scispace - formally typeset
A

A. De Vecchi

Researcher at University of Milan

Publications -  64
Citations -  1636

A. De Vecchi is an academic researcher from University of Milan. The author has contributed to research in topics: Peritoneal dialysis & Dialysis. The author has an hindex of 20, co-authored 64 publications receiving 1597 citations. Previous affiliations of A. De Vecchi include University of California, Los Angeles.

Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

Healthcare systems and end-stage renal disease (ESRD) therapies—an international review: costs and reimbursement/funding of ESRD therapies

TL;DR: The costs and reimbursement patterns in the majority of countries were very similar and therefore did not explain the different distribution of modalities in these countries, and one explanation could be the difference in microeconomics, CHD being a treatment with high fixed costs, but high variable costs (supplies) and a low need for investments.
Journal ArticleDOI

A multicenter, selection-adjusted comparison of patient and technique survivals on CAPD and hemodialysis.

TL;DR: CAPD would appear to be an excellent alternative to HD based on this 7 year analysis, and there was no statistically significant difference between CAPD and HD technique survival when peritonitis was eliminated as a cause of failure.
Journal ArticleDOI

Cutaneous lesions in 67 cyclosporin-treated renal transplant recipients.

TL;DR: Two patients developed a squamous-cell epithelioma and a probable cutaneous lymphoma, respectively, in the first month after transplantation.
Journal ArticleDOI

Renal disease in essential mixed cryoglobulinaemia. Long-term follow-up of 44 patients.

TL;DR: The ominous significance of renal impairment in EMC should be revaluated because the high prevalence of hypertension, which was refractory to treatment in six patients, may be important to the clinical outcome.
Journal ArticleDOI

Peritoneal dialysis in nondiabetic patients older than 70 years: Comparison with patients aged 40 to 60 years

TL;DR: Patient survival was significantly worse in the elderly patients, but the observed to expected survival ratio with respect to age was similar, and technique survival was comparable in the two groups.