Introduction Kidney replacement therapy (KRT) is needed for patients with end-stage kidney disease. While it is clear that kidney transplantation remains the gold standard in KRT, data comparing the cost-utility of peritoneal dialysis (PD) and hemodialysis (HD) are scarce. No such analysis has been performed for German patients. Methods We used aggregated data generated by the Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36) for quality of life and insurance claims to evaluate mortality and economic impact. Quality-adjusted life years (QALY) and cost-utility were calculated accordingly. Results PD is superior to HD within all dimensions of the SF-36, both in terms of QALY and cost-utility. The difference in cost per QALY between the aggregated physical dimensions (€50,671.54 vs. €39,745.77) is greater than that of the aggregated mental dimensions (€31,638.75 vs. €25,287.63). However, there is considerable variability among patients. Conclusion From a health-economic point of view, PD should be preferred over HD when deciding on the KRT modality for the patient. This is not reflected in current practice, though. However, interindividual differences and patient preferences should be considered in the decision.
Keywords: center hemodialysis; chronic kidney disease; cost-benefit analysis; cost-utility analysis; dialysis; health-related quality of life; hemodialysis; kidney replacement therapy; peritoneal dialysis; quality of life.
Copyright © 2024, Matrisch et al.