Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros








Base de dados
Tipo de estudo
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38889925

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: In 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic caused disruptions in kidney replacement therapy (KRT) services worldwide. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 on the incidence of KRT, kidney transplantation activity, mortality and prevalence of KRT across Europe. METHODS: Patients receiving KRT were included from 17 countries providing data to the European Renal Association Registry. The epidemiology of KRT in 2020 was compared with average data from the period 2017-2019. Also changes occurring during the first and second wave of the pandemic were explored. RESULTS: The incidence of KRT was 6.2% lower in 2020 compared with 2017-2019, with the lowest point (-22.7%) during the first wave in April. The decrease varied across countries, was smaller in males (-5.2%) than in females (-8.2%), and was moderate for peritoneal dialysis (-3.7%) and haemodialysis (-5.4%), but substantial for pre-emptive kidney transplantation (-23.6%). The kidney transplantation rate decreased by 22.5%, reaching a nadir of -80.1% during the first wave, and most for living donor kidney transplants (-30.5%). While in most countries the kidney transplantation rate decreased, in the Nordic/Baltic countries and Greece there was no clear decline. In dialysis patients, mortality increased by 11.4%, and was highest in those aged 65-74 years (16.1%), in those with diabetes as primary renal disease (15.1%), and in those on haemodialysis (12.4%). In transplant recipients, the mortality was 25.8% higher, but there were no subgroups that stood out. In contrast to the rising prevalence of KRT observed over the past decades across Europe, the prevalence at the end of 2020 (N=317787) resembled that of 2019 (N=317077). CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a substantial impact on the incidence of KRT, kidney transplant activity, mortality of KRT, and prevalence of KRT in Europe with variations across countries.

2.
Clin Kidney J ; 16(8): 1330-1354, 2023 Aug.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37529647

RESUMO

Background: The European Renal Association (ERA) Registry collects data on kidney replacement therapy (KRT) in patients with ESKD. This paper is a summary of the ERA Registry Annual Report 2020, also including comparisons among primary renal disease (PRD) groups. Methods: Data were collected from 52 national and regional registries from 34 European countries and countries bordering the Mediterranean Sea: 35 registries from 18 countries providing individual level data and 17 registries from 17 countries providing aggregated data. Using this data, KRT incidence and prevalence, kidney transplantation rates, expected remaining lifetimes and survival probabilities were calculated. Results: A general population of 654.9 million people was covered by the ERA Registry in 2020. The overall incidence of KRT was 128 per million population (p.m.p.). In incident KRT patients, 54% were older than 65 years, 63% were men and the most common PRD was diabetes mellitus (21%). Regarding initial treatment modality in incident patients, 85% received haemodialysis (HD), 11% received peritoneal dialysis (PD) and 4% received a pre-emptive kidney transplant. On 31 December 2020, the prevalence of KRT was 931 p.m.p. In prevalent patients, 45% were older than 65 years, 60% were men and glomerulonephritis was the most common PRD (18%). Of these patients, 58% were on HD, 5% on PD and 37% were living with a kidney transplant. The overall kidney transplantation rate in 2020 was 28 p.m.p., with a majority of kidney grafts from deceased donors (71%). The unadjusted 5-year survival, based on incident dialysis patient from 2011-15, was 41.8%. For patients having received a deceased donor transplant, the unadjusted 5-year survival probability was 86.2% and for patients having received a living donor transplant it was 94.4%. When comparing data by PRD group, differences were found regarding the distribution of age groups, sex and treatment modality received.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA