Kidney Failure from Kidney Stones: An ANZDATA Registry Study.

INTRODUCTION: Kidney stones is common with an increasing trend over time and has been well studied in the general population. However, incidence and outcomes of kidney stones leading to kidney failure (KF) and receiving kidney replacement therapy (KRT) is poorly examined. We examined the incidence of KF due to kidney stones and compared outcomes to KRT patients due to other causes. METHODS: Adult patients who started KRT (January 1981-December 2020) and based in the Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant (ANZDATA) registry. Exposure was KRT patients due to kidney stones comparing them to those with other causes. We examined incidence, prevalence, patient survival (KRT and transplant) and graft survival (transplant). Cox regression models were fit to compare patient survival between kidney stones and non-kidney stones groups, overall KRT, dialysis and patient and graft survival after kidney transplant. RESULTS: A total of 834 (1.1%) patients commenced KRT due to kidney stones. Incidence was 1.17 per million population per year and remained stable during the study period (annual percentage change -0.3% [95%CI -1.5% to 0.9%]. Survival was higher in kidney stone patients receiving dialysis compared to the non-kidney stone group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.89, 95%CI 0.82- 0.96) with similar estimates in a matched cohort. In kidney transplant patients, time to transplant was longer for patients with kidney stone compared to non-kidney stone patients (2.5 vs 1.7 years, P=0.001). There was no mortality difference (HR 1.02, 95%CI 0.82- 1.28) or graft loss (HR 1.07, 95%CI 0.79- 1.45) between kidney stones vs non-kidney stones in the kidney transplant group. CONCLUSION: KF due to kidney stones incidence is unchanged over the study period. Survival of patients with kidney stones who require KRT was better compared to patients from other causes. For the kidney transplant group, survival and risk of graft failure were similar.

Management of chronic kidney disease for Maori in Aotearoa New Zealand: a summary of clinical practice guidelines.

AIMS: The kaupapa of the Caring for Australians and New Zealanders with Kidney Impairment (CARI) Clinical practice guidelines for management of chronic kidney disease for Maori in Aotearoa New Zealand is to provide whanau-centred and evidence-based recommendations to healthcare systems, healthcare providers and healthcare workers. The guidelines include screening, identification, management and system-level responses to chronic kidney disease (CKD) to deliver best practice care to Maori affected by CKD across community, primary and secondary services. METHODS: The guidelines are funded by the Ministry of Health - Manatu Hauora and are written by a panel of Maori and non-Maori clinicians and literacy experts across Aotearoa New Zealand from Kaupapa Maori organisations, general practice and nephrology units using standardised methods. The guidelines methodology included consultation with whanau Maori with lived experience of CKD and primary and secondary care practitioners. Additional guideline development would be required to inform management of CKD for non-Maori in Aotearoa New Zealand. RESULTS: The guidelines provide recommendations about equity, governance and accountability, cultural safety, case management, information systems, social determinants of equity and wellbeing and screening. CONCLUSIONS: Recommendations to health services for Maori with CKD are based on giving effect to Te Tiriti o Waitangi and best practice care to prevent CKD, delaying its progression, treating kidney failure through timely transplantation, delivering in community and providing high-quality symptom management.

Sodium-glucose co-transporter protein 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors for people with chronic kidney disease and diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes is associated with high risks of premature chronic kidney disease (CKD), cardiovascular diseases, cardiovascular death and impaired quality of life. People with diabetes are more likely to develop kidney impairment, and approximately one in three adults with diabetes have CKD. People with CKD and diabetes experience a substantially higher risk of cardiovascular outcomes. Sodium-glucose co-transporter protein 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors have shown potential effects in preventing kidney and cardiovascular outcomes in people with CKD and diabetes. However, new trials are emerging rapidly, and evidence synthesis is essential to summarising cumulative evidence. OBJECTIVES: This review aimed to assess the benefits and harms of SGLT2 inhibitors for people with CKD and diabetes. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 17 November 2023 using a search strategy designed by an Information Specialist. Studies in the Register are continually identified through regular searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled studies were eligible if they evaluated SGLT2 inhibitors versus placebo, standard care or other glucose-lowering agents in people with CKD and diabetes. CKD includes all stages (from 1 to 5), including dialysis patients. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently extracted data and assessed the study risk of bias. Treatment estimates were summarised using random effects meta-analysis and expressed as a risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD), with a corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). Confidence in the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. The primary review outcomes were all-cause death, 3-point and 4-point major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), fatal or nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), fatal or nonfatal stroke, and kidney failure. MAIN RESULTS: Fifty-three studies randomising 65,241 people with CKD and diabetes were included. SGLT2 inhibitors with or without other background treatments were compared to placebo, standard care, sulfonylurea, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors, or insulin. In the majority of domains, the risks of bias in the included studies were low or unclear. No studies evaluated the treatment in children or in people treated with dialysis. No studies compared SGLT2 inhibitors with glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists or tirzepatide. Compared to placebo, SGLT2 inhibitors decreased the risk of all-cause death (20 studies, 44,397 participants: RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.94; I2 = 0%; high certainty) and cardiovascular death (16 studies, 43,792 participants: RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.93; I2 = 29%; high certainty). Compared to placebo, SGLT2 inhibitors probably make little or no difference to the risk of fatal or nonfatal MI (2 studies, 13,726 participants: RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.14; I2 = 24%; moderate certainty), and fatal or nonfatal stroke (2 studies, 13,726 participants: RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.30; I2 = 0%; moderate certainty). Compared to placebo, SGLT2 inhibitors probably decrease 3-point MACE (7 studies, 38,320 participants: RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.98; I2 = 46%; moderate certainty), and 4-point MACE (4 studies, 23,539 participants: RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.96; I2 = 77%; moderate certainty), and decrease hospital admission due to heart failure (6 studies, 28,339 participants: RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.79; I2 = 17%; high certainty). Compared to placebo, SGLT2 inhibitors may decrease creatinine clearance (1 study, 132 participants: MD -2.63 mL/min, 95% CI -5.19 to -0.07; low certainty) and probably decrease the doubling of serum creatinine (2 studies, 12,647 participants: RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.89; I2 = 53%; moderate certainty). SGLT2 inhibitors decrease the risk of kidney failure (6 studies, 11,232 participants: RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.79; I2 = 0%; high certainty), and kidney composite outcomes (generally reported as kidney failure, kidney death with or without ≥ 40% decrease in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR)) (7 studies, 36,380 participants: RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.78; I2 = 25%; high certainty) compared to placebo. Compared to placebo, SGLT2 inhibitors incur less hypoglycaemia (16 studies, 28,322 participants: RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.89 to 0.98; I2 = 0%; high certainty), and hypoglycaemia requiring third-party assistance (14 studies, 26,478 participants: RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.88; I2 = 0%; high certainty), and probably decrease the withdrawal from treatment due to adverse events (15 studies, 16,622 participants: RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.08; I2 = 16%; moderate certainty). The effects of SGLT2 inhibitors on eGFR, amputation and fracture were uncertain. No studies evaluated the effects of treatment on fatigue, life participation, or lactic acidosis. The effects of SGLT2 inhibitors compared to standard care alone, sulfonylurea, DPP-4 inhibitors, or insulin were uncertain. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: SGLT2 inhibitors alone or added to standard care decrease all-cause death, cardiovascular death, and kidney failure and probably decrease major cardiovascular events while incurring less hypoglycaemia compared to placebo in people with CKD and diabetes.

Improving Diverse and Equitable Involvement of Patients and Caregivers in Research in CKD: Report of a Better Evidence and Translation-Chronic Kidney Disease (BEAT-CKD) Workshop.

Patient and caregiver involvement can enhance the uptake and impact of research, but the involvement of patients and caregivers who are underserved and marginalized is often limited. A better understanding of how to make involvement in research more broadly accessible, supportive, and inclusive for patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and caregivers is needed. We conducted a national workshop involving patients, caregivers, clinicians, and researchers from across Australia to identify strategies to increase the diversity of patients and caregivers involved in CKD research. Six themes were identified. Building trust and a sense of safety was considered pivotal to establishing meaningful relationships to support knowledge exchange. Establishing community and connectedness was expected to generate a sense of belonging to motivate involvement. Balancing stakeholder goals, expectations, and responsibilities involved demonstrating commitment and transparency by researchers. Providing adequate resources and support included strategies to minimize the burden of involvement for patients and caregivers. Making research accessible and relatable was about nurturing patient and caregiver interest by appealing to intrinsic motivators. Adapting to patient and caregiver needs and preferences required tailoring the approach for individuals and the target community. Strategies and actions to support these themes may support more diverse and equitable involvement of patients and caregivers in research in CKD.

Australian and New Zealand Living Guideline cholesterol-lowering therapy for people with chronic kidney disease (CARI Guidelines): Reducing the evidence-practice gap.

AIM: People with chronic kidney disease experience high rates of cardiovascular disease. Cholesterol-lowering therapy is a mainstay in the management but there is uncertainty in the treatment effects on patient-important outcomes, such as fatigue and rhabdomyolysis. Here, we summarise the updated CARI Australian and New Zealand Living Guidelines on cholesterol-lowering therapy in chronic kidney disease. METHODS: We updated a Cochrane review and monitored newly published studies weekly to inform guideline development according to international standards. The Working Group included expertise from nephrology, cardiology, Indigenous Health, guideline development and people with lived experience of chronic kidney disease. RESULTS: The guideline recommends people with chronic kidney disease (eGFR ≥15 mL/min/1.73 m2) and an absolute cardiovascular risk of 10% or higher should receive statin therapy (with or without ezetimibe) to reduce the risk of cardiovascular events and death (strong recommendation, moderate certainty evidence). The guidelines also recommends a lower absolute cardiovascular risk threshold (≥5%) for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples and Maori with chronic kidney disease to receive statin therapy (with or without ezetimibe) (strong recommendation, low certainty evidence). The evidence was actively surveyed from 2020-2023 and updated as required. No changes to guideline recommendations were made, with no new data on the balance and benefits of harms. CONCLUSIONS: The development of living guidelines was feasible and provided the opportunity to update recommendations to improve clinical decision-making in real-time. Living guidelines provide the opportunity to transform chronic kidney disease guidelines.

Consumer involvement in the development and dissemination of chronic kidney disease guidelines: a summary of a meaningful and sustainable approach developed by Caring for Australians and New ZealandeRs with kidney Impairment guidelines.

OBJECTIVES: The involvement of consumers (people with lived experience of disease) in guidelines is widely advocated to improve their relevance and uptake. However, the approaches to consumer involvement in guidelines vary and are not well documented. We describe the consumer involvement framework of Caring for Australians and New ZealandeRs with kidney Impairment Guidelines. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We used a descriptive document analysis to collate all relevant policies, documents, e-mails, and presentations on consumer involvement in our organizations. We performed a narrative synthesis of collated data to summarize our evolving consumer involvement approach in guidelines. RESULTS: We involve consumers at all levels of Caring for Australians and New ZealandeRs with kidney Impairment guideline development and dissemination according to their capacity, from conducting consumer workshops to inform the scope of guidelines, to including consumers as members of the guideline Working Groups and overseeing operations and governance as members of the Steering Committee and staff. Our approach has resulted in tangible outcomes including high-priority topics on patient education, psychosocial care, and clinical care pathways, and focusing the literature reviews to assess patient-important outcomes. The ongoing partnership with consumers led to the generation of consumer version guidelines to improve guideline dissemination and translation to support shared decision-making. CONCLUSION: Meaningful consumer involvement can be achieved through a comprehensive approach across the entire lifecycle of guidelines. However, it must be individualized by ensuring that the involvement of consumers is timely and flexible. Future work is needed to assess the impact of consumer involvement in guideline development.

Non-immunosuppressive treatment for IgA nephropathy.

BACKGROUND: IgA nephropathy (IgAN) is the most common primary glomerular disease, with approximately 20% to 40% of patients progressing to kidney failure within 25 years. Non-immunosuppressive treatment has become a mainstay in the management of IgAN by improving blood pressure (BP) management, decreasing proteinuria, and avoiding the risks of long-term immunosuppressive management. Due to the slowly progressive nature of the disease, clinical trials are often underpowered, and conflicting information about management with non-immunosuppressive treatment is common. This is an update of a Cochrane review, first published in 2011. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of non-immunosuppressive treatment for treating IgAN in adults and children. We aimed to examine all non-immunosuppressive therapies (e.g. anticoagulants, antihypertensives, dietary restriction and supplementation, tonsillectomy, and herbal medicines) in the management of IgAN. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to December 2023 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs of non-immunosuppressive agents in adults and children with biopsy-proven IgAN were included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently reviewed search results, extracted data and assessed study quality. Results were expressed as mean differences (MD) for continuous outcomes and risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous outcomes with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using random-effects meta-analysis. Confidence in the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. MAIN RESULTS: This review includes 80 studies (4856 participants), of which 24 new studies (2018 participants) were included in this review update. The risk of bias within the included studies was mostly high or unclear for many of the assessed methodological domains, with poor reporting of important key clinical trial methods in most studies. Antihypertensive therapies were the most examined non-immunosuppressive therapy (37 studies, 1799 participants). Compared to placebo or no treatment, renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibition probably decreases proteinuria (3 studies, 199 participants: MD - 0.71 g/24 h, 95% CI -1.04 to -0.39; moderate certainty evidence) but may result in little or no difference to kidney failure or doubling of serum creatinine (SCr), or complete remission of proteinuria (low certainty evidence). Death, remission of haematuria, relapse of proteinuria or > 50% increase in SCr were not reported. Compared to symptomatic treatment, RAS inhibition (3 studies, 168 participants) probably decreases proteinuria (MD -1.16 g/24 h, 95% CI -1.52 to -0.81) and SCr (MD -9.37 µmol/L, 95% CI -71.95 to -6.80) and probably increases creatinine clearance (2 studies, 127 participants: MD 23.26 mL/min, 95% CI 10.40 to 36.12) (all moderate certainty evidence); however, the risk of kidney failure is uncertain (1 study, 34 participants: RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.01 to 3.88; very low certainty evidence). Death, remission of proteinuria or haematuria, or relapse of proteinuria were not reported. The risk of adverse events may be no different with RAS inhibition compared to either placebo or symptomatic treatment (low certainty evidence). In low certainty evidence, tonsillectomy in people with IgAN in addition to standard care may increase remission of proteinuria compared to standard care alone (2 studies, 143 participants: RR 1.90, 95% CI 1.45 to 2.47) and remission of microscopic haematuria (2 studies, 143 participants: RR 1.93, 95% CI 1.47 to 2.53) and may decrease relapse of proteinuria (1 study, 73 participants: RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.85) and relapse of haematuria (1 study, 72 participants: RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.98). Death, kidney failure and a > 50% increase in SCr were not reported. These trials have only been conducted in Japanese people with IgAN, and the findings' generalisability is unclear. Anticoagulant therapy, fish oil, and traditional Chinese medicines exhibited small benefits to kidney function in patients with IgAN when compared to placebo or no treatment. However, compared to standard care, the kidney function benefits are no longer evident. Antimalarial therapy compared to placebo in one study reported an increase in a > 50% reduction of proteinuria (53 participants: RR 3.13 g/24 h, 95% CI 1.17 to 8.36; low certainty evidence). Although, there was uncertainty regarding adverse events from this study due to very few events. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Available RCTs focused on a diverse range of interventions. They were few, small, and of insufficient duration to determine potential long-term benefits on important kidney and cardiovascular outcomes and harms of treatment. Antihypertensive agents appear to be the most beneficial non-immunosuppressive intervention for IgAN. The antihypertensives examined were predominantly angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers. The benefits of RAS inhibition appear to outweigh the harms in patients with IgAN. The certainty of the evidence of RCTs demonstrating a benefit of tonsillectomy to patients with Japanese patients with IgAN was low. In addition, these findings are inconsistent across observational studies in people with IgAN of other ethnicities; hence, tonsillectomy is not widely recommended, given the potential harm of therapy. The RCT evidence is insufficiently robust to demonstrate efficacy for the other non-immunosuppressive treatments evaluated here.

HMG CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) for people with chronic kidney disease not requiring dialysis.

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular disease is the most frequent cause of death in people with early stages of chronic kidney disease (CKD), and the absolute risk of cardiovascular events is similar to people with coronary artery disease. This is an update of a review first published in 2009 and updated in 2014, which included 50 studies (45,285 participants). OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the benefits and harms of statins compared with placebo, no treatment, standard care or another statin in adults with CKD not requiring dialysis. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 4 October 2023. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov. An updated search will be undertaken every three months. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs that compared the effects of statins with placebo, no treatment, standard care, or other statins, on death, cardiovascular events, kidney function, toxicity, and lipid levels in adults with CKD (estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) 90 to 15 mL/min/1.73 m2) were included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two or more authors independently extracted data and assessed the study risk of bias. Treatment effects were expressed as mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes and risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous benefits and harms with 95% confidence intervals (CI). The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool, and the certainty of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. MAIN RESULTS: We included 63 studies (50,725 randomised participants); of these, 53 studies (42,752 participants) compared statins with placebo or no treatment. The median duration of follow-up was 12 months (range 2 to 64.8 months), the median dosage of statin was equivalent to 20 mg/day of simvastatin, and participants had a median eGFR of 55 mL/min/1.73 m2. Ten studies (7973 participants) compared two different statin regimens. We were able to meta-analyse 43 studies (41,273 participants). Most studies had limited reporting and hence exhibited unclear risk of bias in most domains. Compared with placebo or standard of care, statins prevent major cardiovascular events (14 studies, 36,156 participants: RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.79; I2 = 39%; high certainty evidence), death (13 studies, 34,978 participants: RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.73 to 0.96; I² = 53%; high certainty evidence), cardiovascular death (8 studies, 19,112 participants: RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.87; I² = 0%; high certainty evidence) and myocardial infarction (10 studies, 9475 participants: RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.73; I² = 0%; moderate certainty evidence). There were too few events to determine if statins made a difference in hospitalisation due to heart failure. Statins probably make little or no difference to stroke (7 studies, 9115 participants: RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.08; I² = 39%; moderate certainty evidence) and kidney failure (3 studies, 6704 participants: RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.05; I² = 0%; moderate certainty evidence) in people with CKD not requiring dialysis. Potential harms from statins were limited by a lack of systematic reporting. Statins compared to placebo may have little or no effect on elevated liver enzymes (7 studies, 7991 participants: RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.50; I² = 0%; low certainty evidence), withdrawal due to adverse events (13 studies, 4219 participants: RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.60; I² = 37%; low certainty evidence), and cancer (2 studies, 5581 participants: RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.30; I² = 0%; low certainty evidence). However, few studies reported rhabdomyolysis or elevated creatinine kinase; hence, we are unable to determine the effect due to very low certainty evidence. Statins reduce the risk of death, major cardiovascular events, and myocardial infarction in people with CKD who did not have cardiovascular disease at baseline (primary prevention). There was insufficient data to determine the benefits and harms of the type of statin therapy. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Statins reduce death and major cardiovascular events by about 20% and probably make no difference to stroke or kidney failure in people with CKD not requiring dialysis. However, due to limited reporting, the effect of statins on elevated creatinine kinase or rhabdomyolysis is unclear. Statins have an important role in the primary prevention of cardiovascular events and death in people who have CKD and do not require dialysis. Editorial note: This is a living systematic review. We will search for new evidence every three months and update the review when we identify relevant new evidence. Please refer to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for the current status of this review.

Recommendations for culturally safe clinical kidney care for First Nations Australians: a guideline summary.

INTRODUCTION: First Nations Australians display remarkable strength and resilience despite the intergenerational impacts of ongoing colonisation. The continuing disadvantage is evident in the higher incidence, prevalence, morbidity and mortality of chronic kidney disease (CKD) among First Nations Australians. Nationwide community consultation (Kidney Health Australia, Yarning Kidneys, and Lowitja Institute, Catching Some Air) identified priority issues for guideline development. These guidelines uniquely prioritised the knowledge of the community, alongside relevant evidence using an adapted GRADE Evidence to Decision framework to develop specific recommendations for the management of CKD among First Nations Australians. MAIN RECOMMENDATIONS: These guidelines explicitly state that health systems have to measure, monitor and evaluate institutional racism and link it to cultural safety training, as well as increase community and family involvement in clinical care and equitable transport and accommodation. The guidelines recommend earlier CKD screening criteria (age ≥ 18 years) and referral to specialists services with earlier criteria of kidney function (eg, estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR], ≤ 45 mL/min/1.73 m2 , and a sustained decrease in eGFR, > 10 mL/min/1.73 m2 per year) compared with the general population. CHANGES IN MANAGEMENT AS RESULT OF THE GUIDELINES: Our recommendations prioritise health care service delivery changes to address institutional racism and ensure meaningful cultural safety training. Earlier detection of CKD and referral to nephrologists for First Nations Australians has been recommended to ensure timely implementation to preserve kidney function given the excess burden of disease. Finally, the importance of community with the recognition of involvement in all aspects and stages of treatment together with increased access to care on Country, particularly in rural and remote locations, including dialysis services.

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers for adults with early (stage 1 to 3) non-diabetic chronic kidney disease.

BACKGROUND: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a long-term condition that occurs as a result of damage to the kidneys. Early recognition of CKD is becoming increasingly common due to widespread laboratory estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) reporting, raised clinical awareness, and international adoption of the Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) classifications. Early recognition and management of CKD affords the opportunity to prepare for progressive kidney impairment and impending kidney replacement therapy and for intervention to reduce the risk of progression and cardiovascular disease. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) are two classes of antihypertensive drugs that act on the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system. Beneficial effects of ACEi and ARB on kidney outcomes and survival in people with a wide range of severity of kidney impairment have been reported; however, their effectiveness in the subgroup of people with early CKD (stage 1 to 3) is less certain. This is an update of a review that was last published in 2011. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the benefits and harms of ACEi and ARB or both in the management of people with early (stage 1 to 3) CKD who do not have diabetes mellitus (DM). SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 6 July 2023 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 Registry Platform (ICTRP) Search Portal, and ClinicalTrials.gov. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) reporting the effect of ACEi or ARB in people with early (stage 1 to 3) CKD who did not have DM were selected for inclusion. Only studies of at least four weeks duration were selected. Authors independently assessed the retrieved titles and abstracts and, where necessary, the full text to determine which satisfied the inclusion criteria. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data extraction was carried out by two authors independently, using a standard data extraction form. The methodological quality of included studies was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Data entry was carried out by one author and cross-checked by another. When more than one study reported similar outcomes, data were pooled using the random-effects model. Heterogeneity was analysed using a Chi² test and the I² test. Results were expressed as risk ratios (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference (MD) and 95% CI for continuous outcomes. Confidence in the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach MAIN RESULTS: Six studies randomising 9379 participants with CKD stages 1 to 3 (without DM) met our inclusion criteria. Participants were adults with hypertension; 79% were male from China, Europe, Japan, and the USA. Treatment periods ranged from 12 weeks to three years. Overall, studies were judged to be at unclear or high risk of bias across all domains, and the quality of the evidence was poor, with GRADE rated as low or very low certainty. In low certainty evidence, ACEi (benazepril 10 mg or trandolapril 2 mg) compared to placebo may make little or no difference to death (any cause) (2 studies, 8873 participants): RR 2.00, 95% CI 0.26 to 15.37; I² = 76%), total cardiovascular events (2 studies, 8873 participants): RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.05; I² = 0%), cardiovascular-related death (2 studies, 8873 participants): RR 1.73, 95% CI 0.26 to 11.66; I² = 54%), stroke (2 studies, 8873 participants): RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.03; I² = 0%), myocardial infarction (2 studies, 8873 participants): RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.20; I² = 0%), and adverse events (2 studies, 8873 participants): RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.26 to 1.41; I² = 0%). It is uncertain whether ACEi (benazepril 10 mg or trandolapril 2 mg) compared to placebo reduces congestive heart failure (1 study, 8290 participants): RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.95) or transient ischaemic attack (1 study, 583 participants): RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.06 to 15.01; I² = 0%) because the certainty of the evidence is very low. It is uncertain whether ARB (losartan 50 mg) compared to placebo (1 study, 226 participants) reduces: death (any-cause) (no events), adverse events (RR 19.34, 95% CI 1.14 to 328.30), eGFR rate of decline (MD 5.00 mL/min/1.73 m2, 95% CI 3.03 to 6.97), presence of proteinuria (MD -0.65 g/24 hours, 95% CI -0.78 to -0.52), systolic blood pressure (MD -0.80 mm Hg, 95% CI -3.89 to 2.29), or diastolic blood pressure (MD -1.10 mm Hg, 95% CI -3.29 to 1.09) because the certainty of the evidence is very low. It is uncertain whether ACEi (enalapril 20 mg, perindopril 2 mg or trandolapril 1 mg) compared to ARB (olmesartan 20 mg, losartan 25 mg or candesartan 4 mg) (1 study, 26 participants) reduces: proteinuria (MD -0.40, 95% CI -0.60 to -0.20), systolic blood pressure (MD -3.00 mm Hg, 95% CI -6.08 to 0.08) or diastolic blood pressure (MD -1.00 mm Hg, 95% CI -3.31 to 1.31) because the certainty of the evidence is very low. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is currently insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of ACEi or ARB in patients with stage 1 to 3 CKD who do not have DM. The available evidence is overall of very low certainty and high risk of bias. We have identified an area of large uncertainty for a group of patients who account for most of those diagnosed as having CKD.

Diabetes Management in Chronic Kidney Disease: Synopsis of the KDIGO 2022 Clinical Practice Guideline Update.

DESCRIPTION: The KDIGO 2022 Clinical Practice Guideline for Diabetes Management in Chronic Kidney Disease is an update of the 2020 guideline from Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO). METHODS: The KDIGO Work Group updated the guideline, which included reviewing and grading new evidence that was identified and summarized. As in the previous guideline, the Work Group used the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach to appraise evidence and rate the strength of recommendations and expert judgment to develop consensus practice points. New evidence led to updating of recommendations in the chapters Comprehensive Care in Patients With Diabetes and CKD (Chapter 1) and Glucose-Lowering Therapies in Patients With T2D and CKD (Chapter 4). New evidence did not change recommendations in the chapters Glycemic Monitoring and Targets in Patients With Diabetes and CKD (Chapter 2), Lifestyle Interventions in Patients With Diabetes and CKD (Chapter 3), and Approaches to Management of Patients With Diabetes and CKD (Chapter 5). RECOMMENDATIONS: The updated guideline includes 13 recommendations and 52 practice points for clinicians caring for patients with diabetes and chronic kidney disease (CKD). A focus on preserving kidney function and maintaining well-being is recommended using a layered approach to care, starting with a foundation of lifestyle interventions, self-management, and first-line pharmacotherapy (such as sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors) demonstrated to improve clinical outcomes. To this are added additional drugs with heart and kidney protection, such as glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and nonsteroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, and interventions to control risk factors for CKD progression and cardiovascular events, such as blood pressure, glycemia, and lipids.

Methods for living guidelines: early guidance based on practical experience. Paper 1: Introduction.

OBJECTIVES: To introduce methods for living guidelines based on practical experiences by the Australian Living Evidence Consortium (ALEC), the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE), and the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA), with methodological support from the US Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) Network. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Members of ALEC, NICE, and the US GRADE Network, convened a working group to share experiences of the methods used to develop living guidelines and outline the key differences between traditional and living guidelines methods. RESULTS: The guidance includes the following steps: 1) deciding if the guideline is a priority for a living approach, 2) preparing for living guideline development, 3) literature surveillance and frequency of searching, 4) assessment and synthesis of the evidence, 5) publication and dissemination, and 6) transitioning recommendations out of living mode. CONCLUSION: This paper introduces methods for living guidelines and provides examples of the similarities and differences in approach across multiple organizations conducting living guidelines. It also introduces a series of papers exploring methods for living guidelines based on our practical experiences, including consumer involvement, selecting and prioritizing questions, search decisions, and methods decisions.

Methods for living guidelines: early guidance based on practical experience. Paper 5: decisions on methods for evidence synthesis and recommendation development for living guidelines.

OBJECTIVES: Producing living guidelines requires making important decisions about methods for evidence identification, appraisal, and integration to allow the living mode to function. Clarifying what these decisions are and the trade-offs between options is necessary. This article provides living guideline developers with a framework to enable them to choose the most suitable model for their living guideline topic, question, or context. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We developed this guidance through an iterative process informed by interviews, feedback, and a consensus process with an international group of living guideline developers. RESULTS: Several key decisions need to be made both before commencing and throughout the continual process of living guideline development and maintenance. These include deciding what approach is taken to the systematic review process; decisions about methods to be applied for the evidence appraisal process, including the use of unpublished data; and selection of "triggers" to incorporate new studies into living guideline recommendations. In each case, there are multiple options and trade-offs. CONCLUSION: We identify trade-offs and important decisions to be considered throughout the living guideline development process. The most appropriate, and most sustainable, mode of development and updating will be dependent on the choices made in each of these areas.

Methods for living guidelines: early guidance based on practical experience. Paper 3: selecting and prioritizing questions for living guidelines.

OBJECTIVES: This article is part of a series on methods for living guidelines, consolidating practical experiences from developing living guidelines. It focuses on methods for identification, selection, and prioritization of clinical questions for a living approach to guideline development. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Members of the Australian Living Evidence Consortium, the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence and the US Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations Network, convened a working group. All members have expertize and practical experience in the development of living guidelines. We collated methods, documents on prioritization from each organization's living guidelines, conducted interviews and held working group discussions. We consolidated these to form best practice principles which were then edited and agreed on by the working group members. RESULTS: We developed best practice principles for (1) identification, (2) selection, and (3) prioritization, of questions for a living approach to guideline development. Several different strategies for undertaking prioritizing questions are explored. CONCLUSION: The article provides guidance for prioritizing questions in living guidelines. Subsequent articles in this series explore consumer involvement, search decisions, and methods decisions that are appropriate for questions with different priority levels.

Safety and tolerability of solifenacin in children and adolescents with overactive bladder- a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Solifenacin is an anticholinergic that is used to treat overactive bladder syndrome (OAB) in children. It is important to ascertain the safety and tolerability of solifenacin in the paediatric population as solifenacin offers an alternative, is more bladder specific, and should have less anticholinergic side effects than other therapies. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to systematically evaluate the safety and tolerability of solifenacin in children and adolescents with OAB. STUDY DESIGN: We included studies that reported the safety and tolerability of solifenacin in children and adolescents. All study types were included. Electronic searches were conducted in Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, TRIP, CINAHL and ICTRP on the 18th of January 2022. Risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool 2.0 (ROB-2) for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and the Newcastle-Ottowa scale for cohort studies. RESULTS: A total of twelve studies including two RCTs were included in this review. Results from the meta-analysis of RCTs showed the commonest side effects were constipation (RR 3.5, 95%CI 0.9-13.7) and dry mouth (RR 3.1 95%CI 0.2-53). In terms of tolerability, the effect estimate of ceasing solifenacin due to an adverse effect was 2.7 (95%CI 0.8-9.1). Within the cohort studies, out of the 779 patients 21.7% experienced side effects. The most common side effects were constipation (6.8%) and dry mouth/lips (6.0%) and 3.5% of patients ceased solifenacin due to adverse effects. Overall, the certainty of the evidence for side effects and tolerability were very low. DISCUSSION: The reported incidence of side effects is low, and less than reported with oxybutynin use. However, the very low certainty of the evidence means the findings should be interpreted with caution. There is limited reporting of a prolonged QTc interval on ECG. Studies that described this only had an increase of QTc from baseline and not a clinically significant prolonged QTc that resulted in arrhythmias. CONCLUSION: Solifenacin is an alternative anticholinergic for the treatment of OAB in children. However, given the paucity of good quality data on safety and tolerability it should be used cautiously in children with close monitoring for potential side effects.

Caring for Australians and New Zealanders With Kidney Impairment Guidelines: Rapid Development of Urate Lowering Therapy Guidelines for People With CKD.

Introduction: The slow transformation of new research findings into clinical guidelines is a barrier to providing evidence-based care. The Caring for Australians and New Zealanders with Kidney Impairment (CARI) guidelines are developing models to improve guideline production, one methodology involves more functional concordance between trial groups, such as the Australian Kidney Trials Network (AKTN) and CARI. The objective of this project was to rapidly produce an evidence-based guideline on urate-lowering therapy in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD), in response to new clinical trial publications on the topic by the AKTN. Methods: To produce a guideline as rapidly as possible, an existing systematic review was utilized as the evidence base, and then updated with the inclusion of clinical trials that had been published subsequently. A Work Group was convened to review the evidence and compose an appropriate guideline using CARI/GRADE methodology. The group met 3 times over 45 days to formulate the guideline. Results: The result was a strong recommendation against the use urate-lowering therapies in individuals with CKD (not receiving dialysis) and asymptomatic hyperuricemia. The process of identifying an appropriate existing systematic review, updating the literature search, and synthesizing the evidence, was done by 2 individuals over 15 days. The Work Group was formulated and composed the guideline over 45 days. In all, a new guideline incorporating the most up-to-date evidence was formulated in 60 days. Conclusion: This method of guideline development represents a potentially new way of releasing guidelines that encapsulates all available evidence in a time-efficient manner.

Executive summary of the KDIGO 2022 Clinical Practice Guideline for Diabetes Management in Chronic Kidney Disease: an update based on rapidly emerging new evidence.

The Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) 2022 Clinical Practice Guideline for Diabetes Management in Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD) represents a focused update of the KDIGO 2020 guideline on the topic. The guideline targets a broad audience of clinicians treating people with diabetes and CKD. Topic areas for which recommendations are updated based on new evidence include Chapter 1: Comprehensive care in patients with diabetes and CKD and Chapter 4: Glucose-lowering therapies in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and CKD. The content of previous chapters on Glycemic monitoring and targets in patients with diabetes and CKD (Chapter 2), Lifestyle interventions in patients with diabetes and CKD (Chapter 3), and Approaches to management of patients with diabetes and CKD (Chapter 5) has been deemed current and was not changed. This guideline update was developed according to an explicit process of evidence review and appraisal. Treatment approaches and guideline recommendations are based on systematic reviews of relevant studies and appraisal of the quality of the evidence, and the strength of recommendations followed the "Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation" (GRADE) approach. Limitations of the evidence are discussed, and areas for which additional research is needed are presented.