Methodological challenges when carrying out research on CKD and AKI using routine electronic health records.

Research regarding chronic kidney disease (CKD) and acute kidney injury (AKI) using routinely collected data presents particular challenges. The availability, consistency, and quality of renal data in electronic health records has changed over time with developments in policy, practice incentives, clinical knowledge, and associated guideline changes. Epidemiologic research may be affected by patchy data resulting in an unrepresentative sample, selection bias, misclassification, and confounding by factors associated with testing for and recognition of reduced kidney function. We systematically explore the issues that may arise in study design and interpretation when using routine data sources for CKD and AKI research. First, we discuss how access to health care and management of patients with CKD may have an impact on defining the target population for epidemiologic study. We then consider how testing and recognition of CKD and AKI may lead to biases and how to potentially mitigate against these. Illustrative examples from our own research within the UK are used to clarify key points. Any research using routine renal data has to consider the local clinical context to achieve meaningful interpretation of the study findings.

Epidemiology of patients in England and Wales with autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease and end-stage renal failure.

BACKGROUND: Autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) is the leading genetic cause of end-stage renal failure (ESRF). The epidemiology of the incident ADPKD patient cohort requiring renal replacement therapy (RRT) in England and Wales has not been described. METHODS: We used a retrospective cohort design. Incident adult patients commencing RRT between 1 January 2000 and 31 December 2011 in England and Wales were identified from the UK Renal Registry. Patients were stratified into three groups based on primary renal diagnosis (PRD): (i) ADPKD, (ii) diabetes as PRD, (iii) individuals with another PRD ('other'). Baseline demographics, comorbidity, care-related measures and outcomes including patient survival are described. RESULTS: A total of 52,608 individuals started RRT during the study period, 3598 (6.8%) had ADPKD, 12,137 (23.1%) diabetes as PRD and 36,873 had another PRD diagnosis. The median age of commencing RRT was 55 years in the ADPKD group compared with 62 and 66 years in those with diabetes or 'other' PRD, respectively. The median age of starting RRT did not change within the ADPKD group over the 10-year period. Median age at death was similar across all groups. The ADPKD group had a lower hazard for all-cause mortality compared with the 'other' PRD group (adjusted hazard ratio 0.45, 95% CI 0.38-0.53). In all PRD groups, crude mortality rates had improved between 2000-06 and 2007-11. CONCLUSION: Although engaged in renal services earlier than some other patient groups, individuals with ADPKD start RRT at a younger age and this has remained unchanged over the last decade. Developing a nationwide cohort and an enhanced disease-specific dataset would facilitate a wide range of research and quality improvement initiatives to try to modify progression to ESRF and the course of RRT.

UK Renal Registry 15th annual report: Chapter 5 survival and causes of death of UK adult patients on renal replacement therapy in 2011: national and centre-specific analyses.

INTRODUCTION: These analyses examine a) survival from the start of renal replacement therapy (RRT) based on the total incident UK RRT population reported to the UK Renal Registry, b) survival of prevalent patients. Changes in survival between 1997 and 2011 are also reported. METHODS: Survival was calculated for both incident and prevalent patients on RRT and compared between the UK countries after adjustment for age. Survival of incident patients (starting RRT during 2010) was calculated both from the start of RRT and from 90 days after starting RRT, both with and without censoring at transplantation. Prevalent dialysis patients were censored at transplantation; this means that the patient is considered alive up to the point of transplantation, but the patient's status post-transplant is not considered. Both Kaplan-Meier and Cox adjusted models were used to calculate survival. Causes of death were analysed for both groups. The relative risk of death was calculated compared with the general UK population. RESULTS: The unadjusted 1 year after 90 day survival for patients starting RRT in 2010 was 87.3%, representing an increase from the previous year (86.6%). In incident patients aged 18-64 years, the unadjusted 1 year survival had risen from 86.0% in patients starting RRT in 1997 to 92.6% in patients starting RRT in 2010 and for those aged ≥65 it had increased from 63.9% to 77.0% over the same period. The age-adjusted one year survival (adjusted to age 60) of prevalent dialysis patients increased from 88.1% in the 2001 cohort to 89.8% in the 2010 cohort. Prevalent diabetic patient one year survival rose from 82.1% in the 2002 cohort to 84.7% in the 2010 cohort. The age-standardised mortality ratio for prevalent RRT patients compared with the general population was 18 for age group 30-34 and 2.5 at age 85+ years. In the prevalent RRT dialysis population, cardiovascular disease accounted for 22% of deaths, infection and treatment withdrawal 18% each and 25% were recorded as other causes of death. Treatment withdrawal was a more frequent cause of death in those incident patients aged ≥65 than in younger patients. The median life years remaining for a 25-29 year old on RRT was 18 years and approximately three years for a 75+ year old. CONCLUSIONS: Survival of patients starting RRT has improved in the 2010 incident cohort. The relative risk of death on RRT compared with the general population has fallen since 2001.

UK Renal Registry 16th annual report: chapter 9 adequacy of haemodialysis in UK adult patients in 2012: national and centre-specific analyses.

INTRODUCTION: Outcomes in patients treated with haemodialysis (HD) are influenced by the delivered dose of dialysis. The UK Renal Association (RA) publishes clinical practice guidelines which include recommendations for dialysis dose. The urea reduction ratio (URR) is a widely used measure of dialysis dose and has historically been the measure of adequacy reported by the UKRR. This chapter aims to determine the extent to which patients achieved the recommended UK target. METHODS: All 71 UK renal centres submitted data to the UK Renal Registry (UKRR). Two groups of patients were included in the analyses: the prevalent HD patient population on 30st September 2012 and the incident HD patient population for 2011. Centres returning data on <50% of their patient population or centres with <20 patients were excluded from centrespecific comparisons. RESULTS: Data regarding URR were available from 63 renal centres in the UK. Forty nine centres provided URR data on more than 90% of prevalent HD patients. The proportion of patients in the UK who met the UK clinical practice guideline for URR (>65%) increased from 69% in 2000 to 88% in 2012. There was persistent variation observed between centres, with 21 centres attaining the RA clinical practice guideline in >90% of patients, 38 centres attaining the guideline in 70-90% of patients and one centre in less than 70% of patients. The overall proportion of prevalent HD patients with a URR >65% has continued to improve over time. CONCLUSIONS: The delivered dose of HD, as measured by URR for patients with established renal failure, has increased over the last decade. Whilst the majority of UK patients achieved the target URR there was considerable variation between centres in the percentage of patients achieving the current guideline.

UK Renal Registry 15th annual report: Chapter 2 UK RRT prevalence in 2011: national and centre-specific analyses.

INTRODUCTION: This chapter describes the characteristics of adult patients on renal replacement therapy (RRT) in the UK in 2011. The prevalence rates per million population (pmp) were calculated for Primary Care Trusts in England, Health and Social Care areas in Northern Ireland, Local Health Boards in Wales and Health Boards (HB) in Scotland (PCT/HB areas). METHODS: Data were electronically collected from all 71 renal centres within the UK. A series of cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses were performed to describe the demographics of prevalent RRT patients in 2011 at centre and national level. Age and gender standardised ratios for prevalence rates in PCT/ HBs were calculated. RESULTS: There were 53,207 adult patients receiving RRT in the UK on 31st December 2011. The UK adult prevalence of RRT was 842 pmp. This represented an annual increase in prevalent numbers of approximately 4%, although there was variation between centres and PCT/HB areas. The growth rate from 2010 to 2011 for prevalent patients by treatment modality in the UK was an increase of 1.7% for haemodialysis (HD), a fall of 2.2% for peritoneal dialysis (PD) and an increase of 4.7% with a functioning transplant. There has been a slow but steady decline in the proportion of dialysis patients receiving PD since 2000. In contrast, the number of patients receiving home HD has increased 16% since 2010. Median RRT vintage for patients on HD was 3.3 years, PD 1.8 years and for those patients with a transplant, 10.3 years. The median age of prevalent patients was 58.2 years (HD 66.5 years, PD 62.7 years, transplant 51.7 years) compared to 55 years in 2000. For all ages the prevalence rate in men exceeded that in women, peaking in age group 75-79 years at 2,918 pmp in males. For females the peak was in age group 65-69 years at 1,460 pmp. The most common recorded renal diagnosis was glomerulonephritis (biopsy proven/not biopsy proven) (19%), followed by uncertain (18%). Transplantation was the most common treatment modality (48.6%), HD in 43.9% and PD 7.6%. However, HD was increasingly common with increasing age and transplantation less common. CONCLUSIONS: The HD and transplant population continued to expand whilst the PD population contracted. There were national, regional and dialysis centre level variations in prevalence rates. Prevalent patients were on average three years older than 10 years ago. This has implications for service planning and ensuring equity of care for RRT patients.

UK Renal Registry 16th annual report: chapter 12 biochemical variables amongst UK adult dialysis patients in 2012: national and centre-specific analyses.

INTRODUCTION: The UK Renal Association clinical practice guidelines include clinical performance measures for biochemical variables in dialysis patients. The UK Renal Registry (UKRR) annually audits dialysis centre performance against these measures as part of its role in promoting continuous quality improvement. METHODS: Cross sectional performance analyses were undertaken to compare dialysis centre achievement of clinical audit measures for prevalent haemodialysis (HD) and peritoneal dialysis (PD) cohorts in 2012. The biochemical variables studied were phosphate, adjusted calcium, parathyroid hormone, bicarbonate and total cholesterol. In addition, longitudinal analyses were performed (2002-2012) to show changes in achievement of clinical performance measures over time. RESULTS: Fifty-six percent of HD and 61% of PD patients achieved a phosphate within the range recommended by the RA clinical practice guidelines. Seventy-seven percent of HD and 78% of PD patients had adjusted calcium between 2.2-2.5 mmol/L. Fifty-eight percent of HD and 65% of PD patients had parathyroid hormone between 16-72 pmol/L. Fifty-nine percent of HD and 80% of PD patients achieved the audit measure for bicarbonate. There was significant inter-centre variation for all variables studied. CONCLUSIONS: The UKRR consistently demonstrates significant inter-centre variation in achievement of biochemical clinical audit measures. Understanding the causes of this variation is an important part of improving the care of dialysis patients in the UK.

UK Renal Registry 16th annual report: chapter 2 UK RRT prevalence in 2012: national and centre-specific analyses.

INTRODUCTION: This chapter describes the characteristics of adult patients on renal replacement therapy (RRT) in the UK in 2012. METHODS: Data were electronically collected from all 71 renal centres within the UK. A series of crosssectional and longitudinal analyses were performed to describe the demographics of prevalent RRT patients in 2012 at centre and national level. RESULTS: There were 54,824 adult patients receiving RRT in the UK on 31st December 2012. The UK adult prevalence of RRT was 861 pmp. This represented an annual increase in absolute prevalent numbers of approximately 3.7%, although there was variation between centres and Primary Care and Health Board areas. The actual number of patients increased across all modalities: 2.3% haemodialysis (HD), 0.3% peritoneal dialysis (PD) and 5.6% for those with a functioning transplant. The number of patients receiving home HD has increased by 19.3% since 2011. Median RRT vintage for patients on HD was 3.4 years, PD 1.7 years and for those patients with a transplant, 10.2 years. The median age of prevalent patients was 58 years (HD 66 years, PD 63 years, transplant 52 years) compared to 55 years in 2005. For all ages the prevalence rate in men exceeded that in women. The most common recorded renal diagnosis was glomerulonephritis (biopsy proven/not biopsy proven) (18.8%). Transplantation was the most common treatment modality (50.4%) CONCLUSIONS: The HD and transplant population continued to expand; the decline in the size of the prevalent PD population has plateaued. There were national, regional and dialysis centre level variations in prevalence rates. Prevalent patients were on average three years older than the prevalent RRT cohort 7 years ago. This has continued implications for service planning and ensuring equity of care for RRT patients.

UK Renal Registry 16th annual report: chapter 14 2012 multisite dialysis access audit in England, Northern Ireland and Wales and 2011 PD one year follow-up: national and centre-specific analyses.

INTRODUCTION: Dialysis access should be timely, minimise complications and maintain functionality. Good functional access is required for renal replacement therapy (RRT) to be successful. The aim of the combined vascular and peritoneal dialysis access audit was to examine practice patterns with respect to dialysis access and highlight variations in practice between renal centres. METHODS: The UK Renal Registry collected centre-specific information on vascular and peritoneal access outcome measures including patient demographics, dialysis access type (at start of dialysis and three months after start of dialysis), surgical assessment and access functionality. The combined access audit covered incident haemodialysis (HD) and peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients in 2012 from England, Northern Ireland and Wales. Centres who had reported data on incident PD patients for the previous audit in 2011 were additionally asked to provide one year follow up data for this group. RESULTS: Fifty-one centres in England, Wales and Northern Ireland (representing 82% of all centres) returned data on first access from 3,720 incident HD patients and 1,018 incident PD patients. A strong relationship was seen between surgical assessment and the likelihood of starting HD with an arteriovenous fistula (AVF). Type of first access was related to the length of time known to renal services with higher numbers of AVFs and PD catheters used in patients known to renal services for at least one year. Three month and one year outcomes of HD and PD access were poorly reported. CONCLUSIONS: This audit provides information on important patient related outcome measures with the potential to lead to an improvement in access provision. This represents an important advance, however data collection remains suboptimal. There is wide practice variation across the England, Wales and Northern Ireland in provision of both HD and PD access which requires further exploration.

Chapter 7 Adequacy of haemodialysis in UK adult patients in 2010: national and centre-specific analyses.

BACKGROUND: Outcome in patients treated with haemodialysis (HD) is influenced by the delivered dose of dialysis. The UK Renal Association (RA) publishes clinical practice guidelines which include recommendations for dialysis dose. The urea reduction ratio (URR) is a widely used measure of dialysis dose. AIM: To determine the extent to which patients received the recommended dose of HD in the UK. METHODS: All seventy-two UK renal centres submitted data to the UK Renal Registry (UKRR). Two groups of patients were included in the analyses: the prevalent patient population on 31st December 2010 and the incident patient population for 2010. Centres returning data on <50% of their patient population or centres with <20 patients were excluded from centre-specific comparisons. RESULTS: Data regarding URR were available from 64 renal centres in the UK. Forty nine centres provided URR data on more than 90% of prevalent patients. The proportion of patients in the UK who met the UK clinical practice guideline for URR (>65%) increased from 56% in 1998 to 86% in 2010. There was persistent variation observed between centres, with 19 centres attaining the RA clinical practice guideline in >90% of patients and 39 centres attaining the guideline in 70-90%. The overall proportion of prevalent patients with a URR >65% has continued to improve over time. CONCLUSIONS: The delivered dose of HD for patients with established renal failure has increased over the last decade. Whilst the majority of UK patients achieved the target URR there was considerable variation between centres in the percentage of patients achieving the guideline.

Chapter 4 Comorbidities and current smoking status amongst patients starting renal replacement therapy in England, Wales and Northern Ireland from 2009 to 2010.

INTRODUCTION: Comorbidities are an important determinant of survival for patients requiring renal replacement therapy (RRT) and influence other care processes such as dialysis access formation and transplant wait-listing. The prevalence of comorbidities in incident RRT patients changes with age and varies between ethnic groups. This study describes these associations and the independent effect of comorbidities on outcomes. METHODS: Incident patients reported to the UK Renal Registry (UKRR) with comorbidity data in 2009 and 2010 (n = 6,130) were included in analyses exploring the association of comorbidities with patient demographics, treatment modality, haemoglobin and renal function at start of RRT. For analyses examining association between comorbidities and survival, adult patients starting RRT between 2005 and 2010 in centres reporting to the UKRR with comorbidity data (n = 17,184) were included. The relationship between comorbidities and mortality at 90 days and one year after 90 days from start of RRT were explored using Cox regression. RESULTS: Completeness of comorbidity data was 49.1% in 2010 compared with 48.9% in 2005. Of patients with data, 55.4% had one or more comorbidities. Diabetes mellitus and ischaemic heart disease were the most common conditions, observed in 33.3% and 21.1% of patients respectively. 13.2% of incident RRT patients in the 2-year period were recorded as current smokers. The prevalence of comorbidity increased with increasing age across all ethnic groups. In multivariable survival analysis, malignancy and the presence of ischaemic/neuropathic ulcers were strong independent predictors of poor survival at 1 year after 90 days from the start of RRT in patients <65 years. CONCLUSION: Differences in prevalence rates of comorbid illnesses in incident RRT patients may reflect variation in access to health care or competing risk prior to commencing treatment. The generalisability of these analyses continues to be limited by poor data completeness.

Hypertension and cardiovascular risk factor management in a multi-ethnic cohort of adults with CKD: a cross sectional study in general practice.

BACKGROUND: Hypertension, especially if poorly controlled, is a key determinant of chronic kidney disease (CKD) development and progression to end stage renal disease (ESRD). AIM: To assess hypertension and risk factor management, and determinants of systolic blood pressure control in individuals with CKD and hypertension. DESIGN AND SETTING: Cross-sectional survey using primary care electronic health records from 47/49 general practice clinics in South London. METHODS: Known effective interventions, management of hypertension and cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk in patients with CKD Stages 3-5 were investigated. Multivariable logistic regression analysis examined the association of demographic factors, comorbidities, deprivation, and CKD coding, with systolic blood pressure control status as outcome. Individuals with diabetes were excluded. RESULTS: Adults with CKD Stages 3-5 and hypertension represented 4131/286,162 (1.4%) of the total population; 1984 (48%) of these individuals had undiagnosed CKD without a recorded CKD clinical code. Hypertension was undiagnosed in 25% of the total Lambeth population, and in patients with CKD without diagnosed hypertension, 23.0% had systolic blood pressure > 140 mmHg compared with 39.8% hypertensives, p < 0.001. Multivariable logistic regression revealed that factors associated with improved systolic blood pressure control in CKD included diastolic blood pressure control, serious mental illness, history of cardiovascular co-morbidities, CKD diagnostic coding, and age < 60 years. African ethnicity and obesity were associated with poorer systolic blood pressure control. CONCLUSION: We found both underdiagnosed CKD and underdiagnosed hypertension in patients with CKD. The poor systolic blood pressure control in older age groups ≥ 60 years and in Black African or obese individuals is clinically important as these groups are at increased risk of mortality for cardiovascular diseases.

Acute Peritoneal Dialysis With Percutaneous Catheter Insertion for COVID-19-Associated Acute Kidney Injury in Intensive Care: Experience From a UK Tertiary Center.

INTRODUCTION: During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in 2020, high rates of acute kidney injury (AKI) in critically unwell patients are being reported, leading to an increased demand for renal replacement therapy (RRT). Providing RRT for this large number of patients is proving challenging, and so alternatives to continuous renal replacement therapies (CRRT) in the intensive care unit (ICU) are needed. Peritoneal dialysis (PD) can be initiated immediately after percutaneous insertion of the catheter, but there are concerns about impact on ventilation and RRT efficacy. We sought to describe our recent experience with percutaneous catheter insertion and peritoneal dialysis in patients in the ICU with COVID-19 infection. METHOD: Patients were selected according to local protocol, and catheters were inserted percutaneously by experienced operators using a Seldinger technique. Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score and ventilation requirements were recorded at the time of insertion and 24 hours later. Procedural complications, proportion of RRT provided by PD, renal recovery, and RRT parameters (serum potassium and maximum base excess) during PD were assessed. RESULTS: Percutaneous PD catheters were successfully inserted in 37 of 44 patients (84.1%) after a median of 13.5 days (interquartile range [IQR] = 10.0, 20.3 days) in the ICU. No adverse events were reported; SOFA scores and ventilation requirements were comparable before and after insertion; and adequate RRT parameters were achieved. The median proportion of RRT provided by PD following catheter insertion was 94.6% (IQR = 75.0, 100%). CONCLUSION: Peritoneal dialysis provides a safe and effective alternative to CRRT in selected patients with AKI and COVID-19 infection requiring ventilation on intensive care.

Uncoded chronic kidney disease in primary care: a cross-sectional study of inequalities and cardiovascular disease risk management.

BACKGROUND: Uncoded chronic kidney disease (CKD) is associated with poorer quality of care. AIM: To ascertain the proportion and determinants of CKD, which have not been formally recorded (Read coded), and identify differences in management and quality-of-care measures for patients with coded and uncoded CKD. DESIGN AND SETTING: Cross-sectional survey undertaken in an ethnically diverse adult population using primary care electronic health records (EHRs) from GP clinics in Lambeth, South London, UK. METHOD: Multivariable logistic regression analysis examined the association of demographic factors, selected comorbidities, deprivation, and cardiovascular disease risk management in CKD, with coding status as outcome. RESULTS: In total, the survey involved 286 162 adults, of whom 9325 (3.3%) were identified with CKD stage 3-5 (assigned as CKD based on estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] values). Of those identified with CKD, 4239 (45.5%) were Read coded, and 5086 (54.5%) were uncoded. Of those identified with CKD stage 3-5, individuals aged ≥50 years were more likely to be coded for CKD, compared with those aged <50 years. Lower levels of coding were independently associated with deprivation and black Caribbean, black African, South Asian, and non-stated ethnicities, compared with white ethnicity. Prescribed statin and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker medications were associated with increased odds of coded CKD. CONCLUSION: This study found that >50% of CKD was uncoded and, for those patients, quality of care was lower compared with those with coded CKD. Future research and practices should focus on areas of greater deprivation and targeted initiatives for those aged <50 years and of black African, black Caribbean, South Asian, or non-stated ethnic groups. Possible areas for improvement include diagnostic coding support, automated CKD recording, and clinical decision support (based on adjusted eGFR results) in the GP clinical records.

Recently published papers: putting fluids in and taking fluids out.

Further work on the use of albumin in the intensive care unit is discussed. The interesting pilot study by Dubois and colleagues examines the potential benefits for albumin supplementation in the hypoalbuminaemic critically ill patient. Maintaining the fluid theme, we discuss recent work on factors influencing post-intensive care unit blood transfusion as well as another study on erythropoietin. Finally, a large multicentred trial comparing continuous venovenous haemofiltration with intermittent haemodialysis is outlined, the results of which pose more questions than answers.

UK Renal Registry 18th Annual Report: Chapter 7 Adequacy of Haemodialysis in UK Adult Patients in 2014: National and Centre-specific Analyses.

Data suitable for urea reduction ratio (URR) analyses were available for 14,761 (71.9%) of the 20,539 patients receiving haemodialysis (HD) in the UK on the 30/9/2014. In 2014, 88.6% of prevalent HD patients achieved a URR .65%. The between centre range of prevalent patients achieving this target was wide (74.9-97.0%). The median URR in 2014 was 75%. URR was greater in those with longer dialysis vintage, with 91.2% of patients who had survived on renal replacement therapy (RRT) for more than two years achieving a URR .65% compared with only 73.4% of those on RRT for less than six months. Large variation between centres in the percentage of patients achieving the UK Renal Association's (RA) URR guideline persists.

UK Renal Registry 18th Annual Report: Chapter 9 Biochemical Variables amongst UK Adult Dialysis Patients in 2014: National and Centre-specific Analyses.

In 2014 57.5% of HD patients and 62.7% of PD patients achieved the audit measure for phosphate. 29.0% of HD and 30.3% of PD patients had a serum phosphate above the audit standard range. 79.1% of HD and 79.7% of PD patients had adjusted calcium between 2.2­2.5 mmol/L. 57.4% of HD and 65.0% of PD patients had a serum PTH between 16­72 pmol/L. 16.4% of HD and 12.0% of PD patients had a serum PTH .72 pmol/L. Simultaneous control of all three parameters within current audit standards was achieved by 50.3% of HD and 52.5% of PD patients. 60.4% of HD and 81.8% of PD patients achieved the audit measure for bicarbonate.

UK Renal Registry 18th Annual Report: Chapter 2 UK Renal Replacement Therapy Prevalence in 2014: National and Centre-specific Analyses.

There were 58,968 adult patients receiving renal replacement therapy (RRT) in the UK on 31st December 2014, an absolute increase of 4.0% from 2013.The actual number of patients increased 2.0% for haemodialysis (HD), 5.3% for those with a functioning transplant but decreased 0.7% for peritoneal dialysis (PD).The UK adult prevalence of RRT was 913 per million population (pmp). The reported prevalence in 2000 was 523 pmp.The number of patients receiving home HD increased by 6.7% from 1,113 patients in 2013 to 1,188 patients in 2014.The median age of prevalent patients was 59 years(HD 67 years, PD 64 years, transplant 53 years).In 2000, the median age was 55 years (HD 63 years, PD 58 years, transplant 48 years). In 2014,the percentage of RRT patients aged greater than 75 years was 16.0%.For all ages, the prevalence rate in men exceeded that in women, peaking in age group 75­79 years at 3,100 pmp in men and for women at 1,600 pmp in age group 70­74 years.The most common identifiable renal diagnosis was glomerulonephritis (19%), followed by diabetes(16%) and aetiology uncertain (16%).Transplantation continued as the most common treatment modality (53%), HD was used in 41%and PD in 6% of RRT patients.Prevalence rates in patients aged 585 years continued to increase between 2013 and 2014 (1,021 per million age related population (pmarp) to 1,060 pmarp).

Impact of an Early Invasive Strategy versus Conservative Strategy for Unstable Angina and Non-ST Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome in Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Clinical practice guidelines support an early invasive approach after NSTE-ACS in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). There is no direct randomised controlled trial evidence in the CKD population, and whether the benefit of an early invasive approach is maintained across the spectrum of severity of CKD remains controversial. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review to evaluate the association between an early invasive approach and all-cause mortality in patients with CKD. We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE (1990-May 2015) and article reference lists. Data describing study design, participants, invasive management strategies, renal function, all-cause mortality and risk of bias were extracted. RESULTS: 3,861 potentially relevant studies were identified. Ten studies, representing data on 147,908 individuals with NSTE-ACS met the inclusion criteria. Qualitative heterogeneity in the definitions of early invasive approach, comparison groups and renal dysfunction existed. Meta-analysis of the RCT derived and observational data were generally supportive of an early invasive approach in CKD (RR0.76 (95% CI 0.49-1.17) and RR0.50 (95%CI 0.42-0.59) respectively). Meta-analysis of the observational studies demonstrated a large degree of heterogeneity (I2 79%) driven in part by study size and heterogeneity across various kidney function levels. CONCLUSIONS: The observational data support that an early invasive approach after NSTE-ACS confers a survival benefit in those with early-moderate CKD. Local opportunities for quality improvement should be sought. Those with severe CKD and the dialysis population are high risk and under-studied. Novel and inclusive approaches for CKD and dialysis patients in cardiovascular clinical trials are needed.