Home dialysis: conclusions from a Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Controversies Conference.

Home dialysis modalities (home hemodialysis [HD] and peritoneal dialysis [PD]) are associated with greater patient autonomy and treatment satisfaction compared with in-center modalities, yet the level of home-dialysis use worldwide is low. Reasons for limited utilization are context-dependent, informed by local resources, dialysis costs, access to healthcare, health system policies, provider bias or preferences, cultural beliefs, individual lifestyle concerns, potential care-partner time, and financial burdens. In May 2021, KDIGO (Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes) convened a controversies conference on home dialysis, focusing on how modality choice and distribution are determined and strategies to expand home-dialysis use. Participants recognized that expanding use of home dialysis within a given health system requires alignment of policy, fiscal resources, organizational structure, provider incentives, and accountability. Clinical outcomes across all dialysis modalities are largely similar, but for specific clinical measures, one modality may have advantages over another. Therefore, choice among available modalities is preference-sensitive, with consideration of quality of life, life goals, clinical characteristics, family or care-partner support, and living environment. Ideally, individuals, their care-partners, and their healthcare teams will employ shared decision-making in assessing initial and subsequent kidney failure treatment options. To meet this goal, iterative, high-quality education and support for healthcare professionals, patients, and care-partners are priorities. Everyone who faces dialysis should have access to home therapy. Facilitating universal access to home dialysis and expanding utilization requires alignment of policy considerations and resources at the dialysis-center level, with clear leadership from informed and motivated clinical teams.

Managing the symptom burden associated with maintenance dialysis: conclusions from a Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Controversies Conference.

Individuals with kidney failure undergoing maintenance dialysis frequently report a high symptom burden that can interfere with functioning and diminish life satisfaction. Until recently, the focus of nephrology care for dialysis patients has been related primarily to numerical targets for laboratory measures, and outcomes such as cardiovascular disease and mortality. Routine symptom assessment is not universal or standardized in dialysis care. Even when symptoms are identified, treatment options are limited and are initiated infrequently, in part because of a paucity of evidence in the dialysis population and the complexities of medication interactions in kidney failure. In May of 2022, Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) held a Controversies Conference-Symptom-Based Complications in Dialysis-to identify the optimal means for diagnosing and managing symptom-based complications in patients undergoing maintenance dialysis. Participants included patients, physicians, behavioral therapists, nurses, pharmacists, and clinical researchers. They outlined foundational principles and consensus points related to identifying and addressing symptoms experienced by patients undergoing dialysis and described gaps in the knowledge base and priorities for research. Healthcare delivery and education systems have a responsibility to provide individualized symptom assessment and management. Nephrology teams should take the lead in symptom management, although this does not necessarily mean taking ownership of all aspects of care. Even when options for clinical response are limited, clinicians should focus on acknowledging, prioritizing, and managing symptoms that are most important to individual patients. A recognized factor in the initiation and implementation of improvements in symptom assessment and management is that they will be based on locally existing needs and resources.

Availability of assisted peritoneal dialysis in Europe: call for increased and equal access.

BACKGROUND: Availability of assisted PD (asPD) increases access to dialysis at home, particularly for the increasing numbers of older and frail people with advanced kidney disease. Although asPD has been widely used in some European countries for many years, it remains unavailable or poorly utilized in others. A group of leading European nephrologists have therefore formed a group to drive increased availability of asPD in Europe and in their own countries. METHODS: Members of the group filled in a proforma with the following headings: personal experience, country experience, who are the assistants, funding of asPD, barriers to growth, what is needed to grow and their top three priorities. RESULTS: Only 5 of the 13 countries surveyed provided publicly funded reimbursement for asPD. The use of asPD depends on overall attitudes to PD, with all respondents mentioning the need for nephrology team education and/or patient education and involvement in dialysis modality decision making. CONCLUSIONS AND CALL TO ACTION: Many people with advanced kidney disease would prefer to have their dialysis at home, yet if the frail patient chooses PD most healthcare systems cannot provide their choice. AsPD should be available in all countries in Europe and in all renal centres. The top priorities to make this happen are education of renal healthcare teams about the advantages of PD, education of and discussion with patients and their families as they approach the need for dialysis, and engagement with policymakers and healthcare providers to develop and support assistance for PD.

Prevalence of frailty and cognitive impairment in older transplant candidates - a preview to the Kidney Transplantation in Older People (KTOP): impact of frailty on outcomes study.

BACKGROUND: Kidney transplantation in older people has increased, however older transplant recipients experience mixed outcomes that invariably impacts on their quality of life. The increased vulnerability of older end stage kidney disease patients to frailty and cognitive impairment, may partially explain the differences in outcomes observed. The Kidney Transplantation in Older People (KTOP): impact of frailty on clinical outcomes study is an active clinical study aiming to explore the experience of older people waiting for and undergoing transplantation. In this manuscript we present the study protocol, the study cohort, and the prevalence of frailty and cognitive impairment identified at recruitment. METHODS: The KTOP study is a single centre, prospective, mixed methods, observational study. Recruitment began in October 2019. All patients aged 60 or above either active on the deceased donor waitlist or undergoing live donor transplantation were eligible for recruitment. Recruited participants completed a series of questionnaires assessing frailty, cognition, and quality of life, which are repeated at defined time points whilst on the waitlist and post-transplant. Clinical data was concurrently collected. Any participants identified as frail or vulnerable were also eligible for enrolment into the qualitative sub-study. RESULTS: Two hundred eight participants have been recruited (age 60-78). Baseline Montreal Cognitive Assessments were available for 173 participants, with 63 (36.4%) participants identified as having scores below normal (score < 26). Edmonton Frail Scale assessments were available for 184 participants, with 29 participants (15.8%) identified as frail (score ≥ 8), and a further 37 participants (20.1%) identified as being vulnerable (score 6-7). CONCLUSION: In the KTOP study cohort we have identified a prevalence of 36.4% of participants with MoCA scores suggestive of cognitive impairment, and a prevalence of frailty of 15.8% at recruitment. A further 20.1% were vulnerable. As formal testing for cognition and frailty is not routinely incorporated into the work up of older people across many units, the presence and significance of these conditions is likely not known. Ultimately the KTOP study will report on how these parameters evolve over time and following a transplant, and describe their impact on quality of life and clinical outcomes.

Burden of Kidney Disease, Health-Related Quality of Life, and Employment Among Patients Receiving Peritoneal Dialysis and In-Center Hemodialysis: Findings From the DOPPS Program.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Individuals faced with decisions regarding kidney replacement therapy options need information on how dialysis treatments might affect daily activities and quality of life, and what factors might influence the evolution over time of the impact of dialysis on daily activities and quality of life. STUDY DESIGN: Observational cohort study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: 7,771 hemodialysis (HD) and peritoneal dialysis (PD) participants from 6 countries participating in the Peritoneal and Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Studies (PDOPPS/DOPPS). PREDICTORS: Patient-reported functional status (based on daily living activities), country, demographic and clinical characteristics, and comorbidities. OUTCOME: Employment status and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) including Kidney Disease Quality of Life (KDQOL) instrument physical and mental component summary scores (PCS, MCS), kidney disease burden score, and depression symptoms (Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale [CES-D] score > 10). ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Linear regression (PCS, MCS, kidney disease burden score), logistic regression (depression symptoms), adjusted for predictors plus 12 additional comorbidities. RESULTS: In both dialysis modalities, patients in Japan had the highest PCS and employment (55% for HD and 68% for PD), whereas those in the United States had the highest MCS score, lowest kidney disease burden, and lowest employment (20% in HD and 42% in PD). After covariate adjustment, the association of age, sex, dialysis vintage, diabetes, and functional status with PROs was similar in both modalities, with women having lower PCS and kidney disease burden scores. Lower functional status (score <11) was strongly associated with lower PCS and MCS scores, a much greater burden of kidney disease, and greater likelihood of depression symptoms (CES-D, >10). The median change in KDQOL-based PROs was negligible over 1 year in participants who completed at least 2 annual questionnaires. LIMITATIONS: Selection bias due to incomplete survey responses. Generalizability was limited to the dialysis populations of the included countries. CONCLUSIONS: Variation exists in quality of life, burden of kidney disease, and depression across countries but did not appreciably change over time. Functional status remained one of the strongest predictors of all PROs. Routine assessment of functional status may provide valuable insights for patients and providers in anticipating outcomes and support needs for patients receiving either PD or HD.

Establishing a Core Outcome Set for Peritoneal Dialysis: Report of the SONG-PD (Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology-Peritoneal Dialysis) Consensus Workshop.

Outcomes reported in randomized controlled trials in peritoneal dialysis (PD) are diverse, are measured inconsistently, and may not be important to patients, families, and clinicians. The Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology-Peritoneal Dialysis (SONG-PD) initiative aims to establish a core outcome set for trials in PD based on the shared priorities of all stakeholders. We convened an international SONG-PD stakeholder consensus workshop in May 2018 in Vancouver, Canada. Nineteen patients/caregivers and 51 health professionals attended. Participants discussed core outcome domains and implementation in trials in PD. Four themes relating to the formation of core outcome domains were identified: life participation as a main goal of PD, impact of fatigue, empowerment for preparation and planning, and separation of contributing factors from core factors. Considerations for implementation were identified: standardizing patient-reported outcomes, requiring a validated and feasible measure, simplicity of binary outcomes, responsiveness to interventions, and using positive terminology. All stakeholders supported inclusion of PD-related infection, cardiovascular disease, mortality, technique survival, and life participation as the core outcome domains for PD.

Meaning of empowerment in peritoneal dialysis: focus groups with patients and caregivers.

BACKGROUND: While peritoneal dialysis (PD) can offer patients more independence and flexibility compared with in-center hemodialysis, managing the ongoing and technically demanding regimen can impose a burden on patients and caregivers. Patient empowerment can strengthen capacity for self-management and improve treatment outcomes. We aimed to describe patients' and caregivers' perspectives on the meaning and role of patient empowerment in PD. METHODS: Adult patients receiving PD (n = 81) and their caregivers (n = 45), purposively sampled from nine dialysis units in Australia, Hong Kong and the USA, participated in 14 focus groups. Transcripts were thematically analyzed. RESULTS: We identified six themes: lacking clarity for self-management (limited understanding of rationale behind necessary restrictions, muddled by conflicting information); PD regimen restricting flexibility and freedom (burden in budgeting time, confined to be close to home); strength with supportive relationships (gaining reassurance with practical assistance, comforted by considerate health professionals, supported by family and friends); defying constraints (reclaiming the day, undeterred by treatment, refusing to be defined by illness); regaining lost vitality (enabling physical functioning, restoring energy for life participation); and personal growth through adjustment (building resilience and enabling positive outlook, accepting the dialysis regimen). CONCLUSIONS: Understanding the rationale behind lifestyle restrictions, practical assistance and family support in managing PD promoted patient empowerment, whereas being constrained in time and capacity for life participation outside the home undermined it. Education, counseling and strategies to minimize the disruption and burden of PD may enhance satisfaction and outcomes in patients requiring PD.

Why do people waste differently on dialysis? Important insights from other chronic diseases with a focus on microRNAs.

Premature muscle tiring (fatigue) is an important complication of advanced kidney disease, and results in a reduced ability to walk and exercise. As patients move from pre-dialysis care to dialysis, they begin to lose their residual kidney function and experience muscle wasting. Not all patients on dialysis are affected equally by the loss of muscle mass, and the effect of dialysis mode (peritoneal dialysis and hemodialysis) on muscle wasting is not known. This review will explore molecular mechanisms relevant to muscle wasting in end-stage kidney disease and in particular address some important insights into the emerging role of microRNAs in regulating the wasting response in individuals with chronic disease.

An international Delphi survey helped develop consensus-based core outcome domains for trials in peritoneal dialysis.

Shared decision-making about clinical care options in end-stage kidney disease is limited by inconsistencies in the reporting of outcomes and the omission of patient-important outcomes in trials. Here we generated a consensus-based prioritized list of outcomes to be reported during trials in peritoneal dialysis (PD). In an international, online, three-round Delphi survey, patients/caregivers and health professionals rated the importance of outcomes using a 9-point Likert scale (with 7-9 indicating critical importance) and provided comments. Using a Best-Worst Scale (BWS), the relative importance of outcomes was estimated. Comments were analyzed thematically. In total, 873 participants (207 patients/caregivers and 666 health professionals) from 68 countries completed round one, 629 completed round two and 530 completed round three. The top outcomes were PD-related infection, membrane function, peritoneal dialysis failure, cardiovascular disease, death, catheter complications, and the ability to do usual activities. Compared with health professionals, patients/caregivers gave higher priority to six outcomes: blood pressure (mean difference, 0.4), fatigue (0.3), membrane function (0.3), impact on family/friends (0.1), peritoneal thickening (0.1) and usual activities (0.1). Four themes were identified that underpinned the reasons for ratings: contributing to treatment longevity, preserving quality of life, escalating morbidity, and irrelevant and futile information and treatment. Patients/caregivers and health professionals gave highest priority to clinical outcomes. In contrast to health professionals, patients/caregivers gave higher priority to lifestyle-related outcomes including the impact on family/friends and usual activities. Thus, prioritization will inform a core outcome set to improve the consistency and relevance of outcomes for trials in PD.

Conventional dialysis in the elderly: How lenient should our guidelines be?

There has been a dramatic, worldwide expansion in life expectancy across the last century. This has resulted in a progressively more elderly and comorbid population. It is increasingly recognized that healthcare in this group needs to move to the concept of "adding life to years". Recognition and assessment of frailty is vital in changing our approach in elderly patients. Current guidelines in dialysis have a limited evidence base across all age groups, but particularly the elderly and serve them poorly. Moreover, the burden of guidelines for each comorbidity of the multimorbid patient is increasing and can be conflicting. Finally, there is increasing evidence relating to the harm associated with the delivery of conventional dialysis. In dialysis patients, frailty is the overwhelming determinant in relation to patient-specific outcomes rather than modality of treatment; therefore, the focus should be on promoting quality of life. We need to focus on new priorities of care when we design guidelines "for people not diseases". Patient-centered goal-directed therapy, arising from shared decision making between physician and patient, should allow adaption of the dialysis regime to maximize opportunities while minimizing treatment-related morbidity and concentrating on alleviating symptoms.

Cognitive function before and after dialysis initiation in adults with chronic kidney disease-a new perspective on an old problem?

The impact of dialysis on cognitive trends is uncertain. Kurella Tamura et al. evaluated cognitive trajectories in 212 participants from the Chronic Renal Insufficiency Cohort study and found that dialysis initiation was associated with a decline in executive function. This is consistent with a cerebrovascular basis for cognitive impairment in patients with renal disease. However, larger corroborative studies are needed while targets for intervention are identified to ameliorate dialytic effects on cognitive function.

Peritoneal or hemodialysis for the frail elderly patient, the choice of 2 evils?

Management of older people on dialysis requires focus on the wider aspects of aging as well as dialysis. Almost all frail and older patients receiving dialysis will default to in-center hemodialysis, although the availability of assisted peritoneal dialysis enables dialysis at home. As with any disease management decision, patients approaching end-stage renal disease need all the appropriate facts about their prognosis, the natural history of their disease without dialysis, and the resulting outcomes and complications of the different dialysis modalities. Hemodialysis in the older age group can be complicated by intradialytic hypotension, prolonged time to recovery, and vascular access-related problems. Peritoneal dialysis can be difficult for older patients with impaired physical or cognitive function and can become a considerable burden. Use of incremental dialysis, changes in hemodialysis frequency, and delivery and use of assistance for peritoneal dialysis can ameliorate quality of life for older patients. Understanding each individual's goals of care in the context of his or her life experience is particularly important in the elderly, when overall life expectancy is relatively short, and life experience or quality of life may be the priority. Indeed, some patients select the option of no dialysis or conservative care. With multifaceted assessments of care, physicians should be able to give individual patients the ability to select and continue to make the best decisions for their care.

Dialysis modality choice in elderly patients with end-stage renal disease: a narrative review of the available evidence.

The number of elderly patients on maintenance dialysis has rapidly increased in the past few decades, particularly in developed countries, imposing a growing burden on dialysis centres. Hence, many nephrologists and healthcare authorities feel that greater emphasis should be placed on the promotion of home dialysis therapies such as peritoneal dialysis (PD) and home haemodialysis (HD). There is currently no general consensus as to the best dialysis modality for elderly patients with end-stage renal disease. In-centre HD is predominant in most countries, although it is widely recognized that PD has several advantages over HD, including the lack of need for vascular access, continuous slow ultrafiltration, less interference with patients' lifestyle and lower costs. Comparisons of outcomes between elderly patients on PD and HD rely on observational studies, as randomized controlled trials are lacking. The results of these studies are variable. However, most of them suggest that survival rates are largely similar between the two modalities, except for elderly patients with diabetes and/or beyond 1-3 years from dialysis initiation, in which cases HD appears to be superior. An equally important aspect to consider when choosing dialysis modality, particularly in this age group, is the quality of life, and in this regard most studies found no significant differences between PD and HD. In these circumstances, we believe that dialysis modality selection should be guided by patient's preference, based on comprehensive and unbiased information. A multidisciplinary team should review elderly patients starting on dialysis, aiming to identify possible barriers to PD and home HD, including physical, visual, cognitive, psychological and social problems, and to overcome such barriers by adequate care, education, psychological counselling and dialysis assistance.

Left ventricular twist mechanics and its relation with aortic stiffness in chronic kidney disease patients without overt cardiovascular disease.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies hypothesized left ventricular (LV) twist as a potential biomarker for evaluation of sub clinical myocardial disease, however its relationship with aortic stiffness has yet to be investigated. Chronic kidney disease (CKD) has been identified as a risk factor for both myocardial and arterial disease. As such we sought to explore the relationship between aortic stiffness and LV twist in CKD patients without known cardiovascular disease (CVD). METHODS: In this prospective, observational study we enrolled 106 CKD patients (Stages 1 to 5) with normal LVEF as assessed by conventional echocardiography. Aortic stiffness was measured using aortic pulse wave velocity (aPWV). We defined increased aPWV as ≥10 m/s. LV Twist was measured using two-dimensional speckle tracking echocardiography. RESULTS: Patients with increased aPWV had higher LV twist (p = 0.002) but similar LVEF (p = 0.486). Aortic PWV correlated crudely with age (p < 0.001), the presence of diabetes (p < 0.001), hypertension (p < 0.001), eGFR (p < 0.001), LVMI (p = 0.01), e/e' (p < 0.001) and LV twist (p = 0.003). In multivariable analyses after adjusting for age, gender, cardiovascular risk factors and hypertensive medication, aPWV was independently associated with LV twist (ß = 0.163, p = 0.025). CONCLUSIONS: Aortic stiffness independently associates with LV Twist in asymptomatic CKD patients. These findings suggest a close interaction between LV twist mechanics and arterial remodeling even before CVD becomes clinically relevant.

Executive summary of the KDIGO Controversies Conference on Supportive Care in Chronic Kidney Disease: developing a roadmap to improving quality care.

Patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) have a high burden of physical and psychosocial symptoms, poor outcomes, and high costs of care. Current paradigms of care for this highly vulnerable population are variable, prognostic and assessment tools are limited, and quality of care, particularly regarding conservative and palliative care, is suboptimal. The KDIGO Controversies Conference on Supportive Care in CKD reviewed the current state of knowledge in order to define a roadmap to guide clinical and research activities focused on improving the outcomes of people living with advanced CKD, including those on dialysis. An international group of multidisciplinary experts in CKD, palliative care, methodology, economics, and education identified the key issues related to palliative care in this population. The conference led to a working plan to address outstanding issues in this arena, and this executive summary serves as an output to guide future work, including the development of globally applicable guidelines.

Nephrologists' perceptions regarding dialysis withdrawal and palliative care in Europe: lessons from a European Renal Best Practice survey.

BACKGROUND: There is a variation in dialysis withdrawal rates, but reasons for this variation across European countries are largely unknown. We therefore surveyed nephrologists' perceptions of factors concerning dialysis withdrawal and palliative care and explored relationships between these perceptions and reports of whether withdrawal actually occurred in practice. METHODS: We developed a 33-item electronic survey, disseminated via an email blast to all European Renal Association-European Dialysis and Transplant Association (ERA-EDTA) members. In our data analyses, we distinguished those respondents who reported occurrence from those reporting no dialysis withdrawal in their unit. With multilevel logistic regression, we investigated the association between respondents' characteristics and perceptions and whether they reported occurrence of dialysis withdrawal or not. RESULTS: Five hundred and twenty-eight nephrologists from 45 countries completed the questionnaire; 42% reported occurrence of withdrawal in their unit in the past year, and 56% perceived that stopping life-prolonging treatment in terminally ill patients was allowed. Few respondents reported presence in their unit of protocols on withdrawal decision making (7%) or palliative care (10%) or the common involvement of a geriatrician in withdrawal decisions (10%). The majority stated that palliative care had not been part of their core curriculum (74%) and that they had not recently attended continuous medical education sessions on this topic (73%). Respondents from Eastern and Southern Europe had a 42 and 40% lower probability, respectively, of reporting withdrawal compared with those from North European countries. Working in a public centre [odds ratio (OR), 2.41; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.36-4.25] and respondents' perception that stopping life-prolonging treatment in terminally ill patients was allowed (OR, 1.96; 95% CI, 1.23-3.12), that withdrawal decisions were commonly shared between doctor and patient (OR, 1.97; 95% CI, 1.26-3.08) and that palliative care was reimbursed (OR, 1.81; 95% CI, 1.16-2.83) increased the odds of reporting occurrence of withdrawal. CONCLUSION: Reports of dialysis withdrawal occurrence varied between European countries. Occurrence reports were more likely if respondents worked in a public centre, if stopping life-prolonging treatments was perceived as allowed, if withdrawal decisions were considered shared between doctors and patients and if reimbursement of palliative care was believed to be in place. There is room for improvement regarding protocols on withdrawal and palliative care processes and regarding nephrologists' training and education on end-of-life care.

Cognitive impairment in elderly renal inpatients: an under-identified phenomenon.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Cognitive impairment is a common but under-recognised problem in patients with chronic kidney disease, and is likely to become more significant as this patient population ages. METHODS: This cross-sectional study focussed on inpatients aged ≥65 years at a tertiary renal unit, and consisted of two parts. Part 1 (n = 25) considered whether cognitively impaired inpatients were being identified and being referred to memory services. In Part 2 (n = 105) two different cognitive function tests were attempted (6-CIT, MMSE). RESULTS: In Part 1, cognitive function tests were attempted in only 4 patients at admission and 1 patient subsequently. No patients were referred to memory services. In Part 2, 6-CIT was abnormal (score ≥8) in 61.4%, and MMSE was abnormal (score <27) in 79.5% (score 21-26: 28.9%, 15-20: 28.9%, 10-14: 13.3%, <10: 8.4%). There was a close correlation between MMSE and 6-CIT (R(2) = 0.735). Only 7.2% of those assessed had a documented cognitive deficit prior to admission. CONCLUSION: This is the first study looking at cognition in elderly inpatients with chronic kidney disease. There appears to be a much higher rate of cognitive impairment than expected and this is largely unidentified. These deficits are likely to have a major impact on both inpatient and outpatient management.

Determinants of quality of life in advanced kidney disease: time to screen?

The incidence of older patients with end stage renal disease is on the increase. This group of patients have multiple comorbidities and a high symptom burden. Dialysis can be life sustaining for such patients. But it is often at the expense of quality of life, which starts to decline early in the pathway of chronic kidney disease. Quality of life is also important to patients and is a major determinant in decisions regarding renal replacement. As a result, validated patient-reported outcome measures are increasingly used to assess quality of life in renal patients. Cognitive impairment, depression, malnutrition and function decline are non-renal determinants of quality of life and mortality. They are under-recognised in the renal population but are potentially treatable, if not preventable. This review article discusses aetio-pathogenesis, prevalence and impact of these four outcomes, advocating regular screening for early identification and management.