Validating the anatomical landmark technique for bedside tunneled central venous catheter placement in the medical intensive care unit.

BACKGROUND: A non-tunneled dialysis catheter (nTDC) is often the vascular access of choice to initiate dialysis in an intensive care unit (ICU). In the absence of contraindications, if a patient remains dialysis dependent beyond 2-weeks, the options are either to replace the nTDC with another nTDC or convert to a tunneled dialysis catheter (TDC). As a standard of care, TDCs are placed under fluoroscopic guidance. OBJECTIVES: To determine if TDCs and other tunneled central venous catheters (tCVC) can be placed safely using anatomical landmark techniques without the use of fluoroscopy. RESEARCH DESIGN: Subjects that met a predetermined selection criteria underwent placement of tunneled catheters with the use of the anatomical landmark technique. We looked at various outcomes to determine the safety and effectiveness of this technique. SUBJECTS: One hundred eleven TDCs and other tCVCs were placed using the anatomical landmark technique in the intensive care unit. RESULTS: All but one (110/111) of the catheters placed had recommended tip placement confirmed by at least one blinded physician. Major complications encountered were bleeding (two cases), pneumothorax (one case), and line associated blood stream infection (one case). We did find a higher-than-expected rate of "unnecessary procedures" with 18/111 lines placed in patients who did not survive beyond 7 days after placement of the catheter. CONCLUSIONS: Using the anatomical landmark technique for bedside tunneled catheter placement can be an effective approach in the right population.

Thromboelastography-Guided Correction of Coagulopathy Before Tunneled Central Venous Access in Critically Ill Patients With Liver Disease: A Propensity Score-Matched Study.

Importance: Optimal blood product transfusion strategies before tunneled central venous catheter (CVC) placement are required in critically ill coagulopathic patients with liver disease to reduce exposure to allogeneic blood products and mitigate bleeding and thrombotic complications. Objectives: This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of a thromboelastography-guided transfusion strategy for the correction of coagulopathy in patients with liver disease compared with a conventional transfusion strategy (using international normalized ratio, platelet count, and fibrinogen) before tunneled CVC insertion. Design Setting and Participants: A retrospective propensity score-matched single-center cohort study was conducted at a quaternary care academic medical center involving 364 patients with liver disease (cirrhosis and acute liver failure) who underwent tunneled CVC insertion in the ICU. Patients were stratified into two groups based on whether they received blood product transfusions based on a thromboelastography-guided or conventional transfusion strategy. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes that were evaluated included the volume, units and cost of blood products (fresh frozen plasma, cryoprecipitate, and platelets) when using a thromboelastography-guided or conventional approach to blood transfusions. Secondary outcomes included the frequency of procedure-related bleeding and thrombotic complications. Results: The total number of units/volume/cost of fresh frozen plasma (12 U/3,000 mL/$684 vs. 32 U/7,500 mL/$1,824 [p = 0.019]), cryoprecipitate (60 U/1,500 mL/$3,240 vs. 250 U/6,250 mL/$13,500 [p < 0.001]), and platelets (5 U/1,500 mL/$2,610 vs. 13 units/3,900 mL/$6,786 [p = 0.046]) transfused were significantly lower in the thromboelastography-guided transfusion group than in the conventional transfusion group. No differences in the frequency of bleeding/thrombotic events were observed between the two groups. Conclusions and Relevance: A thromboelastography-guided transfusion strategy for correction of coagulopathy in critically ill patients with liver disease before tunneled CVC insertion, compared with a conventional transfusion strategy, reduces unnecessary exposure to allogeneic blood products and associated costs without increasing the risk for peri-procedural bleeding and thrombotic complications.

Global hemodialysis vascular access care: Three decades of evolution.

The development of vascular access for hemodialysis has come a long way since 1943 when the first hemodialysis treatment was performed in humans by connecting an artery and vein using an external glass canula. Since then, vascular access care has evolved robustly through contributions from numerous countries and professional nephrology societies, worldwide. To understand the global distribution and contribution of different specialties to medical literature on dialysis vascular access care, we performed a literature search from 1991 to 2021 and identified 2768 articles from 74 countries. The majority of publications originated from the United States (41.5%), followed by China (5.1%) and the United Kingdom (4.6%). Our search results comprise of observational studies (43%), case reports/series (27%), review articles (16.5%) and clinical trials (12%). A large proportion of articles were published in Nephrology journals (49%), followed by General Medicine (14%), Surgery (10%), Vascular Medicine (8%), and Interventional Radiology journals (4%). With the introduction of interventional nephrology, nephrologists will be able to assume the majority of the responsibility for dialysis vascular access care and above all maintain a close interdisciplinary collaboration with other specialties to provide optimum patient care. In this review article, we discuss the history, evolving knowledge, challenges, educational opportunities, and future directions of dialysis vascular access care, worldwide.

Placing an appropriate tunneled dialysis catheter in an appropriate patient including the nonconventional sites.

Hemodialysis remains the most frequently chosen kidney replacement modality across the world. A well-functioning dialysis vascular access is critical to providing successful dialysis therapy. Despite its drawbacks, central venous catheter is commonly used as a vascular access to initiate hemodialysis therapy in acute and chronic settings. The growing recognition of providing patient centric care and per recommendations from the recently published Kidney Disease Outcome Quality Initiative (KDOQI) Vascular Access Guidelines, selecting the appropriate patient population for a central venous catheter placement involves implementing the End Stage Kidney Disease (ESKD) Life-Plan strategy. The current review examines the circumstances and challenges that increasingly lead to the hemodialysis catheter being the default and the only available choice for patients. The current review outlines the clinical scenarios for selecting an appropriate patient for hemodialysis catheter use for short-term or long-term needs. The review further discusses clinical pointers to assist with the decision-making process on estimation on prospective catheter length selection, particularly in the intensive care unit setting without the aid of conventional fluoroscopic guidance. A hierarchy of conventional and non-conventional access sites is proposed based on KDOQI guidance and multi-disciplinary author experience. Non-conventional sites are reviewed, including complications and technical guidance, for trans-lumbar IVC, trans-hepatic, trans-renal, and other exotic sites.

Unmet needs and opportunities for optimal management of patients with type 2 diabetes and chronic kidney disease.

This brief report utilizes EHR data from a large US health system to summarize unmet needs in patients with type 2 diabetes and chronic kidney disease and identifies areas of opportunity to optimize management within this patient population from treatment, screening and monitoring, and health care resource use perspectives.

Study protocol of a randomized controlled trial of fistula vs. graft arteriovenous vascular access in older adults with end-stage kidney disease on hemodialysis: the AV access trial.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) with hemodialysis requires surgical creation of an arteriovenous (AV) vascular access-fistula (AVF) or graft (AVG)-to avoid (or limit) the use of a central venous catheter (CVC). AVFs have long been considered the first-line vascular access option, with AVGs as second best. Recent studies have suggested that, in older adults, AVGs may be a better strategy than AVFs. Lacking evidence from well-powered randomized clinical trials, integration of these results into clinical decision making is challenging. The main objective of the AV Access Study is to compare, between the two types of AV access, clinical outcomes that are important to patients, physicians, and policy makers. METHODS: This is a prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled trial in adults ≥ 60 years old receiving chronic hemodialysis via a CVC. Eligible participants must have co-existing cardiovascular disease, peripheral arterial disease, and/or diabetes mellitus; and vascular anatomy suitable for placement of either type of AV access. Participants are randomized, in a 1:1 ratio, to a strategy of AVG or AVF creation. An estimated 262 participants will be recruited across 7 healthcare systems, with average follow-up of 2 years. Questionnaires will be administered at baseline and semi-annually. The primary outcome is the rate of CVC-free days per 100 patient-days. The primary safety outcome is the cumulative incidence of vascular access (CVC or AV access)-related severe infections-defined as access infections that lead to hospitalization or death. Secondary outcomes include access-related healthcare costs and patients' experiences with vascular access care between the two treatment groups. DISCUSSION: In the absence of studies using robust and unbiased research methodology to address vascular access care for hemodialysis patients, clinical decisions are limited to inferences from observational studies. The goal of the AV Access Study is to generate evidence to optimize vascular access care, based on objective, age-specific criteria, while incorporating goals of care and patient preference for vascular access type in clinical decision-making. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is being conducted in accordance with the tenets of the Helsinki Declaration, and has been approved by the central institutional review board (IRB) of Wake Forest University Health Sciences (approval number: 00069593) and local IRB of each participating clinical center; and was registered on Nov 27, 2020, at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04646226).

Acute hemodialysis catheter follows the path of least resistance.

The placement of large bore double-lumen catheters for hemodialysis (HD) is one of the most frequent procedures performed in HD patients. However, these procedures are associated with complications, the most common being catheter malposition. In this context, catheter deviation to the left superior intercostal vein (LISV) is a very uncommon malposition, which must be differentiated from intrathoracic extravascular catheter lodgment. We report a case of an adult male patient on hemodialysis who presented with a thrombosed arteriovenous fistula and requiring urgent HD. His past medical history included hemophilia, allergy to contrast media, and multiple previous central vein catheterizations. A non-tunneled HD catheter was placed without any difficulty in the left internal jugular vein. However, the arterial lumen failed to pull any blood with free flow in the venous lumen. A chest X-ray revealed a surprising finding. The malpositioned catheter was removed successfully without any complications.

Salvage of the existing venotomy site and tunnel: Redeeming the "Fallen dialysis catheter".

Accidental extrusion of tunneled hemodialysis (HD) catheter leaves the dialysis patient without a vascular access and creates an emergency. The common practice is to insert a new catheter via a new venotomy site and a new tunnel. We highlight a lesser-known intervention technique that helps preserve the limited central venous vascular access sites needed to provide dialysis. A 42-year-old man with end stage kidney disease on HD through a right internal jugular vein (RIJV) tunneled hemodialysis catheter (TDC) was referred 1-day after he accidently pulled his catheter following the removal of butterfly wing sutures. The TDC had been in place for 2 months. On examination, the catheter exit site was not infected. After sterile skin preparation the exit site and the tunnel were cleaned with betadine impregnated Q-tips. An 0.035″ hydrophilic guidewire was advanced through the existing venotomy site over a 5F directional catheter under fluoroscopic guidance. The catheter over the guidewire was advanced through the tunnel towards the previous venotomy site in the RIJV. The exact position of the guidewire and catheter was confirmed by injecting contrast. The angled catheter was then maneuvered inferiorly towards the superior vena cava and the wire was placed in the inferior vena cava. A new TDC was advanced over the guidewire through the existing tunnel and the catheter tip was positioned into the mid-right atrium. The procedure was uneventful and TDC was functioning well at 1-month follow-up review. In conclusion, the case highlights the safety of an underutilized practical approach to achieving safe and quick access for dialysis in patients with accidental loss of TDC. The technique described herein, avoids the need to select a new venotomy site, improves patient satisfaction by minimizing procedure related discomfort due to alleviating the need to create a new tunnel, and optimizes resources used for the procedure.

Tunneled femoral dialysis catheter: Practical pointers.

One of the most challenging aspects of providing end-stage kidney disease care is to achieve adequate long-term access to the bloodstream to support hemodialysis (HD) therapy. Although upper extremity arteriovenous fistula remains the vascular access of choice for patients on HD, complications such as central venous stenosis, access thrombosis, or exhaustion of suitable access sites in the upper extremity, ultimately result in pursuing vascular access creation in the lower extremity. The current review focuses on the indications, contraindications, and clinically relevant practical procedural tips to successfully place a tunneled femoral dialysis catheter. The review highlights some of the prevailing misconceptions regarding femoral catheter placement practices.

Challenges with tunneled dialysis catheter placement with subcutaneous emphysema.

Central vein catheter is a convenient and preferred vascular access for blood purification therapy in intensive care unit. Utilizing ultrasound to access the central vein is considered standard of care. However, critically ill patients can pose challenges while acquiring an optimal ultrasound image. The presence of subcutaneous air pockets, concerns for air embolism, and excessive bleeding from the exit site is one such clinical situation. We describe our experience with a unique situation while placing a tunneled dialysis catheter in a COVID-19 patient with acute respiratory failure and subcutaneous emphysema.

Feasibility and safety of guidewire-balloon entrapment technique for recanalization of thoracic central vein occlusion in hemodialysis patients.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the feasibility and safety of Guidewire-Balloon Entrapment Technique (GBET) for the recanalization of thoracic central vein occlusions (TCVOs) in hemodialysis patients. METHODS: A retrospective observational study was conducted using data from 28 patients who required the establishment or maintenance of hemodialysis access and were treated with GBET for the recanalization of right-sided TCVOs from January 2017 to April 2021. Of the patients, 27 required tunneled cuffed catheter (TCC) placement or exchange, and 1 had an outflow tract occlusion of the Brescia-Cimino radio cephalic arteriovenous fistula (AVF). RESULTS: A total of 26 patients successfully underwent TCC exchange and placement using GBET; 1 patient underwent successful recanalization of an occlusion of the outflow tract of the right Brescia-Cimino AVF; and 1 patient underwent successful TCC placement in the left internal jugular vein (LIJV) after the failure of TCC placement in the right internal jugular vein (RIJV). The success rate for GBET was 27/28 (96.43%), and there were no major complications. CONCLUSION: GBET is a safe and effective method for the recanalization of right-sided TCVOs, especially for TCC exchange and placement, and can be used as a safe and easy approach for TCVO recanalization.

Dialysis Decision Making, Dialysis Experiences, and Illness Perceptions: A Qualitative Study of Pakistani Patients Receiving Maintenance Hemodialysis.

Rationale & Objective: The incidence and prevalence of patients with kidney failure requiring dialysis are increasing in Pakistan. However, in-depth perspectives on kidney care from Pakistani people requiring maintenance dialysis are lacking. Study Design: Qualitative interview study. Setting & Participants: Between September 2020 and January 2021, we interviewed 20 adults receiving maintenance hemodialysis in 2 outpatient dialysis units in Pakistan. We asked open-ended questions to explore their experiences with various aspects of kidney care. Analytical Approach: We recorded, transcribed, and then, using a phenomenological approach, thematically analyzed interviews. Results: We observed the following 6 main themes: (1) Patients perceived various supernatural phenomena as causes of their illness and chose traditional medicine for chronic kidney disease (CKD) treatment. (2) Patients expressed dissatisfaction with their physicians' communication. They felt poorly informed and resented their decision to initiate dialysis. (3) Family members tried to dissuade patients away from dialysis but also provided support once dialysis was initiated. (4) Patients and families found it challenging to afford dialysis and transplantation and also to arrange for transportation. (5) Women found it challenging to fulfill their obligations as wives and mothers while receiving maintenance dialysis. (6) Patients seemed reluctant to discuss end-of-life care. Limitations: We collected data from only 2 hospitals in neighboring cities. Additionally, patients on peritoneal dialysis were not included. Conclusions: Our findings shed light on patients' perspectives on kidney care in Pakistan and call for financially feasible solutions to raise kidney disease awareness and improve patients' experiences with dialysis. Physician training in communication and shared dialysis decision making along with the development of culturally adapted decision aids are needed to improve CKD knowledge and shared decision making. Although financial challenges preclude many from receiving long-term dialysis, cost-effective strategies to improve the availability of other options (eg, supportive kidney care, peritoneal dialysis, and transplantation) are still warranted.

Study protocol for Vascular Access outcome measure for function: a vaLidation study In hemoDialysis (VALID) : A multi-center, multinational validation study to assess the accuracy and feasibility of measuring vascular access function in clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: A functioning vascular access (VA) is crucial to providing adequate hemodialysis (HD) and considered a critically important outcome by patients and healthcare professionals. A validated, patient-important outcome measure for VA function that can be easily measured in research and practice to harvest reliable and relevant evidence for informing patient-centered HD care is lacking. Vascular Access outcome measure for function: a vaLidation study In hemoDialysis (VALID) aims to assess the accuracy and feasibility of measuring a core outcome for VA function established by the international Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology (SONG) initiative. METHODS: VALID is a prospective, multi-center, multinational validation study that will assess the accuracy and feasibility of measuring VA function, defined as the need for interventions to enable and maintain the use of a VA for HD. The primary objective is to determine whether VA function can be measured accurately by clinical staff as part of routine clinical practice (Assessor 1) compared to the reference standard of documented VA procedures collected by a VA expert (Assessor 2) during a 6-month follow-up period. Secondary outcomes include feasibility and acceptability of measuring VA function and the time to, rate of, and type of VA interventions. An estimated 612 participants will be recruited from approximately 10 dialysis units of different size, type (home-, in-center and satellite), governance (private versus public), and location (rural versus urban) across Australia, Canada, Europe, and Malaysia. Validity will be measured by the sensitivity and specificity of the data acquisition process. The sensitivity corresponds to the proportion of correctly identified interventions by Assessor 1, among the interventions identified by Assessor 2 (reference standard). The feasibility of measuring VA function will be assessed by the average data collection time, data completeness, feasibility questionnaires and semi-structured interviews on key feasibility aspects with the assessors. DISCUSSION: Accuracy, acceptability, and feasibility of measuring VA function as part of routine clinical practice are required to facilitate global implementation of this core outcome across all HD trials. Global use of a standardized, patient-centered outcome measure for VA function in HD research will enhance the consistency and relevance of trial evidence to guide patient-centered care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03969225. Registered on 31st May 2019.

Global challenges with providing vascular access care during COVID era.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has adversely affected health care systems and dialysis access care in the US and across the globe. Beyond the initial challenges posed by the pandemic and despite the actions taken by health care leaders/organizations/professional societies such as the "Maintaining Lifelines for ESKD Patients" joint statement, there continues to be delays in providing timely care and performing elective and emergent dialysis access procedures worldwide. The aim of this study was to assess the global challenges associated with providing dialysis vascular access care across the international vascular access community during the pandemic. METHODS: The American Society of Diagnostic and Interventional Nephrology (ASDIN) conducted an online survey in 2021, that was administered to an expert panel of dialysis vascular access specialists and global leaders spanning across the international community. The respondents who are members of ASDIN, Association of Vascular Access and InTerventionAl Renal physicians (AVATAR), Asia Pacific Society of Dialysis Access (APSDA), Peruvian Vascular Access Society (APDAV), and Australia/New Zealand Society of Interventional Nephrology (ANZSIN) reported their experiences in the care of dialysis vascular access, practice patterns, and challenges faced during the COVID pandemic. RESULTS: Of the 53 individual surveys sent, 16 were opened and 11 (69%) responses were received from across the world and from different practice settings. The survey revealed the continued challenges facing the international community, the stark disparities in care delivery, supply chain disruption and logistical, regulatory, and financial issues that the global community continues to face in the ongoing pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID19 pandemic is far from over, and the challenges and barriers to providing dialysis access care seen on the initial ASDIN survey in the US seem to extend across the globe. We describe those results and discuss options, opportunities, and innovative tools to provide dialysis and access care during these trying times.

Therapeutic Advances in Diabetic Nephropathy.

Diabetic kidney disease (DKD) is the most common cause of end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) in the United States. Risk factor modification, such as tight control of blood glucose, management of hypertension and hyperlipidemia, and the use of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) blockade have been proven to help delay the progression of DKD. In recent years, new therapeutics including sodium-glucose transport protein 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors, endothelin antagonists, glucagon like peptide-1 (GLP-1) agonists, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRA), have provided additional treatment options for patients with DKD. This review discusses the various treatment options available to treat patients with diabetic kidney disease.