PTFE grafts versus tunneled cuffed catheters for hemodialysis: which is the second choice when arteriovenous fistula is not feasible?

Vascular access-related complications are still one of the leading causes of morbidity in hemodialysis patients. The aim of this study was to compare polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) grafts versus tunneled cuffed permanent catheters (TCCs) in terms of vascular access and patients' survival. An observational study was carried out with a 2-year follow-up. Eighty-seven chronic hemodialysis patients were enrolled: 31 with a PTFE graft as vascular access for hemodialysis versus 56 with a TCC. Patients' mean age was 63.8 ± 14.6 (grafts) versus 73.5 ± 11.3 years (TCCs), P = 0.001. Significantly more patients with TCC had atrial fibrillation than patients with grafts (30.3% versus 6.5%, P = 0.01). In an unadjusted Kaplan-Meier analysis, median TCC survival at 24 months was 5.4 months longer than that of PTFE grafts but not significantly (log-rank test = 1.3, P = ns). In a Cox regression analysis adjusted for age, gender, number of previous vascular accesses, diabetes, atrial fibrillation, smoking, and any complication, this lack of significant difference in survival of the vascular access between TCC and PTFE groups was confirmed and diabetes proved to be an independent risk factor for the survival of both vascular accesses considered (P = 0.02). In an unadjusted Kaplan-Meier analysis, a higher mortality was found in the TCC group than in the PTFE group at 24 months (log-rank test = 10.07, P < 0.01). The adjusted Cox regression analysis showed that patients with TCC had a 3.2 times higher risk of death than patients with PTFE grafts. When an arteriovenous fistula (AVF) is not possible, PTFE grafts can be considered the vascular access of second choice, whereas TCCs can be used when an AVF or PTFE graft are not feasible or as a bridge to AVF or PTFE graft creation.

Extracorporeal detoxification for hepatic failure using molecular adsorbent recirculating system: depurative efficiency and clinical results in a long-term follow-up.

Acute liver failure and acute-on-chronic liver failure still show a poor prognosis. The molecular adsorbent recirculating system (MARS) has been extensively used as the most promising detoxifying therapy for patients with these conditions. Sixty-four patients with life-threatening liver failure were selected, and 269 MARS treatments were carried out as a bridge for orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) or for liver function recovery. All patients were grouped according to the aim of MARS therapy. Group A consisted of 47 patients treated for liver function recovery (median age 59 years, range 23-82). Group B consisted of 11 patients on the waiting list who underwent OLT (median age 47 years, range 32-62). Group C consisted of 6 patients on the waiting list who did not undergo OLT (median age 45.5 years, range 36-54, P = 0.001). MARS depurative efficiency in terms of liver toxins, cytokines, and growth factors was assessed together with the clinical outcome of the patients during a 1-year follow-up. Total bilirubin reduction rate per session (RRs) for each MARS session was 23% (range 17-29); direct bilirubin RRs was 28% (21-35), and indirect bilirubin RRs was 8% (3-21). Ammonia RRs was 34% (12-86). Conjugated cholic acid RRs was 58% (48-61); chenodeoxycholic acid RRs was 34% (18-48). No differences were found between groups. Hepatocyte growth factor (HGF) values on starting MARS were 4.1 ng/mL (1.9-7.9) versus 7.9 ng/mL (3.2-14.1) at MARS end (P < 0.01). Cox regression analysis to determine the risk factors predicting patient outcomes showed that age, male gender, and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score (but not Model for End-stage Liver Disease score) were factors predicting death, whereas the number of MARS sessions and the ΔHGF proved protective factors. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was also used; after 12 months, 21.3% of patients in Group A survived, while 90.9% were alive in Group B and 16.7% in Group C (log rank = 0.002). In conclusion, MARS was clinically well tolerated by all patients and significantly reduced hepatic toxins. Better survival rates were linked to an OLT program, but patients' clinical characteristics on starting MARS therapy were the main factors predicting survival. The role of HGF should be evaluated in larger clinical trials.

[Choice and management of anticoagulation during CRRT].

Continuous renal replacement therapies (CRRT) are widely used in the treatment of acute kidney injury. Several causes, related to the treatment itself or to the patient's condition, determine the coagulation of the extracorporeal circuit. These interruptions (or down-time) have a negative impact on the effectiveness of the treatment in terms of solute clearance and fluid balance. Historically, the choice of anticoagulant has fallen on unfractionated heparin because it is cheap and easy to use. Today, the use of citrate is recommended in most instances because of its high efficacy and safety. Several studies demonstrate the superiority of citrate in terms of filter survival. The reduction of down-time results in a reduction of the delta between the prescribed dialysis dose and the dose that is actually administered (ml/Kg/hour of collected effluent). The literature also agrees that there is a reduction in the incidence of major bleeding events when citrate is used instead of heparin, although there is no impact on mortality rates. Some technical and clinical complexities, secondary to citrate action both as anticoagulant and buffer, still exist in the use of regional citrate anticoagulation. However, complications due to citrate use, such as acid-base balance disorders and hypocalcaemia, are rare and easily reversible. There is not much data about the costs and benefits of using citrate instead of heparin; according to the experience within our own Unit, we have observed a reduction in costs when the data is normalized for 35 ml of effluent administered. Appropriate protocols, accurate surveillance and the automated management of regional citrate anticoagulation thanks to dedicated software make this technique safe and effective.

[Hemodialysis and cardiovascular outcome].

Hemodialysis patients often present multiple comorbidities and have a high mortality rate (15-20% per year), mostly due to cardiovascular events. Besides predisposing pathological conditions related to uremia (heart failure, coronary heart disease, left ventricular hypertrophy, arrhythmias), they also have specific risk factors linked to the hemodialysis (HD) treatment in itself: chronic inflammation, fluid overload, autonomic nervous system dysfunction, arterovenous fistula. These factors may affect the hemodynamic compensatory systems (vascular refilling, arteriolar and venous tone, autonomic nervous system response) to fluid removal, with high risk of intra-dialysis hypotension (IDH) episodes or arrhythmic events. IDH is recognized as associated to a negative long term outcome, due to the repeated episodes of organ hypoperfusion with ischemic damage to heart, brain and gut. Over the years, dialysis technology has greatly improved, with the development of continuous and noninvasive monitoring systems, able to control some hemodynamic parameters affecting blood pressure (mainly blood volume and body temperature), with positive results in terms of hemodynamic instability during HD. Furthermore, recent studies suggest that hemodiafiltration may reduce the risk of IDH and cardiovascular mortality, compared with conventional HD. Diabetic and/or old patients, as well as those with a previous cardiovascular event, are the first patients who should receive the new treatment options. Overall, the HD prescription needs to be tailored to each patient's need, to improve the hemodynamic tolerance to treatment and the cardiovascular outcome.

Citrate Anticoagulation during Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy.

During extracorporeal dialysis, some anticoagulation strategy is necessary to prevent the coagulation of blood. Heparin has historically been used as an anticoagulant because of its efficacy combined with low cost. However, a variable incidence of hemorrhagic complications (5-30%) has been documented in patients undergoing continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) with heparin as an anticoagulant. Citrate has anticoagulation properties secondary to its ability to chelate calcium, which is necessary for the coagulation cascade. Citrate may thus be used in a regional anticoagulation (RCA), limited to the extracorporeal circuit of CRRT, to avoid systemic anticoagulation. Recent meta-analysis confirmed the advantage of RCA over heparin in terms of incidence of bleeding during CRRT. Moreover, an increase in filter lifespan is documented, with a secondary advantage in reaching the prescribed dialysis dose. In our experience, we could confirm this positive effect. In fact, with a progressive increase in the proportion of CRRT with citrate as RCA, we obtained a reduction in the number of filters used for every 72 h of treatment (from 2.4 in 2011 to 1.3 in 2015), and most importantly, a reduction in the difference between the prescribed and delivered dialysis doses (from 22 to 7%). Citrate has an intense effect on the acid-base balance as well, if fully metabolized through the Krebs cycle, due to the production of bicarbonate. Even more severely ill patients, such as those with liver dysfunction, may be treated with RCA without severe complications, because modern machines for CRRT are equipped with simple systems that are able to manage the citrate infusion and control the calcium levels, with minimal risks of metabolic derangements.