Pharmacoeconomics of hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis for patients with end-stage renal disease: a systematic review_Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine

Authors：

YANG Bolu ^1,3 , ZHANG Fan ^1,3 , MENG Rui ² , LIU Zhao ^1,3 , LI Xue ^1,3 , WANG Yaoling ^1,3 , LIU Yuehua ^1,3 ,  ZHAO Kun ⁴

1. Health Development Research Center, National Health Commission, Beijing 100191, P.R.China;
2. International School of Medicine and Business, China Pharmaceutical University, Nanjing 211198, P.R.China;
3. National Comprehensive Evaluation Center of Drugs and Health Technology of National Health Commission, Beijing 100191, P.R.China;
4. Vanke School of Public Health, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, P.R.China;

Corresponding author：

ZHAO Kun, Email: xuewhp@163.com

Keywords：

Hemodialysis; Peritoneal dialysis; Cost-effectiveness; Pharmacoeconomic; Systematic review

DOI：

10.7507/1672-2531.202105182

Video：

Export PDF Favorites Scan Get Citation

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Objective To systematically review the pharmacoeconomics of hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis in patients with end-stage renal disease. Methods CRD, NICE, CADTH, HITAP, NECA, IWIQG, ISPOR, PubMed, EMbase, CNKI, and WanFang Data databases were electronically searched to collect pharmacoeconomic studies on the hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis in the treatment of end-stage renal disease from inception to December 2020. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Then, the conclusions of research models, pharmacoeconomic evaluation results, and sensitivity analysis were summarized. Results A total of 15 pharmacoeconomic studies were included, among which 9 studies used the Markov state transition model, and 6 were observational studies. From the perspective of health outcomes, peritoneal dialysis had cost-effectiveness advantages over hemodialysis in the treatment of end-stage renal disease under the condition of a clear threshold. Conclusions Current evidence shows that compared with hemodialysis, peritoneal dialysis has certain cost-effectiveness advantages in the treatment of end-stage renal disease. Due to limited quality and quantity of the included studies, more high-quality studies are required to verify the above conclusions.

Citation： YANG Bolu, ZHANG Fan, MENG Rui, LIU Zhao, LI Xue, WANG Yaoling, LIU Yuehua, ZHAO Kun. Pharmacoeconomics of hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis for patients with end-stage renal disease: a systematic review. Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, 2021, 21(12): 1398-1406. doi: 10.7507/1672-2531.202105182 Copy

1.	肖月, 隋宾艳, 赵琨. 我国终末期肾病现状及透析技术的应用、费用及支付情况分析. 中国卫生政策研究, 2011, 4(5): 29-33.
2.	方纪林, 蒋红利, 李向东, 等. 不同透析方式对终末期肾脏疾病患者钙磷代谢及炎症因子水平的影响. 国际泌尿系统杂志, 2020, 40(1): 115-118.
3.	郑奕挺, 林振威. 血液透析和腹膜透析治疗终末期肾病透析患者的临床疗效观察. 临床医学工程, 2018, 25(3): 281-282.
4.	Zhang L, Zhao MH, Zuo L, et al. China kidney disease network (CK-NET) 2015 annual data report. Kidney Int Suppl (2011), 2019, 9(1): e1-e81.
5.	Husereau D, Drummond M, Petrou S, et al. Consolidated health economic evaluation reporting standards (CHEERS)-explanation and elaboration: a report of the ISPOR health economic evaluation publication guidelines good reporting practices task force. Value Health, 2013, 16(2): 231-250.
6.	Husereau D, Drummond M, Petrou S, et al. Consolidated health economic evaluation reporting standards (CHEERS) statement. Int J Technol Assess Health Care, 2013, 29(2): 117-122.
7.	Afiatin None, Khoe LC, Kristin E, et al. Economic evaluation of policy options for dialysis in end-stage renal disease patients under the universal health coverage in Indonesia. PLoS One, 2017, 12(5): e0177436.
8.	Pike E, Hamidi V, Ringerike T, et al. More use of peritoneal dialysis gives significant savings: a systematic review and health economic decision model. J Clin Med Res, 2017, 9(2): 104-116.
9.	Salonen T, Reina T, Oksa H, et al. Alternative strategies to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of peritoneal dialysis and hemodialysis. Int Urol Nephrol, 2007, 39(1): 289-298.
10.	Sinclair A, Cimon K, Loncar M, et al. Dialysis modalities for the treatment of end-stage kidney disease: a health technology assessment. Ottawa (ON): Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health, 2017.
11.	Hooi LS, Lim TO, Goh A, et al. Economic evaluation of centre haemodialysis and continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis in Ministry of Health hospitals, Malaysia. Nephrology (Carlton), 2005, 10(1): 25-32.
12.	Pike E, Hamidi V, Ringerike T, et al. Health technology assessment of the different dialysis modalities in Norway [Internet]. Oslo, Norway: Knowledge Centre for the Health Services at the Norwegian Institute of Public Health (NIPH), 2013.
13.	Surendra NK, Abdul Manaf MR, Hooi LS, et al. Cost utility analysis of end stage renal disease treatment in ministry of health dialysis centres, Malaysia: hemodialysis versus continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis. PLoS One, 2019, 14(10): e0218422.
14.	Chang YT, Hwang JS, Hung SY, et al. Cost-effectiveness of hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis: a national cohort study with 14 years follow-up and matched for comorbidities and propensity score. Sci Rep, 2016, 6: 30266.
15.	Teerawattananon Y, Mugford M, Tangcharoensathien V. Economic evaluation of palliative management versus peritoneal dialysis and hemodialysis for end-stage renal disease: evidence for coverage decisions in Thailand. Value Health, 2007, 10(1): 61-72.
16.	刘亦农. 血液透析和腹膜透析的成本效用分析. 中华肾脏病杂志, 2011, 27(1): 6.
17.	Yang F, Lau T, Luo N. Cost-effectiveness of haemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis for patients with end-stage renal disease in Singapore. Nephrology (Carlton), 2016, 21(8): 669-677.
18.	Takura T, Hiramatsu M, Nakamoto H, et al. Health economic evaluation of peritoneal dialysis based on cost-effectiveness in Japan: a preliminary study. Clinicoecon Outcomes Res, 2019, 11: 579-590.
19.	Treharne C, Liu FX, Arici M, et al. Peritoneal dialysis and in-centre haemodialysis: a cost-utility analysis from a UK payer perspective. Appl Health Econ Health Policy, 2014, 12(4): 409-420.
20.	Lim TO, Lim YN, Wong HS, et al. Cost effectiveness evaluation of the Ministry of Health Malaysia dialysis programme. Med J Malaysia, 1999, 54(4): 442-452.
21.	Wong CKH, Chen J, Fung SKS, et al. Lifetime cost-effectiveness analysis of first-line dialysis modalities for patients with end-stage renal disease under peritoneal dialysis first policy. BMC Nephrol, 2020, 21(1): 42.
22.	杨超. 中国透析患者疾病负担分析. 成都: 中华医学会肾脏病学分会2019年血液净化论坛, 2019.

1. 肖月, 隋宾艳, 赵琨. 我国终末期肾病现状及透析技术的应用、费用及支付情况分析. 中国卫生政策研究, 2011, 4(5): 29-33.
2. 方纪林, 蒋红利, 李向东, 等. 不同透析方式对终末期肾脏疾病患者钙磷代谢及炎症因子水平的影响. 国际泌尿系统杂志, 2020, 40(1): 115-118.
3. 郑奕挺, 林振威. 血液透析和腹膜透析治疗终末期肾病透析患者的临床疗效观察. 临床医学工程, 2018, 25(3): 281-282.
4. Zhang L, Zhao MH, Zuo L, et al. China kidney disease network (CK-NET) 2015 annual data report. Kidney Int Suppl (2011), 2019, 9(1): e1-e81.
5. Husereau D, Drummond M, Petrou S, et al. Consolidated health economic evaluation reporting standards (CHEERS)-explanation and elaboration: a report of the ISPOR health economic evaluation publication guidelines good reporting practices task force. Value Health, 2013, 16(2): 231-250.
6. Husereau D, Drummond M, Petrou S, et al. Consolidated health economic evaluation reporting standards (CHEERS) statement. Int J Technol Assess Health Care, 2013, 29(2): 117-122.
7. Afiatin None, Khoe LC, Kristin E, et al. Economic evaluation of policy options for dialysis in end-stage renal disease patients under the universal health coverage in Indonesia. PLoS One, 2017, 12(5): e0177436.
8. Pike E, Hamidi V, Ringerike T, et al. More use of peritoneal dialysis gives significant savings: a systematic review and health economic decision model. J Clin Med Res, 2017, 9(2): 104-116.
9. Salonen T, Reina T, Oksa H, et al. Alternative strategies to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of peritoneal dialysis and hemodialysis. Int Urol Nephrol, 2007, 39(1): 289-298.
10. Sinclair A, Cimon K, Loncar M, et al. Dialysis modalities for the treatment of end-stage kidney disease: a health technology assessment. Ottawa (ON): Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health, 2017.
11. Hooi LS, Lim TO, Goh A, et al. Economic evaluation of centre haemodialysis and continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis in Ministry of Health hospitals, Malaysia. Nephrology (Carlton), 2005, 10(1): 25-32.
12. Pike E, Hamidi V, Ringerike T, et al. Health technology assessment of the different dialysis modalities in Norway [Internet]. Oslo, Norway: Knowledge Centre for the Health Services at the Norwegian Institute of Public Health (NIPH), 2013.
13. Surendra NK, Abdul Manaf MR, Hooi LS, et al. Cost utility analysis of end stage renal disease treatment in ministry of health dialysis centres, Malaysia: hemodialysis versus continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis. PLoS One, 2019, 14(10): e0218422.
14. Chang YT, Hwang JS, Hung SY, et al. Cost-effectiveness of hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis: a national cohort study with 14 years follow-up and matched for comorbidities and propensity score. Sci Rep, 2016, 6: 30266.
15. Teerawattananon Y, Mugford M, Tangcharoensathien V. Economic evaluation of palliative management versus peritoneal dialysis and hemodialysis for end-stage renal disease: evidence for coverage decisions in Thailand. Value Health, 2007, 10(1): 61-72.
16. 刘亦农. 血液透析和腹膜透析的成本效用分析. 中华肾脏病杂志, 2011, 27(1): 6.
17. Yang F, Lau T, Luo N. Cost-effectiveness of haemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis for patients with end-stage renal disease in Singapore. Nephrology (Carlton), 2016, 21(8): 669-677.
18. Takura T, Hiramatsu M, Nakamoto H, et al. Health economic evaluation of peritoneal dialysis based on cost-effectiveness in Japan: a preliminary study. Clinicoecon Outcomes Res, 2019, 11: 579-590.
19. Treharne C, Liu FX, Arici M, et al. Peritoneal dialysis and in-centre haemodialysis: a cost-utility analysis from a UK payer perspective. Appl Health Econ Health Policy, 2014, 12(4): 409-420.
20. Lim TO, Lim YN, Wong HS, et al. Cost effectiveness evaluation of the Ministry of Health Malaysia dialysis programme. Med J Malaysia, 1999, 54(4): 442-452.
21. Wong CKH, Chen J, Fung SKS, et al. Lifetime cost-effectiveness analysis of first-line dialysis modalities for patients with end-stage renal disease under peritoneal dialysis first policy. BMC Nephrol, 2020, 21(1): 42.
22. 杨超. 中国透析患者疾病负担分析. 成都: 中华医学会肾脏病学分会2019年血液净化论坛, 2019.

Previous Article
Association between Helicobacter pylori infection and Parkinson's disease: a meta-analysis
Next Article
Risk factors for children with tic disorder: a systematic review

Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine

Pharmacoeconomics of hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis for patients with end-stage renal disease: a systematic review

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Previous Article

Next Article

Format

Content