Peritoneal Dialysis

  • Karl D. Nolph

Part of the Developments in Nephrology book series (DINE, volume 2)

Table of contents

  1. Front Matter
    Pages I-XVIII
  2. Karl D. Nolph, Michael I. Sorkin
    Pages 21-41
  3. Frederick N. Miller
    Pages 42-78
  4. Robert P. Popovich, W. Keith Pyle, Jack W. Moncrief
    Pages 79-123
  5. Lee Henderson
    Pages 124-143
  6. Suhail Ahmad, Fu-Hsiung Shen, Christopher R. Blagg
    Pages 144-177
  7. Jack W. Moncrief, Robert P. Popovich
    Pages 178-212
  8. Michael J. Blumenkrantz, R. William Schmidt
    Pages 275-308
  9. Dimitrios G. Oreopoulos, Ramesh Khanna
    Pages 309-343
  10. S. I. Vas, D. E. Low, D. G. Oreopoulos
    Pages 344-365
  11. Fernando Villarroel, Robert J. Wineman, Antonia C. Novello
    Pages 366-383
  12. Back Matter
    Pages 384-393

About this book


A year or so after Dr. Robert Popovieh arrived in Seattle in 1965 to begin working on his doctoral thesis under Dr. A.L. Babb, we had just begun work to try to prove the prediction that the peritoneum had a higher permeability to 'middle molecules' than hemodialysis membranes [I]. Several years later, when Dr. Popovieh accepted a position at the University of Texas in Austin, he decided to concentrate his research efforts in the area of peritoneal dialysis and everyone knows how successful that effort has become [2]. Indeed, because of continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD), long-term per­ itoneal dialysis after a two-decade incubation period is finally becoming an equal option to hemodialysis and transplantation in the management of chronic renal failure. For me this development represents final vindication of a twenty-year effort to help promote peritoneal dialysis, often in the face of enormaus opposition. I particularly remember a policy meeting at the NIH a few years back in which it was decided by my colleagues on the committee that long term peritoneal dialysis had no future and therefore no funds for projects in this area would be forthcoming. Based on the excellent results that Boen and later Tenckhoff had been getting in our Seattle program, I knew the committee was wrong and tried to convince them otherwise. Naturally, being the only favorable vote, I failed. I often wonder how many years this decision and others like it set back peritoneal dialysis.



Editors and affiliations

  • Karl D. Nolph
    • 1
  1. 1.Division of NephrologyUniversity of Missouri Health Sciences CenterColumbiaUSA

Bibliographic information

  • DOI
  • Copyright Information Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 1981
  • Publisher Name Springer, Dordrecht
  • eBook Packages Springer Book Archive
  • Print ISBN 978-94-017-2565-1
  • Online ISBN 978-94-017-2563-7
  • Buy this book on publisher's site