doles JV, Pinotti DG, El Dib R. Efficacy of antibiotic therapy for peritoneal dialysis-associated peritonitis: A proportional meta-analysis. BMC Infect Dis 2014;14:445.
60Boyce NW, Wood C, Thomson NM, Kerr P, Atkins RC. Intraperitoneal (IP) vancomycin therapy for CAPD peritonitis—A prospective, randomized comparison of intermittent v continuous therapy. Am J Kidney Dis 1988;12:304-6.
61Low CL, Bailie GR, Evans A, Eisele G, Venezia RA. Pharmacokinetics of once-daily IP gentamicin in CAPD patients. Perit Dial Int 1996;16:379-84.
62Low CL, Gopalakrishna K, Lye WC. Pharmacokinetics of once daily intraperitoneal cefazolin in continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis patients. J Am Soc Nephrol 2000; 11:1117-21.
63Manley HJ, Bailie GR, Frye RF, McGoldrick MD. Intravenous vancomycin pharmacokinetics in automated peritoneal dialysis patients. Perit Dial Int 2001;21:378-85.
64Manley HJ, Bailie GR, Frye R, McGoldrick MD. Intermittent intravenous piperacillin pharmacokinetics in automated peritoneal dialysis patients. Perit Dial Int 2000;20:686-93.
65Fish R, Nipah R, Jones C, Finney H, Fan SL. Intraperitoneal vancomycin concentrations during peritoneal dialysis-associated peritonitis: Cor-relation with serum levels. Perit Dial Int 2012;32:332-8.
66Stevenson S, Tang W, Cho Y, Mudge DW, Hawley CM, Badve SV, et al. The role of monitoring vancomycin levels in patients with peritoneal dialysis-associated peritonitis. Perit Dial Int 2015;35:222-8.
67Blunden M, Zeitlin D, Ashman N, Fan SL. Single UK centre experience on the treatment of PD peritonitis—antibiotic levels and outcomes. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2007;22:1714-9.
68Mulhern JG, Braden GL, O'Shea MH, Madden RL, Lipkowitz GS, Germain MJ. Trough serum vancomycin levels predict the relapse of Gram-positive peritonitis in peritoneal dialysis patients. Am J Kidney Dis 1995;25:611-5.
69Johnson DW. Do antibiotic levels need to be followed in treating peri-toneal dialysis-associated peritonitis? Semin Dial 2011;24:445-6.
70Choi P, Nemati E, Banerjee A, Preston E, Levy J, Brown E. Peritoneal dialysis catheter removal for acute peritonitis: A retrospective analysis of factors associated with catheter removal and prolonged postoperative hospitalization. Am J Kidney Dis 2004;43:103-11.
71Shukla A, Abreu Z, Bargman JM. Streptococcal PD peritonitis—A 10-year review of one centre's experience. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2006;21:3545-9.
72Yap DY, To KK, Yip TP, Lui SL, Chan TM, Lai KN, et al. Streptococcus bovis peritonitis complicating peritoneal dialysis–A review of 10 years' experience. Perit Dial Int 2012;32:55-9.
73Szeto CC, Chow KM, Kwan BC, Law MC, Chung KY, Yu S, et al. Staphylo-coccus aureus peritonitis complicates peritoneal dialysis: Review of 245 consecutive cases. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2007;2:245-51.
74Govindarajulu S, Hawley CM, McDonald SP, Brown FG, Rosman JB, Wiggins KJ, et al. Staphylococcus aureus peritonitis in Australian peritoneal dialysis patients: Predictors, treatment and outcomes in 503 cases. Perit Dial Int 2010;30:311-9.
75Siva B, Hawley CM, McDonald SP, Brown FG, Rosman JB, Wiggins KJ, et al. Pseudomonas peritonitis in Australia: Predictors, treatment, and outcomes in 191 cases. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2009;4:957-64.
76Tzanetou K, Triantaphilis G, Tsoutsos D, Petropoulou D, Ganteris G, Malamou-Lada E, et al. Strenotophomonas maltophila peritonitis in CAPD patients: Susceptibility of antibioticis and treatment outcome: A report of five cases. Perit Dial Int 2004;24:401-4.
77Bunke M, Brier ME, Golper TA. Culture-negative CAPD peritonitis: The Network 9 Study. Adv Perit Dial 1994;10:174-8.
78Fahim M, Hawley CM, McDonald SP, Brown FG, Rosman JB, Wiggins KJ, et al. Culture-negative peritonitis in peritoneal dialysis patients in Australia: Predictors, treatment and outcomes in 435 cases. Am J Kidney Dis 2010;55:690-7.
79Szeto CC, Wong TY, Chow KM, Leung CB, Li PK. The clinical course of culture-negative peritonitis complicating peritoneal dialysis. Am J Kidney Dis 2003;42:567-74.
80Miles R, Hawley CM, McDonald SP, Brown FG, Rosman JB, Wiggins KJ, et al. Predictors and outcomes of fungal peritonitis in peritoneal dialysis patients. Kidney Int 2009;76:622-8.
81Matuszkiewicz-Rowinska J. Update on fungal peritonitis and its treat-ment. Perit Dial Int 2009;29(Suppl 2):S161-5.
82Nadeau-Fredette AC, Bargman JM. Characteristics and outcomes of fungal peritonitis in a modern North American cohort. Perit Dial Int 2015;35:78-84.
83Basturk T, Koc Y, Unsal A, Ahbap E, Sakaci T, Yildiz I, et al. Fungal peri-tonitis in peritoneal dialysis: A 10-year retrospective analysis in a single center. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci 2012;16:1696-700.
84Chow KM, Chow VC, Hung LC, Wong SM, Szeto CC. Tuberculous peritonitis-associated mortality is high among patients waiting for the results of mycobacterial cultures of ascitic fluid samples. Clin Infect Dis 2002;35:409-13.
85Inoue H, Washida N, Morimoto K, Shinozuka K, Kasai T, Uchiyama K, et al. Non-tuberculous mycobacterial infections related to peritoneal dialysis. Perit Dial Int 2018;38:147-9.