Hemodialysis vascular access options in pediatrics: considerations for patients and practitioners

Recent data indicate that the incidence of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) in pediatric patients (age 0–19 years) has increased over the past two decades. Similarly, the prevalence of ESRD has increased threefold over the same period. Hemodialysis (HD) continues to be the most frequently utilized modality for renal replacement therapy in incident pediatric ESRD patients. The number of children on HD exceeded the sum total of those on peritoneal dialysis and those undergoing pre-emptive renal transplantation. Choosing the best vascular access option for pediatric HD patients remains challenging. Despite a national initiative for fistula first in the adult hemodialysis population, the pediatric nephrology community in the United States of America utilizes central venous catheters as the primary dialysis access for most patients. Vascular access management requires proper advance planning to assure that the best permanent access is placed, seamless communication involving a multidisciplinary team of nephrologists, nurses, surgeons, and interventional radiologists, and ongoing monitoring to ensure a long life of use. It is imperative that practitioners have a long-term vision to decrease morbidity in this unique patient population. This article reviews the various types of pediatric vascular accesses used worldwide and the benefits and disadvantages of these various forms of access.     

End-stage renal care in developing countries: the India experience

Chronic renal failure is a devastating medical, social and economic problem for patients and their families. There is no data on the true incidence and prevalence of chronic renal failure in the developing world. Delayed diagnosis and failure of institution of measures to slow progression of renal failure result in a predominantly young ESRD population. Renal replacement therapy (RRT) is a low-priority area for healthcare planners in developing nations with two-tier healthcare delivery system. There is a severe shortage of nephrologists and hospitals offering dialysis and transplantation, more so in the poorest regions. There is a direct relationship between the number of dialysis centers and per capita gross national income of developing nations. Shortage in the number of government-funded hospitals has fanned the growth of a large number of private hospitals offering RRT. The high cost of hemodialysis (HD) puts it beyond the reach of all but the very rich and maintenance HD is the exclusively preserve of private hospitals. Government-run hospitals are busy with renal transplantation, which is the only realistic long term RRT option for a majority of patients. There are no state-funded or private health insurance schemes and patients have to raise finances for RRT on their own. Entire families are involved in such endeavors, with resulting loss of income of other family members too. A number of measures are utilized to bring down the RRT costs. For HD, these include cutting down the frequency of dialysis, use of cheaper cellulosic dialyzers, dialyzer reuse and nonutilization of expensive drugs like erythropoietin. Paradoxically, chronic peritoneal dialysis is more expensive than HD; patients use outdated connection systems and are suboptimally dialyzed on 3 exchanges/day. Most patients on dialysis are inadequately rehabilitated. Renal transplant recipients are forced to discontinue expensive drugs like cyclosporine after variable periods leading to high rates of graft loss. Financial considerations often preclude appropriate treatment of steroid-resistant rejection and cytomegalovirus infection. There is no organized cadaver donation program and an overwhelming majority of transplants are performed using living donors. This led to the practice of the sale of kidneys for transplant. To conclude, the financial burden of RRT in developing nations impacts on the lifestyle and future of entire families, and extracts a cost far higher than the actual amount of money spent on treatment.     

Patient education and access of ESRD patients to renal replacement therapies beyond in-center hemodialysis

BACKGROUND: Nephrologists report that patients' choice should play an important role in the selection of renal replacement therapy (RRT) for end-stage renal disease (ESRD). In the United States, kidney transplant rates remain low and <10% of patients utilize home dialysis therapies. This study examined the effect of pre-ESRD processes on the selection of RRT among incident ESRD patients. METHODS: Using surveys, data were collected for all patients admitted to 229 dialysis units in ESRD Network 18 between April 1, 2002 and May 31, 2002. A total of 1365 patients began chronic dialysis and 1193 facility (87%) and 428 patient (31%) surveys were returned. RESULTS: Substantial proportions of patients were unaware of their kidney disease (36%) or were not seeing a nephrologist (36%) until <4 months before first dialysis. The presentation of treatment options was delayed (48% either after or < 1 month before the first dialysis). The majority of ESRD patients were not presented with chronic peritoneal dialysis, home hemodialysis, or renal transplantation as options (66%, 88%, and 74%, respectively). Using multivariate analyses, variables significantly associated with selection of chronic peritoneal dialysis as dialysis modality were the probability of chronic peritoneal dialysis being presented as a treatment option and the time spent on patient education. CONCLUSION: An incomplete presentation of treatment options is an important reason for under-utilization of home dialysis therapies and probably delays access to transplantation. Improvements in and reimbursement for pre-ESRD education could provide an equal and timely access for all medically suitable patients to various RRTs.     

Survival and development of cardiovascular disease by modality of treatment in patients with end-stage renal disease.

Patients undergoing dialysis are at high risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD). The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of hemodialysis (HD) versus peritoneal dialysis (PD) on survival and the risk of developing de novo CVD. Of the 4191 patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) who started renal replacement treatment (RRT) in Lombardy between 1994 and 1997, 4064 (who were on dialysis 30 d after the start of RRT) were considered for survival analysis: 2772 were on HD (mean age 60.9 yr; 21.2% diabetic) and 1292 on PD (mean age 63.6 yr; 16% diabetic). The 3120 patients who were free of CVD at the start of RRT were included in the analysis of the risk of developing de novo CVD. HD and PD were compared by use of a Cox-regression proportional hazard model, stratified by diabetic status; the explanatory covariates were age and gender. The death rate was 13.3 per 100 patient-years (13.0 on HD and 13.9 on PD); 197 (6.3%) of the 3120 patients included in the CVD analysis developed de novo CVD (128 on HD and 69 on PD). After adjustment for age, gender, and established CVD and stratification by diabetic status, there was no significant between-treatment difference in 4-yr survival (relative risk [RR], 0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.79 to 1.06). The risk of de novo CVD did not differ significantly by treatment modality (RR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.79 to 1.43). The risk of mortality and de novo CVD for new patients with ESRD assigned to HD or PD was similar in Lombardy in the period 1994 through 1997.     

Impact of Training in Interventional Nephrology on Hemodialysis Vascular Access Types

Vascular access has been a major problem in the management of end stage renal disease (ESRD) patients on chronic hemodialysis (HD). Native arteriovenous fistulas (AVFs) are the preferred vascular access for ESRD patients on HD. Multiple factors have been evaluated as causes for poor AVF rates. The purpose of this retrospective analysis was to assess the impact of training of nephrologist in interventional nephrology (IN) on vascular access outcomes. We studied the rates of different types of vascular access amongst patients on chronic HD under the care of two nephrology groups over 25 months in a community dialysis unit. In group A, all vascular access were managed directly by an interventional nephrologist, while in group B they were managed by general nephrologist with no exposure to IN during their training. A total of 129 patients received dialysis for at least 4 months at the unit during those 25 months. The rate of AVFs in group A was 56.6%, while in group B the rate of AVFs was 40.8% ( p  = 0.059). The rate of AVGs in group A was 22.9% and in group B it was 27.6% ( p  = 0.647). The tunneled HD catheter rate in group A was 20.4% and in group B it was 31.6% ( p  = 0.098). The results of this study demonstrate that training of nephrologists in IN leads to increased use of AVF as HD vascular access. We suggest that training programs in nephrology should consider incorporating IN into their programs to increase the prevalence of AVFs.     

Renal replacement therapy options from an Indian perspective: dialysis versus transplantation

In developing countries such as India, the management of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) is largely guided by economic considerations. In the absence of health insurance plans, fewer than 10% of all patients receive renal replacement therapy (RRT). Hemodialysis (HD) is mainly a short-term measure to support ESRD patients prior to transplant. Infections are common in dialysis patients. The majority of patients starting HD die or are forced to abandon treatment because of cost constraints within the first 3 months. The cost of peritoneal dialysis (PD) is two times higher than that of HD, fewer than 2% of patients are started on PD. Among the three RRT options available, renal transplant is the preferred mode, as it is most cost-effective and provides a better quality of life. But due to financial constraints and nonavailability of organs, only about 5% of ESRD patients undergo transplant surgery. Though the removal of organs from brain-dead patients has been legalized, the concept of donation of organs from deceased donors has not received adequate social sanction. Only 2% of all transplants are performed from deceased donors. Due to limited access to RRT, the ideal approach should be to reduce the incidence of ESRD and attempt preventive measures. Preemptive transplant, reducing the duration of dialysis prior to transplant, use of immunosuppression for only up to 1 year, and availability of more deceased donor organs may be helpful to make RRT options within the reach of the common man.     

PD First: Peritoneal Dialysis as the Default Transition to Dialysis Therapy

Peritoneal dialysis (PD) and in‐center hemodialysis (HD) are accepted as clinically equivalent dialysis modalities, yet in‐center HD is the predominant renal replacement therapy (RRT) modality offered to new end‐stage renal disease (ESRD) patients in the United States and most other industrialized nations. This predominance has little to do with clinical outcomes, patient choice, cost, or quality of life. It has been driven by ease of HD initiation, physician experience and training, inadequate pre‐ESRD patient education, ample in‐center HD capacity, and lack of adequate infrastructure for PD‐related care. As compared with in‐center HD, PD is a widely applicable, yet underutilized modality of RRT that provides comparable clinical outcomes, superior quality of life measures, significant cost savings, and many other unmeasured advantages. A “PD First” approach not only has advantages for patients but also physicians, healthcare systems, and society. In this review, we will summarize evidence demonstrating that PD should be the default modality when new ESRD patients are transitioning to dialysis therapy when preemptive transplantation is not an option and highlight the essential infrastructural requirements to allow for a “PD First” model.     

Renal replacement therapy among disadvantaged populations in Mexico: a report from the Jalisco Dialysis and Transplant Registry (REDTJAL)

BACKGROUND: End-stage renal disease represents a serious public health problem in Jalisco, Mexico. It is reported among the 10 leading causes of death, with an annual mortality rate of 12 deaths per 100,000 population. The state population is 6.3 million, and more than half do not have medical insurance. In this study, we report the population's access to renal replacement therapy (RRT). METHODS: Patients > or =15 years of age, who started RRT between January 1998 and December 2000 at social security or health secretariat medical facilities, were included. Nine facilities participated in the study. At the start of treatment, the patient's facility, age, gender, cause of renal failure, and initial treatment modality were registered. RESULTS: Within the study period, 2456 started RRT, 1767 (72%) at social security facilities and 687 (28%) at health secretariat facilities, for an annual incidence rate of 195 per million population (pmp). The main cause of renal failure was diabetes mellitus (51% of patients). There were significant differences between the 2 populations. Patients with social security were older (53.1 +/- 17 vs. 45.1 +/- 20 years, P= 0.001) and had more diabetes (54% vs. 42%, P= 0.001) than those without social security. They had higher acceptance (327 pmp vs. 99 pmp, P= 0.001) and prevalence rates (939 pmp vs. 166 pmp, P= 0.001) than patients without medical insurance. Dialysis use was similar in both populations. Eighty-five percent of patients were on continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis and 15% on hemodialysis. Kidney transplant rate was higher among insured patients (72 pmp vs. 7.5 pmp, P= 0.001). The number of dialysis programs and nephrologists that offered renal care also differed. There were 10 dialysis programs in social security and 3 in health secretariat facilities. Fourteen nephrologists looked after the insured population, whereas 5 cared for the uninsured (7.7 pmp vs. 2.1 pmp, P= 0.001). The latter had access to 8 hemodialysis stations compared with 34 for the insured population (3.4 pmp vs. 18.8 pmp, P= 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Access to RRT is unequal in our state. Although it is universal for the insured population, it is severely restricted for the poor. Social and economical factors, as well as the limited number of understaffed, centralized dialysis facilities, could explain these differences.     

Dialytic management of childhood acute renal failure: A survey of North American pediatric nephrologists

A 35-question survey was mailed to 19 pediatric nephrologists regarding dialytic management of acute renal failure (ARF). Fifteen surveys were returned (79%). The purpose of the survey was to determine which renal replacement therapies (RRT) are most frequently used in the management of children with ARF in North America. Nephrologists were also questioned about clinical factors that influence the decisions to initiate RRT and choice of a particular modality. Survey results showed that hemofiltration was the initial choice for RRT among nephrologists (median value 40%, range 0%–100%) more often in their patients in the past 12 months than peritoneal dialysis (median value 30%, range 0%–85%) or hemodialysis (median value 20%, range 0%–50%). Factors considered most important in the decision to initiate dialysis include abnormalities in serum potassium, fluid balance, blood pressure and nutritional needs. Patient size and dialysis access were additional factors considered important in the choice of RRT modality.     

La néphrologie en Tunisie : d’hier à aujourd’hui

Professor Hassouna Ben Ayed is the founder of Tunisian nephrology. He introduced in 1962 the first artificial kidney for the treatment of acute renal failure. In 1963, the first acute peritoneal dialysis was done. Renal biopsy started in 1967 with general pathologists. A special laboratory of renal pathology was set up in 1975 with Pr H. Ben Maïz. Epidemiology of glomerular diseases, when histologically proven, was published [8]. A comprehensive program of chronic hemodialysis was started in 1968 and was developed markedly since 1975 with Pr A. El Matri. An intermittent peritoneal dialysis programme was started in 1982 and CAPD in 1983 by Pr T. Ben Abdallah. The Tunisian renal failure patient association was created in 1982 and the Tunisian society of nephrology in November 1983. A national registry for ESRD treatment is available since 1986. Since this time, the number of patients initiating renal replacement therapy (RRT) for ESRD has increased dramatically due to the extension of acceptance criteria for RRT and the increase of the elderly population. The incidence was 13 pmp in 1986 and 133 pmp in 2008. The prevalence was 48.5 pmp in 1986 and 734 pmp in 2008. From 1971 up to 1986, locally dialysed patients have been transplanted abroad, especially in France. On 4 June 1986, the local transplantation program was started at Charles Nicolle Hospital in Tunis. A national center of organ transplantation was created on 12 June 1995. At the end of 2008, there were106 nephrologists, 26 residents in nephrology and 253 doctors with a training in hemodialysis during 1 year. In university hospitals, the number of nephrology departments is five, with one unit in an army hospital and two units for pediatric nephrology. Five hospitals perform renal transplantation (Tunis: 2 – Sfax: 1 – Sousse: 1 – Monastir: 1). There are 138 centers of hemodialysis: 39 public, 99 private. Seven thousand and eighty patients were treated by HD, 127 patients underwent renal transplantation. The vast majority of these transplants have been performed using living related donors (103/127). The cost of renal replacement therapy (RRT) is taken in charge by the Ministry of Health and the national security boards. Legislation on HD was promulgated by the Tunisian government, setting rigorous and detailed rules for the implementation of new dialysis centers, as well as for the functioning of already active units (4 August 1986 – 4 April 1998). For transplantation, legislation was promulgated on 25 March 1991.     

Case-mix and treatment in end-stage renal disease: hemodialysis v peritoneal dialysis

The University of Southern California School of Medicine conducted a nationwide survey of 336 nephrologists to obtain demographic and clinical data on 6,411 patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). Patient demographic data, along with ESRD etiology and comorbid conditions noted by the physician, were compared across various modalities of dialysis. Characteristics of the treatment provided were differentiated by the mode of dialysis and the location of the patient encounter. Results of the analysis show that patients on peritoneal dialysis are more likely to be female and have higher rates of diabetes compared with hemodialysis (HD) patients. Statistically, patients on intermittent peritoneal dialysis are older, more likely to be black, and have a higher incidence of cardiovascular conditions. Continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis patients have greatest problem severity and require more physician time and more complex services, whereas home HD patients require the greatest number of diagnostic tests and therapeutic procedures. Hospital inpatient care shows greater case-mix severity and more intensive treatment, but this does not differ by the mode of dialysis. Finally, patients of freestanding dialysis facilities are more likely to have hypertensive renal disease, whereas patients at hospital-based facilities are older, more likely to be seen in the hospital, have more urgent and severe problems during dialysis rounds, and require more physician time, more complex services, and more diagnostic tests and therapeutic procedures.     

Dialysis in diabetic patients: hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis. Pros and cons

Both hemodialysis (HD) as well as peritoneal dialysis (PD), are efficient renal replacement therapies in uremic patients with and without diabetes. PD is less expensive dialysis modality and may provide a survival advantage over hemodialysis in first 2 to 4 years of treatment. Chronic ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) as well as Continuous Cycler-Assisted Peritoneal Dialysis (CCPD) have additional advantages in patients with diabetes. PD therapy will be better tolerated than HD, the blood pressure is more stable and vascular access is not necessary. Preserving residual renal function (RRF) is of paramount importance to prolong the survival outcomes in PD patients. In insulin-dependent diabetic patients intraperitoneal insulin substitution can be used. The development of new, more biocompatible PD solutions holds promise for the future. Nevertheless, in many countries HD is further more favoured in the treatment of patients with ESRD.     

Rapport Rein 2011 – Synthèse

Incident patientsIn 2011, in France, we estimate that 9 400 patients started a treatment by dialysis (incidence of dialysis: 144 per million inhabitants) and 335 patients with a pre-emptive graft without previous dialysis (incidence of pre-emptive graft: 5 per million inhabitants). As in 2010, incidence rate seems to stabilize. Elders provide the majority of new patients (median age at RRT start: 71 years old). New patients present a high rate of disabilities especially diabetes (41% of the new patients) and cardiovascular disabilities (>50% of the new patients) that increase with age. Considering treatment and follow-up, the first treatment remains center's hemodialysis and we do not notice any progression of self-dialysis. RRT started in emergency in 33% of the patients. This finding contrasts with the fact that 56% of patients started hemodialysis on a catheter. This, together with the major inter-region variability, suggests that different strategies of management exist. Finally, the hemoglobin level at RRT start seems to be an interesting indicator of good management and follow-up since 13% of patients presenting an underprovided follow-up have a hemoglobin level under 10 g/dl, whereas only 2.5% of patients with an appropriate follow-up presented such a condition.Prevalent patientsOn December 31, 2011, in France, we estimate that 70.700 patients were receiving a renal replacement therapy, 39.600 (56%) on dialysis and 31.100 (44%) living with a functional renal transplant. The overall crude prevalence was 1091 per million inhabitants. It was 1.6 higher in males.

1. Download : Download full-size image

Renal replacement therapy for End-stage renal disease in 2011 in France

Prevalence was subject to regional variations with 5 regions (3 overseas) above the national rate. Renal transplant share varied from 33% in Nord-Pas de Calais to 53% in Pays de Loire, and from 16 to 25% in overseas regions. The study of temporal variations for 18 regions contributing to the registry since 2007 demonstrated a +4% increase in standardized prevalence of ESRD patients with a functional transplant vs. +2% increase for dialysis, resulting in a decreasing gap between dialysis and transplantation prevalence, due to an increase number of renal transplant and a longer survival of transplanted patients.The main dialysis technique was hemodialysis (93.3% of patients). Even if an important inter-region variability remains considering the choices of treatment, more than 50% of the patients are undergoing hemodialysis in a hospital-based incenter unit, and we noticed an increase in hemodialysis in a medical satellite unit with time whereas the rate of self-care hemodialysis decreases. The rate of peritoneal dialysis remains stable. When comparing guidelines to real-life treatments, 77.5% of patients receive adequate dose of treatment (12 H/week, KT/ V>1.2), the rate of patients with a hemoglobin blood-level lower than 10 g/dl and without erythropoietin treatment is 1.3%, which confirmed a good management of anemia. On the contrary, 34% of patients have a BMI lower than 23 kg/m² and only 23% have an albumin blood-level over 40 g/l, which underlines that nutritional management of ESRD patients can be improved.MortalityAge strongly influences survival on dialysis. Thus, one year survival of patients under age 65 is over 90%. After 5 years, among patients over 85 years, it is more than 15%. The presence of diabetes or one or more cardiovascular comorbidities also significantly worse patient survival. In terms of trend, we do not find significant improvement in the 2-year survival between patients in the cohort 2006–2007 and the 2008–2009 cohort. Cardiovascular diseases account for 27% of causes of death to infectious diseases (12%) and cancer (10%). Life expectancy of patients is highly dependent on their treatment. Thus, a transplant patient aged 30 has a life expectancy of 41 years versus 23 years for a dialysis patient.ESRD pediatric patientsIn 2011, the incidence and the prevalence of ESRD among patients under 20 years old remained stable at 8 and 53 per million inhabitants respectively. The first causes of ESDR remain uropathies and hypodysplasia followed by glomerulonephritis and genetic diseases. Considering the initial treatment, we found a high rate of hemodialysis and a low rate of peritoneal dialysis that is mainly used in younger children. In 2011, 31 preemptive transplantations were performed accounting for 27.7% of new patients. Finally, survival analysis confirm that younger children (under 4 years old) have the highest risk of death (88% survival rate at 2 years vs. 98% in patients over 4 years old) and that the treatment of choice remains the renal transplantation since it increases the expected remaining lifetime of 20 to 40 years depending on the considered age.TransplantationAccess to the waiting list is evaluated on a cohort of 51,846 new patients who started dialysis between 2002 and 2011 in 25 regions. The probability of first wait-listing was of 3.7% at the start of dialysis (pre-emptive registrations), 15% at 12, 22% at 36 and 24% to 60 months. Patient older than 60 had a very poor access to the waiting list, whatever their diabetes status was. Among 13,653 patients less than 60 years old, the probability of being registered was 11% at the start of dialysis, 43% to 12 months, 62% to 36 months and 66% to 60 months (median dialysis duration: 16 months). Seventeen regions with up to 5 years follow-up show an increase of 8 to 15% in pre-emptive registrations between 2007 and 2001, without change at 1 year.Access to kidney transplant is evaluated on a cohort of 53,301 new patients who started a renal replacement therapy (dialysis or pre-emptive renal transplant) between 2002 and 2011 in 25 regions. The probability of first kidney transplant was of 7% at 12, 17% at 36 and 21% at 60 months. 8,633 patients (16,2%) had received a first renal transplant within 14.7 month median time; 1,455 (2.7%) had received a pre-emptive graft. Among the 14.770 new patients less than 60 years old, the probability of being transplanted was of 21% at 12, 46% at 36 and 58% at 60 months (median dialysis duration: 42 months). When pre-emptive graft were excluded, the probability of being transplanted was of 5% at 12, 15% to 36 and 19% to 60 monthsFlow between treatment modalitiesAmong the 36.849 patients on dialysis at 31/10/2010, 79% were already on RRT at 31/12/2009. Respectively 91%, 85% and 93% of the patients on HD in-center, HD self-care unit and peritoneal dialysis were in the same modality of treatment the year before. Among the 29.758 patients with a functioning graft at 31/12/2010, 98% were already on RRT at 31/12/2009, 95% of them with a functioning graft.72%, 72% and 74% of the patients with in-center HD, out-center HD and self-care unit were in the same modality of treatment at 31/12/2011. But 37% of the patients on PD at 31/12/2010 were not on PD at 31/12/2011. In 2011, new patients represented 89% of the entries in peritoneal dialysis. Renal transplantation represented 10% of the outcomes of the HD patients in self-care unit or at home.     

Technical-economic management models in dialytic treatment: an evolving reality. The Italian experience

Health care organisations and financial factors (particularly treatment reimbursement rates) may influence the management of ESRD. We analysed the organisation of renal replacement therapy (RRT) in Italy, focusing on RRT population trends, patient distribution by treatment modality and provision, reimbursement rates, accreditation and quality control. Data from the Italian Dialysis and Transplant Registry and market research studies indicate that Italy has one of the highest dialysis and treatment acceptance rates in Europe. There is a high rate of hemodialysis (HD) and good use of peritoneal dialysis (PD), whereas the prevalence of transplanted patients is lower than the European mean. Dialytic treatment in private centers is limited by law to HD (mainly in Central-Southern Italy) and covers nearly 25-30% of the demand for RRT which means that, although Italy has a public national health care system, the provision of RRT is based on a "mixed" model. Regions with a higher prevalence of "private" dialysis have more dialysis centers, but a lower prevalence of PD since it is not permitted in private facilities, and fewer transplanted patients. The "public" system is not an automatic guarantee of quality and efficacy, and the "private" system is not necessarily a synonym of poor quality treatment due to its need to make a profit. The coexistence of private and public facilities (if well balanced and integrated) may in fact help overcoming bureaucracy in the public administration in relation to the demand for innovation and improving performances by means of fair competition.     

Human immunodeficiency virus infection in end-stage renal disease patients

Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) offers many diagnostic and therapeutic challenges to nephrologists. Renal failure may be a direct consequence of viral infection (HIV-associated nephropathy), or intrinsic renal diseases may occur in previously infected individuals. Patients receiving renal replacement therapy (RRT) may acquire HIV infection from blood transfusions, renal allografts, sexual contacts, or needle sharing by drug addicts. In the early 1980s, the overall prognosis of patients with the acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) was very poor, and survival of those with ESRD was dismal. Consequently many even questioned the value of providing maintenance dialysis to patients with AIDS. With advances in diagnostic techniques in serologic and viral markers of disease, and deployment of highly effective antiretroviral agents, the prognosis of HIV-infected patients has dramatically improved. Over the past two decades, experiences in the management of HIV patients with ESRD is accumulating. Both peritoneal dialysis and hemodialysis are effective modes of therapy and many centers are now beginning to perform renal transplantation in HIV-infected patients. This article deals with various aspects of HIV infection in patients with ESRD.     

Perceived health-related quality of life and comorbidity in diabetic patients starting dialysis (CALVIDIA study)

BACKGROUND: Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a widespread prevalent illness, currently the main cause of end-stage renal disease (ESRD). MATERIAL AND METHODS: In a longitudinal, prospective study we compared two cohorts of patients starting dialysis therapy, diabetic and non-diabetic ESRD patients. Perceived health was measured by the Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form 36 (SF-36) questionnaire, functional status by the Karnofsky scale and comorbidity by the Charlson age-comorbidity index. A broad spectrum of variables in relation to diabetes, ESRD, comorbidity and renal replacement therapy (RRT) were studied, as well as the distribution of comorbidity frequencies at dialysis start. RESULTS: Thirty-four Spanish centers included 232 diabetic patients, 43 type 1 and 189 type 2, mean diabetes duration 18 +/- 9 yrs, and five centers included 121 non-diabetic patients. Out of the 232 diabetic patients, 187 patients (81%) started hemodialysis (HD) and 45 patients (19%) started peritoneal dialysis (PD) (vs. 82% and 18%, respectively in non-diabetic patients). Transient vascular access (VA) for starting RRT was required in 54% of the diabetic patients vs. 53% in the nondiabetic patients. When both study groups were compared, diabetic patients required antihypertensive drugs more frequently than non-diabetic patients and showed higher systolic blood pressure (BP), as well as higher cardiovascular (CV) complication incidences, poorer SF-36 physical component summary scores and mental component summary scores and worse Karnofsky scale scores, with the Charlson age-comorbidity score being higher. CONCLUSION: Diabetic patients starting dialysis in Spain are more often type 2 diabetics, have worse perceived health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in relation to non-diabetic patients, worse functional status and higher incidences of prognostic mortality markers.     

The renal epidemiology and information network (REIN): a new registry for end-stage renal disease in France.

The French Renal Epidemiology and Information Network (REIN) registry began in 2002 to provide a tool for public health decision support, evaluation and research related to renal replacement therapies (RRT) for end-stage renal disease (ESRD). It relies on a network of nephrologists, epidemiologists, patients and public health representatives, coordinated regionally and nationally. Continuous registration covers all dialysis and transplanted patients. In 2003, 2070 patients started RRT, 7854 were on dialysis and 7294 lived with a functioning graft in seven regions (with a population of 16.5 million people). The overall crude annual incidence rate of RRT for ESRD was 123 per million population (p.m.p.) with significant differences in age-adjusted rates across regions, from 84 [95% confidence interval (CI): 74-94] to 155 [138-172] p.m.p. The principal causes of ESRD were hypertension (21%) and diabetic (20%) nephropathies. Initial treatment for ESRD was peritoneal dialysis for 15% of patients and a pre-emptive graft for 3%. The one-year survival rate was 81% [79-83] in the cohort of 2002-2003 incident patients. As of December 31, 2003, the overall crude prevalence was 898 [884-913] p.m.p, with 5% of patients receiving peritoneal dialysis, 47% on haemodialysis and 48% with a functioning graft. The experience in these seven regions over these two years clearly shows the feasibility of the REIN registry, which is progressively expanding to cover the entire country.     

Selection of ESRD treatment: an international study

Using the method of paired comparisons, we surveyed nephrologists in three different socioeconomic regions, North Carolina, Southern California, and Australia-New Zealand, to determine their preferences among the major end-stage renal disease (ESRD) treatment modalities. For comparison, we also determined how patients were assigned to the treatment modalities, based on registry data in the regions. Preferences were determined in for six standard ESRD treatment modalities--living related donor (LRD), four-antigen match, LRD two-antigen match, and cadaver (CAD) transplantation; and home peritoneal dialysis (HPD), home hemodialysis (HHD), and facility hemodialysis (FHD)--and for three categories of patients--patients with diabetes, patients over age 60, and patients in general. There was overall agreement in the ranking of treatments by the nephrologists from all three regions for each of the three patient categories; however, significant differences were noted between regions in preferences for certain modalities. Comparison within and between regions revealed striking disparities between preferences and practice. Analysis of these findings provides important insights into the process of ESRD treatment selection and identifies issues that merit further consideration.     

The application status of vascular access at initiation of hemodialysis in patients with end stage renal disease—a single center study

Objective To investigate the types and outcome of vascular access in patients with end stage renal disease (ESRD) initiated hemodialysis (HD), and provide the basis for advancing the proportion of planned HD with arteriovenous fistula (AVF). Methods Clinical data, vascular access types at the initiation of HD, the outcomes of all types of dialysis access and the conversion of renal replacement therapy of ESRD patients who initiated HD in the first affiliated hospital of zhejiang university between January 2009 and December 2011 were retrospectively studied. Results A total of 836 patients were included in our study. Among them 510 were males and 326 were females. The average age was (49.77±17.65) years old. The major primary diseases were primary glomerular disease (72.73%), diabetic nephropathy (11.60%)and hypertensive nephrosclerosis (3.95%). Only 73 patients (8.73%) used AVF as the vascular access at the initiation of HD, another 763 patients (91.27%) used central venous catheter. Six months after the start of dialysis, 542 patients (81.5%) had used AVF as permanent vascular access, 123 patients (18.5%)had used the tunneled cuffed catheter, 54 patients had received a transplant and 55 patients had converted to peritoneal dialysis. The results of logistic regression analysis suggested that being male, patients from outside hangzhou and patients whose glomerular filtration rate were lower than 5 ml•min-1•(1.73 m2)-1 were the risk factors of using central venous catheters at the initiation of HD. Conclusions Only a minority of patients used AVF at the initiation of HD, but most of the other patients switched to AVF within the following six months. Increasing the proportion of AVF as the vascular access of planned HD is still our current goal.     

Comparative studies of dialysis therapies should reflect real world decision-making

The incidence and prevalence of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) continues to rise. While transplantation is the preferred therapy for kidney failure, there is a shortage of donor organs, and the majority of patients will be treated with either peritoneal dialysis (PD) or hemodialysis (HD). Randomized controlled trials comparing patient outcomes on PD and HD are not likely to be successful, as individuals who are educated about their treatment options generally develop a strong preference for one therapy over the other and will not consent to randomization. As a result, prospective cohort studies are frequently the strongest study design available to compare outcomes between dialysis modalities. Previous studies have provided important insights into the relative merits of the 2 therapies. However, they have examined outcomes in relatively heterogeneous groups of ESRD patients and are generally not designed in a manner that mirrors clinical decision-making. We explore several key methodological challenges in the design of observational research in ESRD with a focus on minimizing selection bias and making studies more relevant to the practicing nephrologist. We emphasize that incident patients are preferred in most comparative studies of dialysis modalities. We argue that analyses comparing the outcomes of renal replacement therapy (RRT) modalities should include patients eligible for the therapies being compared and that the way that patients are assigned to treatment groups should reflect decision-making in clinical practice. Finally, the point at which baseline characteristics are measured and we begin tracking patients for the occurrence of outcomes should be chosen carefully.