Evaluating Short-Term Outcomes of Tunneled and Non-Tunneled Central Venous Catheters in Hemodialysis.

Background: The necessity of using central venous catheters (CVCs) in hemodialysis, coupled with their associated complications, remains a critical concern in nephrology. This study aims to compare the short-term prognosis of tunneled (T-CVC) and non-tunneled (NT-CVC) CVCs in acute hemodialysis patients, specifically focusing on infection rates, malpositioning, and lumen thrombosis within the first three weeks post-insertion. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 176 CVCs placed between January and December 2023 at the Policlinico di Modena and the Ospedale Civile di Baggiovara. Patient demographics, CHA2DS2-VASc scores, and comorbid conditions were recorded at the time of catheter placement. Outcomes assessed included catheter-related infections, malpositioning, and lumen thrombosis. Statistical analyses, including Chi-square tests, Fisher's exact tests, and Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, were performed to evaluate differences between T-CVCs and NT-CVCs. Results: The sample comprised 43% females with a mean age of 69.3 years (SD 13.9) and a mean CHADS-VASC score of 3.72 (SD 1.4). Hypertension (90%) was the most prevalent comorbidity. Of the 176 CVCs, 127 were T-CVCs and 49 were NT-CVCs. Infection rates were 3.15% for T-CVCs and 8.16% for NT-CVCs (p = 0.07). Malpositioning occurred in 0.79% of T-CVCs and 4.08% of NT-CVCs (p = 0.47). There was one case of lumen thrombosis in the NT-CVC group. Kaplan-Meier analysis indicated a significant divergence in infection-related catheter survival favoring T-CVCs after ten days (p = 0.034). Conclusions: While non-tunneled CVCs do not significantly alter short-term prognosis compared to tunneled CVCs, the latter show a better infection-related survival rate beyond ten days. Therefore, primary insertion of T-CVCs may be preferable when resources and clinical conditions permit, although NT-CVCs remain a viable option when immediate T-CVC insertion is challenging.

Reactogenicity of COVID-19 vaccine in hemodialysis patients: a single-center retrospective study.

Introduction: Some hemodialysis patients are reluctant to undergo COVID-19 vaccination for the fear of developing adverse events (AEs). The aim of this study was to verify the safety of the mRNA-1273 vaccine in hemodialysis patients. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of in-center hemodialysis patients who underwent mRNA-1273 vaccine from March 1st to April 30th, 2021. All AEs occurring after the first and the second doses were collected and classified as local or systemic. Results: Overall, 126 patients on chronic maintenance dialysis without a prior COVID-19 diagnosis were vaccinated with two doses of mRNA-1273 vaccine. Mean age was 68 (IQR, 54,7-76) years and 53.6% of patients were aged ≥65 years. During the observational period of 68 (IQR, 66-70) days, AEs occurred in 57.9% and 61.9% of patients after the first dose and second dose, respectively. The most common AEs were: injection-site pain (61.9%), erythema (4.8%), itching (4.8%), swelling (16.7%), axillary swelling/tenderness (2.4%), fever (17.5%) headache (7.9%), fatigue (23.8%), myalgia (17.5%), arthralgia (12.7%), dyspnoea (2.4%), nausea/vomiting (7.1%), diarrhoea (5.6%), shivers (4%) and vertigo (1.6%). The rates of local AEs were similar after the first and second doses (P=0.8), whereas systemic AEs occurred more frequently after the second dose (P=0.001). Fever (P=0.03), fatigue (P=0.02) and nausea/vomiting (P=0.03) were significantly more frequent after the second dose of the vaccine. There were no age-related differences in the rate of AEs. Overall, vaccine-related AEs in hemodialysis patients seem to be lower than in the general population. Conclusion: The RNA-1273 vaccine was associated with the development of transient AEs after the first and second doses in patients on chronic maintenance hemodialysis. They were mostly local, whereas systemic AEs were more prevalent after the second dose. Overall, all AEs lasted for a few days, without any apparent sequelae.

Immunosuppressive therapy reduction and early post-infection graft function in kidney transplant recipients with COVID-19.

Background: Kidney transplant (KT) recipients with COVID-19 are at high risk of poor outcomes due to the high burden of comorbidities and immunosuppression. The effects of immunosuppressive therapy (IST) reduction are unclear in patients with COVID-19. Methods: A retrospective study on 45 KT recipients followed at the University Hospital of Modena (Italy) who tested positive for COVID-19 by RT-PCR analysis. Results: The median age was 56.1 years (interquartile range,[IQR] 47.3-61.1), with a predominance of males (64.4%). Kidney transplantation vintage was 10.1 (2.7-16) years, and 55.6 % of patients were on triple IST before COVID-19. Early immunosuppression minimization occurred in 27 (60%) patients (reduced-dose IST group) and included antimetabolite (88.8%) and calcineurin inhibitor withdrawal (22.2%). After SARS-CoV-2 infection, 88.9% of patients became symptomatic and 42.2% required hospitalization. One patient experienced irreversible graft failure. There were no differences in serum creatinine level and proteinuria in non-hospitalized patients before and post-COVID-19, whereas hospitalized patients experienced better kidney function after hospital discharge (P=0.019). Overall mortality was 17.8%. without differences between full- and reduced-dose IST. Risk factors for death were age (odds ratio [OR]: 1.19; 95%CI: 1.01-1.39), and duration of kidney transplant (OR: 1.17; 95%CI: 1.01-1.35). One KT recipient developed IgA glomerulonephritis and two ones experienced symptomatic COVID-19 after primary infection and SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine, respectively. Conclusions: Despite the reduction of immunosuppression, COVID-19 affected the survival of KT recipients. Age of patients and time elapsed from kidney transplantation were independent predictors of death . Early kidney function was favorable in most survivors after COVID-19.