The current and future landscape of dialysis Himmelfarb, Jonathan; Vanholder, Raymond; Mehrotra, Rajnish ...
Nature reviews. Nephrology,
10/2020, Volume:
16, Issue:
10
Journal Article
Peer reviewed
Open access
The development of dialysis by early pioneers such as Willem Kolff and Belding Scribner set in motion several dramatic changes in the epidemiology, economics and ethical frameworks for the treatment ...of kidney failure. However, despite a rapid expansion in the provision of dialysis - particularly haemodialysis and most notably in high-income countries (HICs) - the rate of true patient-centred innovation has slowed. Current trends are particularly concerning from a global perspective: current costs are not sustainable, even for HICs, and globally, most people who develop kidney failure forego treatment, resulting in millions of deaths every year. Thus, there is an urgent need to develop new approaches and dialysis modalities that are cost-effective, accessible and offer improved patient outcomes. Nephrology researchers are increasingly engaging with patients to determine their priorities for meaningful outcomes that should be used to measure progress. The overarching message from this engagement is that while patients value longevity, reducing symptom burden and achieving maximal functional and social rehabilitation are prioritized more highly. In response, patients, payors, regulators and health-care systems are increasingly demanding improved value, which can only come about through true patient-centred innovation that supports high-quality, high-value care. Substantial efforts are now underway to support requisite transformative changes. These efforts need to be catalysed, promoted and fostered through international collaboration and harmonization.
Full text
Available for:
FZAB, GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, MFDPS, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, SBMB, SBNM, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK, VKSCE, ZAGLJ
This study examines the utilization and outcomes of vascular access for long-term hemodialysis in the United States and describes the impact of temporizing catheter use on outcomes. We aimed to ...evaluate the prevalence, patency, and associated patient survival for pre-emptively placed autogenous fistulas and prosthetic grafts; for autogenous fistulas and prosthetic grafts placed after a temporizing catheter; and for hemodialysis catheters that remained in use.
We performed a retrospective study of all patients who initiated hemodialysis in the United States during a 5-year period (2007-2011). The United States Renal Data System-Medicare matched national database was used to compare outcomes after pre-emptive autogenous fistulas, preemptive prosthetic grafts, autogenous fistula after temporizing catheter, prosthetic graft after temporizing catheter, and persistent catheter use. Outcomes were primary patency, primary assisted patency, secondary patency, maturation, catheter-free dialysis, severe access infection, and mortality.
There were 73,884 (16%) patients who initiated hemodialysis with autogenous fistula, 16,533 (3%) who initiated hemodialysis with prosthetic grafts, 106,797 (22%) who temporized with hemodialysis catheter prior to autogenous fistula use, 32,890 (7%) who temporized with catheter prior to prosthetic graft use, and 246,822 (52%) patients who remained on the catheter. Maturation rate and median time to maturation were 79% vs 84% and 47 days vs 29 days for pre-emptively placed autogenous fistulas vs prosthetic grafts. Primary patency (adjusted hazard ratio aHR, 1.26; 95% confidence interval CI, 1.25-1.28; P < .001) and primary assisted patency (aHR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.35-1.38; P < .001) were significantly higher for autogenous fistula compared with prosthetic grafts. Secondary patency was higher for autogenous fistulas beyond 2 months (aHR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.32-1.40; P < .001). Severe infection (aHR, 9.6; 95% CI, 8.86-10.36; P < .001) and mortality (aHR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.27-1.31; P < .001) were higher for prosthetic grafts compared with autogenous fistulas. Temporizing with a catheter was associated with a 51% increase in mortality (aHR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.48-1.53; P < .001), 69% decrease in primary patency (aHR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.31-0.32; P < .001), and 130% increase in severe infection (aHR, 2.3; 95% CI, 2.2-2.5; P < .001) compared to initiation with autogenous fistulas or prosthetic grafts. Mortality was 2.2 times higher for patients who remained on catheters compared to those who initiated hemodialysis with autogenous fistulas (aHR, 2.25; 95% CI, 2.21-2.28; P < .001).
Temporizing catheter use was associated with higher mortality, higher infection, and lower patency, thus undermining the highly prevalent approach of electively using catheters as a bridge to permanent access. Autogenous fistulas are associated with longer time to catheter-free dialysis but better patency, lower infection risk, and lower mortality compared with prosthetic grafts in the general population.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UILJ, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK, ZAGLJ, ZRSKP
Clinical practice guidelines recommend an arteriovenous fistula as the preferred vascular access for hemodialysis, but quantitative associations between vascular access type and various clinical ...outcomes remain controversial. We performed a systematic review of cohort studies to evaluate the associations between type of vascular access (arteriovenous fistula, arteriovenous graft, and central venous catheter) and risk for death, infection, and major cardiovascular events. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and article reference lists and extracted data describing study design, participants, vascular access type, clinical outcomes, and risk for bias. We identified 3965 citations, of which 67 (62 cohort studies comprising 586,337 participants) met our inclusion criteria. In a random effects meta-analysis, compared with persons with fistulas, those individuals using catheters had higher risks for all-cause mortality (risk ratio=1.53, 95% CI=1.41-1.67), fatal infections (2.12, 1.79-2.52), and cardiovascular events (1.38, 1.24-1.54). Similarly, compared with persons with grafts, those individuals using catheters had higher risks for mortality (1.38, 1.25-1.52), fatal infections (1.49, 1.15-1.93), and cardiovascular events (1.26, 1.11-1.43). Compared with persons with fistulas, those individuals with grafts had increased all-cause mortality (1.18, 1.09-1.27) and fatal infection (1.36, 1.17-1.58), but we did not detect a difference in the risk for cardiovascular events (1.07, 0.95-1.21). The risk for bias, especially selection bias, was high. In conclusion, persons using catheters for hemodialysis seem to have the highest risks for death, infections, and cardiovascular events compared with other vascular access types, and patients with usable fistulas have the lowest risk.
During the past decade, clear trends in the types of incident and prevalent hemodialysis vascular access can be observed. There has been a steady increase and recent stabilizaton of patients ...initiating hemodialysis with a central venous catheter, representing approximately 80% of all incident accesses. There has also been a steady increase in prevalent fistula use, currently greater than 50% within 4 months of hemodialysis initiation. Patient and vascular access related morbidity and mortality are reflected in the type of vascular access used at initiation and for long-term maintenance dialysis. There is a three- to fourfold increase in risk of infectious complications in patients initiating dialysis with a catheter compared with either a fistula or graft and a sevenfold higher risk when the catheter is used as a prevalent access. Procedure rates have increased two- to threefold for all types of access. There is a significant increased risk of mortality associated with catheter use, especially within the first year of dialysis initiation.
Abstract Background No consensus exists regarding the factors influencing mortality in patients undergoing hemodialysis(HD). This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the impact of various patient ...characteristics on the risk of mortality in such patients. Methods PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central were searched for studies evaluating the risk factors for mortality in patients undergoing HD. The factors included age, gender, diabetes mellitus(DM), body mass index (BMI), previous cardiovascular disease (CVD), HD duration, hemoglobin, albumin, white blood cell, C-reactive protein (CRP), parathyroid hormone, total iron binding capacity (TIBC), iron, ln ferritin, adiponectin, apolipoprotein A1 (ApoA1), ApoA2, ApoA3, high-density lipoprotein (HDL), total cholesterol, hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), serum phosphate, troponin T (TnT), and B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP). Relative risks with 95% confidence intervals were derived. Data were synthesized using the random-effects model. Results Age (per 1-year increment), DM, previous CVD, CRP (higher versus lower), ln ferritin, adiponectin (per 10.0 μg/mL increment), HbA1c (higher versus lower), TnT, and BNP were associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality. BMI (per 1 kg/m2 increment), hemoglobin (per 1 d/dL increment), albumin (higher versus lower), TIBC, iron, ApoA2, and ApoA3 were associated with reduced risk of all-cause mortality. Age (per 1-year increment), gender (women versus men), DM, previous CVD, HD duration, ln ferritin, HDL, and HbA1c (higher versus lower) significantly increased the risk of cardiac death. Albumin (higher versus lower), TIBC, and ApoA2 had a beneficial impact on the risk of cardiac death. Conclusions Multiple markers and factors influence the risk of mortality and cardiac death in patients undergoing HD.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK, ZRSKP
Background
Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) who require urgent initiation of dialysis but without having a permanent dialysis access have traditionally commenced haemodialysis (HD) using a ...central venous catheter (CVC). However, several studies have reported that urgent initiation of peritoneal dialysis (PD) is a viable alternative option for such patients.
Objectives
This review aimed to examine the benefits and harms of urgent‐start PD compared to HD initiated using a CVC in adults and children with CKD requiring long‐term kidney replacement therapy.
Search methods
We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 25 May 2020 for randomised controlled trials through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.
For non‐randomised controlled trials, MEDLINE (OVID) (1946 to 11 February 2020) and EMBASE (OVID) (1980 to 11 February 2020) were searched.
Selection criteria
All randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi‐RCTs and non‐RCTs comparing urgent‐start PD to HD initiated using a CVC.
Data collection and analysis
Two authors extracted data and assessed the quality of studies independently. Additional information was obtained from the primary investigators. The estimates of effect were analysed using random‐effects model and results were presented as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). The GRADE framework was used to make judgments regarding certainty of the evidence for each outcome.
Main results
Overall, seven observational studies (991 participants) were included: three prospective cohort studies and four retrospective cohort studies. All the outcomes except one (bacteraemia) were graded as very low certainty of evidence given that all included studies were observational studies and reported few events resulting in imprecision, and inconsistent findings. Urgent‐start PD may reduce the incidence of catheter‐related bacteraemia compared with HD initiated with a CVC (2 studies, 301 participants: RR 0.13, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.41; I2 = 0%; low certainty evidence), which translated into 131 fewer bacteraemia episodes per 1000 (95% CI 89 to 145 fewer). Urgent‐start PD has uncertain effects on peritonitis risk (2 studies, 301 participants: RR 1.78, 95% CI 0.23 to 13.62; I2 = 0%; very low certainty evidence), exit‐site/tunnel infection (1 study, 419 participants: RR 3.99, 95% CI 1.2 to 12.05; very low certainty evidence), exit‐site bleeding (1 study, 178 participants: RR 0.12, 95% CI 0.01 to 2.33; very low certainty evidence), catheter malfunction (2 studies; 597 participants: RR 0.26, 95% CI: 0.07 to 0.91; I2 = 66%; very low certainty evidence), catheter re‐adjustment (2 studies, 225 participants: RR: 0.13; 95% CI 0.00 to 18.61; I2 = 92%; very low certainty evidence), technique survival (1 study, 123 participants: RR: 1.18, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.61; very low certainty evidence), or patient survival (5 studies, 820 participants; RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.07; I2 = 0%; very low certainty evidence) compared with HD initiated using a CVC. Two studies using different methods of measurements for hospitalisation reported that hospitalisation was similar although one study reported higher hospitalisation rates in HD initiated using a catheter compared with urgent‐start PD.
Authors' conclusions
Compared with HD initiated using a CVC, urgent‐start PD may reduce the risk of bacteraemia and had uncertain effects on other complications of dialysis and technique and patient survival. In summary, there are very few studies directly comparing the outcomes of urgent‐start PD and HD initiated using a CVC for patients with CKD who need to commence dialysis urgently. This evidence gap needs to be addressed in future studies.
Anxiety symptoms are common in dialysis patients and have a large impact on quality of life. The association of anxiety symptoms with adverse clinical outcomes in dialysis patients is largely ...unknown. This study examined the association of anxiety symptoms with hospitalization and mortality in patients receiving maintenance dialysis.
Prospective cohort study.
Maintenance dialysis patients treated at 10 dialysis centers in the Netherlands between 2012 and 2016.
Time-varying symptoms of anxiety and depression using the Beck Anxiety Inventory and Beck Depression Inventory.
All-cause mortality, 1-year hospitalization rate, and hospital length of stay.
Cox proportional hazards and Poisson regression models adjusted for sociodemographic and clinical variables. Sensitivity analyses included multiple imputation of missing data and restriction to incident patients only.
687 patients were included, composed of 433 prevalent and 242 incident dialysis patients. Median follow-up time was 3.1 (IQR, 3.0-3.5) years, during which 172 deaths occurred. 22% of patients had anxiety symptoms and 42% had depressive symptoms. Anxiety symptoms were associated with all-cause mortality and 1-year hospitalization rate and length of stay in all multivariable models. Anxiety symptoms showed a clear dose-response relationship with mortality.
Depression and anxiety often coexist and share symptoms. The observational design of this study limits inferences about causal mechanisms between anxiety and clinical outcomes.
Anxiety symptoms are independently associated with increased risk for mortality and 1-year hospitalization. Anxiety symptoms are a clinically relevant risk factor for morbidity and mortality in dialysis patients and warrant further research on effective treatment.
This guideline is written primarily for doctors and nurses working in dialysis units and related areas of medicine in the UK, and is an update of a previous version written in 2009. It aims to ...provide guidance on how to look after patients and how to run dialysis units, and provides standards which units should in general aim to achieve. We would not advise patients to interpret the guideline as a rulebook, but perhaps to answer the question: "what does good quality haemodialysis look like?"The guideline is split into sections: each begins with a few statements which are graded by strength (1 is a firm recommendation, 2 is more like a sensible suggestion), and the type of research available to back up the statement, ranging from A (good quality trials so we are pretty sure this is right) to D (more like the opinion of experts than known for sure). After the statements there is a short summary explaining why we think this, often including a discussion of some of the most helpful research. There is then a list of the most important medical articles so that you can read further if you want to - most of this is freely available online, at least in summary form.A few notes on the individual sections: 1. This section is about how much dialysis a patient should have. The effectiveness of dialysis varies between patients because of differences in body size and age etc., so different people need different amounts, and this section gives guidance on what defines "enough" dialysis and how to make sure each person is getting that. Quite a bit of this section is very technical, for example, the term "eKt/V" is often used: this is a calculation based on blood tests before and after dialysis, which measures the effectiveness of a single dialysis session in a particular patient. 2. This section deals with "non-standard" dialysis, which basically means anything other than 3 times per week. For example, a few people need 4 or more sessions per week to keep healthy, and some people are fine with only 2 sessions per week - this is usually people who are older, or those who have only just started dialysis. Special considerations for children and pregnant patients are also covered here. 3. This section deals with membranes (the type of "filter" used in the dialysis machine) and "HDF" (haemodiafiltration) which is a more complex kind of dialysis which some doctors think is better. Studies are still being done, but at the moment we think it's as good as but not better than regular dialysis. 4. This section deals with fluid removal during dialysis sessions: how to remove enough fluid without causing cramps and low blood pressure. Amongst other recommendations we advise close collaboration with patients over this. 5. This section deals with dialysate, which is the fluid used to "pull" toxins out of the blood (it is sometimes called the "bath"). The level of things like potassium in the dialysate is important, otherwise too much or too little may be removed. There is a section on dialysate buffer (bicarbonate) and also a section on phosphate, which occasionally needs to be added into the dialysate. 6. This section is about anticoagulation (blood thinning) which is needed to stop the circuit from clotting, but sometimes causes side effects. 7. This section is about certain safety aspects of dialysis, not seeking to replace well-established local protocols, but focussing on just a few where we thought some national-level guidance would be useful. 8. This section draws together a few aspects of dialysis which don't easily fit elsewhere, and which impact on how dialysis feels to patients, rather than the medical outcome, though of course these are linked. This is where home haemodialysis and exercise are covered. There is an appendix at the end which covers a few aspects in more detail, especially the mathematical ideas. Several aspects of dialysis are not included in this guideline since they are covered elsewhere, often because they are aspects which affect non-dialysis patients too. This includes: anaemia, calcium and bone health, high blood pressure, nutrition, infection control, vascular access, transplant planning, and when dialysis should be started.
Large cohort studies suggest that high convective volumes associated with online hemodiafiltration may reduce the risk of mortality/morbidity compared to optimal high-flux hemodialysis. By contrast, ...intradialytic tolerance is not well studied. The aim of the FRENCHIE (French Convective versus Hemodialysis in Elderly) study was to compare high-flux hemodialysis and online hemodiafiltration in terms of intradialytic tolerance. In this prospective, open-label randomized controlled trial, 381 elderly chronic hemodialysis patients (over age 65) were randomly assigned in a one-to-one ratio to either high-flux hemodialysis or online hemodiafiltration. The primary outcome was intradialytic tolerance (day 30–day 120). Secondary outcomes included health-related quality of life, cardiovascular risk biomarkers, morbidity, and mortality. During the observational period for intradialytic tolerance, 85% and 84% of patients in high-flux hemodialysis and online hemodiafiltration arms, respectively, experienced at least one adverse event without significant difference between groups. As exploratory analysis, intradialytic tolerance was also studied, considering the sessions as a statistical unit according to treatment actually received. Over a total of 11,981 sessions, 2,935 were complicated by the occurrence of at least one adverse event, with a significantly lower occurrence in online hemodiafiltration with fewer episodes of intradialytic symptomatic hypotension and muscle cramps. By contrast, health-related quality of life, morbidity, and mortality were not different in both groups. An improvement in the control of metabolic bone disease biomarkers and β2-microglobulin level without change in serum albumin concentration was observed with online hemodiafiltration. Thus, overall outcomes favor online hemodiafiltration over high-flux hemodialysis in the elderly.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UILJ, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK, ZAGLJ, ZRSKP
Dr. Andreas Pierratos, MD, FRCPC Chan, Christopher T.
Hemodialysis international,
January 2024, 2024-Jan, 2024-01-00, Volume:
28, Issue:
1
Journal Article
Full text
Available for:
FZAB, GIS, IJS, KILJ, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, SBCE, SBMB, UL, UM, UPUK
PDF
