Evaluation and Management of Kidney Dysfunction in Advanced Heart Failure: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.

Early identification of kidney dysfunction in patients with advanced heart failure is crucial for timely interventions. In addition to elevations in serum creatinine, kidney dysfunction encompasses inadequate maintenance of sodium and volume homeostasis, retention of uremic solutes, and disrupted endocrine functions. Hemodynamic derangements and maladaptive neurohormonal upregulations contribute to fluctuations in kidney indices and electrolytes that may recover with guideline-directed medical therapy. Quantifying the extent of underlying irreversible intrinsic kidney disease is crucial in predicting whether optimization of congestion and guideline-directed medical therapy can stabilize kidney function. This scientific statement focuses on clinical management of patients experiencing kidney dysfunction through the trajectory of advanced heart failure, with specific focus on (1) the conceptual framework for appropriate evaluation of kidney dysfunction within the context of clinical trajectories in advanced heart failure, including in the consideration of advanced heart failure therapies; (2) preoperative, perioperative, and postoperative approaches to evaluation and management of kidney disease for advanced surgical therapies (durable left ventricular assist device/heart transplantation) and kidney replacement therapies; and (3) the key concepts in palliative care and decision-making processes unique to individuals with concomitant advanced heart failure and kidney disease.

Dual-Organ Transplantation: Indications, Evaluation, and Outcomes for Heart-Kidney and Heart-Liver Transplantation: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.

Although heart transplantation is the preferred therapy for appropriate patients with advanced heart failure, the presence of concomitant renal or hepatic dysfunction can pose a barrier to isolated heart transplantation. Because donor organ supply limits the availability of organ transplantation, appropriate allocation of this scarce resource is essential; thus, clear guidance for simultaneous heart-kidney transplantation and simultaneous heart-liver transplantation is urgently required. The purposes of this scientific statement are (1) to describe the impact of pretransplantation renal and hepatic dysfunction on posttransplantation outcomes; (2) to discuss the assessment of pretransplantation renal and hepatic dysfunction; (3) to provide an approach to patient selection for simultaneous heart-kidney transplantation and simultaneous heart-liver transplantation and posttransplantation management; and (4) to explore the ethics of multiorgan transplantation.

Referral and Beyond: Restructuring the Kidney Transplant Process to Support Greater Access in the United States.

Advocates for improved equity in kidney transplants in the United States have recently focused their efforts on initiatives to increase referral for transplant evaluation. However, because donor kidneys remain scarce, increased referrals are likely to result in an increasing number of patients proceeding through the evaluation process without ultimately receiving a kidney. Unfortunately, the process of referral and evaluation can be highly resource-intensive for patients, families, transplant programs, and payers. Patients and families may incur out-of-pocket expenses and be required to complete testing and treatments that they might not have chosen in the course of routine clinical care. Kidney transplant programs may struggle with insufficient capacity, inefficient workflow, and challenging programmatic finances, and payers will need to absorb the increased expenses of upfront pretransplant costs. Increased referral in isolation may risk simply transmitting system stress and resulting disparities to downstream processes in this complex system. We argue that success in efforts to improve access through increased referrals hinges on adaptations to the pretransplant process more broadly. We call for an urgent re-evaluation and redesign at multiple levels of the pretransplant system in order to achieve the aim of equitable access to kidney transplantation for all patients with kidney failure.

The Medical Costs of Determining Eligibility and Waiting for a Kidney Transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Recent efforts to increase access to kidney transplant (KTx) in the United States include increasing referrals to transplant programs, leading to more pretransplant services. Transplant programs reconcile the costs of these services through the Organ Acquisition Cost Center (OACC). OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the costs associated with pretransplant services by applying microeconomic methods to OACC costs reported by transplant hospitals. RESEARCH DESIGN, SUBJECTS, AND MEASURES: For all US adult kidney transplant hospitals from 2013 through 2018 (n=193), we crosslinked the total OACC costs (at the hospital-fiscal year level) to proxy measures of volumes of pretransplant services. We used a multiple-output cost function, regressing total OACC costs against proxy measures for volumes of pretransplant services and adjusting for patient characteristics, to calculate the marginal cost of each pretransplant service. RESULTS: Over 1015 adult hospital-years, median OACC costs attributable to the pretransplant services were $5 million. Marginal costs for the pretransplant services were: initial transplant evaluation, $9k per waitlist addition; waitlist management, $2k per patient-year on the waitlist; deceased donor offer management, $1k per offer; living donor evaluation, procurement and follow-up: $26k per living donor. Longer time on dialysis among patients added to the waitlist was associated with higher OACC costs at the transplant hospital. CONCLUSIONS: To achieve the policy goals of more access to KTx, sufficient funding is needed to support the increase in volume of pretransplant services. Future studies should assess the relative value of each service and explore ways to enhance efficiency.

Emerging Evidence on Coronary Heart Disease Screening in Kidney and Liver Transplantation Candidates: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association: Endorsed by the American Society of Transplantation.

Coronary heart disease is an important source of mortality and morbidity among kidney transplantation and liver transplantation candidates and recipients and is driven by traditional and nontraditional risk factors related to end-stage organ disease. In this scientific statement, we review evidence from the past decade related to coronary heart disease screening and management for kidney and liver transplantation candidates. Coronary heart disease screening in asymptomatic kidney and liver transplantation candidates has not been demonstrated to improve outcomes but is common in practice. Risk stratification algorithms based on the presence or absence of clinical risk factors and physical performance have been proposed, but a high proportion of candidates still meet criteria for screening tests. We suggest new approaches to pretransplantation evaluation grounded on the presence or absence of known coronary heart disease and cardiac symptoms and emphasize multidisciplinary engagement, including involvement of a dedicated cardiologist. Noninvasive functional screening methods such as stress echocardiography and myocardial perfusion scintigraphy have limited accuracy, and newer noninvasive modalities, especially cardiac computed tomography-based tests, are promising alternatives. Emerging evidence such as results of the 2020 International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness With Medical and Invasive Approaches-Chronic Kidney Disease trial emphasizes the vital importance of guideline-directed medical therapy in managing diagnosed coronary heart disease and further questions the value of revascularization among asymptomatic kidney transplantation candidates. Optimizing strategies to disseminate and implement best practices for medical management in the broader end-stage organ disease population should be prioritized to improve cardiovascular outcomes in these populations.

One size does not fit all: Differential benefits of simultaneous liver-kidney transplantation by eligibility criteria.

Standard eligibility criteria for simultaneous liver-kidney transplantation (SLK) are in place in the United States. We hypothesize that the benefit associated with SLK over liver transplant alone differs by patient, depending on the specific SLK criteria met. We analyzed a retrospective US cohort of 5446 adult liver transplant or SLK recipients between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2018, who are potentially qualified for SLK. Exposure was a receipt of SLK. We tested effect modification by the specific SLK eligibility criteria met (end-stage kidney disease, acute kidney injury, chronic kidney disease, or unknown). The primary outcome was death within 1 year of a liver transplant. We used a modified Cox regression analysis containing an interaction term of SLK * time from transplant. Two hundred ten (9%) SLK recipients and 351 (11%) liver-alone recipients died in 1 year. In the overall population, SLK was associated with a mortality benefit over liver transplant on the day of the transplant, without adjustment [HR: 0.59 (95% CI, 0.46-0.76)] and with adjustment [aHR: 0.50 (95% CI, 0.35-0.71)]. However, when SLK eligibility criteria were included, only in patients with end-stage kidney disease was SLK associated with a sustained survival benefit at day 0 [HR: 0.17 (0.08-0.35)] up to 288 (95% CI, 120-649) days post-transplant. Benefit within the first year post-transplant associated with SLK over liver-alone transplantation was only pronounced in patients with end-stage kidney disease but not present in patients meeting other criteria for SLK. A "strict SLK liberal Safety Net" strategy may warrant consideration at the national policy level.

Optimal patient selection for simultaneous heart-kidney transplant: A modified cost-effectiveness analysis.

Increasing rates of simultaneous heart-kidney (SHK) transplant in the United States exacerbate the overall shortage of deceased donor kidneys (DDK). Current allocation policy does not impose constraints on SHK eligibility, and how best to do so remains unknown. We apply a decision-analytic model to evaluate options for heart transplant (HT) candidates with comorbid kidney dysfunction. We compare SHK with a "Safety Net" strategy, in which DDK transplant is performed 6 months after HT, only if native kidneys do not recover. We identify patient subsets for whom SHK using a DDK is efficient, considering the quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gains from DDKs instead allocated for kidney transplant-only. For an average-aged candidate with a 50% probability of kidney recovery after HT-only, SHK produces 0.64 more QALYs than Safety Net at a cost of 0.58 more kidneys used. SHK is inefficient in this scenario, producing fewer QALYs per DDK used (1.1) than a DDK allocated for KT-only (2.2). SHK is preferred to Safety Net only for candidates with a lower probability of native kidney recovery (24%-38%, varying by recipient age). This finding favors the implementation of a Safety Net provision and should inform the establishment of objective criteria for SHK transplant eligibility.

Center variations in patient selection for simultaneous heart-kidney transplantation.

There are no established regulations governing patient selection for simultaneous heart-kidney (SHK) transplantation, creating the potential for significant center-level variations in clinical practice. METHODS: Using the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) Standard Transplant Analysis and Research (STAR) file, we examined practice trends and variations in patient selection for SHK at the center level between January 1, 2004 and March 31, 2019. RESULTS: Overall, SHK is becoming more common with most centers performing heart transplants also performing SHK. Among patients who underwent heart transplant who were receiving dialysis, the rate of SHK varied from 22% to 86% at the center level. Among patients not on dialysis, the median estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of patients receiving SHK varied between 19 and 59 mL/min/1.73 m2 . When adjusting for other factors, the odds of SHK varied 57-fold between the highest and lowest SHK performing centers. CONCLUSION: Variation in SHK at the center level suggests the need for national guidelines around the selection of patients for SHK.

The organ procurement costs of expanding deceased donor organ acceptance criteria: Evidence from a cost function model.

A potential solution to the deceased donor organ shortage is to expand donor acceptability criteria. The procurement cost implications of using nonstandard donors is unknown. Using 5 years of US organ procurement organization (OPO) data, we built a cost function model to make cost projections: the total cost was the dependent variable; production outputs, including the number of donors and organs procured, were the independent variables. In the model, procuring one kidney or procuring both kidneys from double/en bloc transplantation from a single-organ donor resulted in a marginal cost of $55 k (95% confidence interval [CI] $28 k, $99 k) per kidney, and procuring only the liver from a single-organ donor results in a marginal cost of $41 k (95% CI $12 k, $69 k) per liver. Procuring two kidneys for two candidates from a donor lowered the marginal cost to $36 k (95% CI $22 k, $66 k) per kidney, and procuring two kidneys and a liver lowers the marginal cost to $24 k (95% CI $17 k, $45 k) per organ. Economies of scale were observed, where high OPO volume was correlated with lower costs. Despite higher cost per organ than for standard donors, kidney transplantation from nonstandard donors remained cost-effective based on contemporary US data.

Consensus conference on heart-kidney transplantation.

Simultaneous heart-kidney transplant (sHK) has enabled the successful transplantation of patients with end-stage heart disease and concomitant kidney disease, with non-inferior outcomes to heart transplant (HT) alone. The decision for sHK is challenged by difficulties in differentiating those patients with a significant component of reversible kidney injury due to cardiorenal syndrome who may recover kidney function after HT, from those with intrinsic advanced kidney disease who would benefit most from sHK. A consensus conference on sHK took place on June 1, 2019 in Boston, Massachusetts. The conference represented a collaborative effort by experts in cardiothoracic and kidney transplantation from centers across the United States to explore the development of guidelines for the interdisciplinary criteria for kidney transplantation in the sHK candidate, to evaluate the current allocation of kidneys to follow the heart for sHK, and to recommend standardized care for the management of sHK recipients. The conference served as a forum to unify criteria between the different specialties and to forge a pathway for patients who may need dual organ transplantation. Due to the continuing shortage of available donor organs, ethical problems related to multi-organ transplantation were also debated. The findings and consensus statements are presented.

Toward telemedicine-compatible physical functioning assessments in kidney transplant candidates.

Frailty is associated with adverse kidney transplant outcomes and can be assessed by subjective and objective metrics. There is increasing recognition of the value of metrics obtainable remotely. We compared the self-reported SF-36 physical functioning subscale score (SF-36 PF) with in-person physical performance tests (6-min walk and sit-to-stand) in a prospective cohort of kidney transplant candidates. We assessed each metric's ability to predict time to the composite outcome of waitlist removal or death, censoring at transplant. We built time-dependent receiver operating characteristic curves and calculated the area under the curve [AUC(t)] at 1 year, using bootstrapping for internal validation. In 199 patients followed for a median of 346 days, 41 reached the composite endpoint. Lower SF-36 PF scores were associated with higher risk of waitlist removal/death, with every 10-point decrease corresponding to a 16% increase in risk. All models showed an AUC(t) of 0.83-0.84 that did not contract substantially after internal validation. Among kidney transplant candidates, SF-36 PF, obtainable remotely, can help to stratify the risk of waitlist removal or death, and may be used as a screening tool for poor physical functioning in ongoing candidate evaluation, particularly where travel, increasing patient volume, or other restrictions challenge in-person assessment.

COVID-19 and kidney transplantation: Results from the TANGO International Transplant Consortium.

Kidney transplant recipients may be at a high risk of developing critical coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) illness due to chronic immunosuppression and comorbidities. We identified hospitalized adult kidney transplant recipients at 12 transplant centers in the United States, Italy, and Spain who tested positive for COVID-19. Clinical presentation, laboratory values, immunosuppression, and treatment strategies were reviewed, and predictors of poor clinical outcomes were determined through multivariable analyses. Among 9845 kidney transplant recipients across centers, 144 were hospitalized due to COVID-19 during the 9-week study period. Of the 144 patients, 66% were male with a mean age of 60 (±12) years, and 40% were Hispanic and 25% were African American. Prevalent comorbidities included hypertension (95%), diabetes (52%), obesity (49%), and heart (28%) and lung (19%) disease. Therapeutic management included antimetabolite withdrawal (68%), calcineurin inhibitor withdrawal (23%), hydroxychloroquine (71%), antibiotics (74%), tocilizumab (13%), and antivirals (14%). During a median follow-up period of 52 days (IQR: 16-66 days), acute kidney injury occurred in 52% cases, with respiratory failure requiring intubation in 29%, and the mortality rate was 32%. The 46 patients who died were older, had lower lymphocyte counts and estimated glomerular filtration rate levels, and had higher serum lactate dehydrogenase, procalcitonin, and interleukin-6 levels. In sum, hospitalized kidney transplant recipients with COVID-19 have higher rates of acute kidney injury and mortality.

Physical Performance Testing in Kidney Transplant Candidates at the Top of the Waitlist.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Frailty and poor physical function are associated with adverse kidney transplant outcomes, but how to incorporate this knowledge into clinical practice is uncertain. We studied the association between measured physical performance and clinical outcomes among patients on kidney transplant waitlists. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective observational cohort study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: We studied consecutive patients evaluated in our Transplant Readiness Assessment Clinic, a top-of-the-waitlist management program, from May 2017 through December 2018 (N=305). We incorporated physical performance testing, including the 6-minute walk test (6MWT) and the sit-to-stand (STS) test, into routine clinical assessments. EXPOSURES: 6MWT and STS test results. OUTCOMES: The primary outcome was time to adverse waitlist outcomes (removal from waitlist or death); secondary outcomes were time to transplantation and time to death. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: We used linear regression to examine the relationship between clinical characteristics and physical performance test results. We used subdistribution hazards models to examine the association between physical performance test results and outcomes. RESULTS: Median 6MWT and STS results were 393 (IQR, 305-455) m and 17 (IQR, 12-21) repetitions, respectively. Clinical characteristics and Estimated Post-Transplant Survival scores accounted for only 14% to 21% of the variance in 6MWT/STS results. Physical performance test results were associated with adverse waitlist outcomes (adjusted subdistribution hazard ratio [sHR] of 1.42 [95% CI, 1.30-1.56] per 50-m lower 6MWT test result and 1.53 [95% CI, 1.33-1.75] per 5-repetition lower STS test result) and with transplantation (adjusted sHR of 0.80 [95% CI, 0.72-0.88] per 50-m lower 6MWT test result and 0.80 [95% CI, 0.71-0.89] per 5-repetition lower STS test result). Addition of either STS or 6MWT to survival models containing clinical characteristics enhanced fit (likelihood ratio test P<0.001). LIMITATIONS: Single-center observational study. Other measures of global health status (eg, Fried Frailty Index or Short Physical Performance Battery) were not examined. CONCLUSIONS: Among waitlisted kidney transplant candidates with high kidney allocation scores, standardized and easily performed physical performance test results are associated with waitlist outcomes and contain information beyond what is currently routinely collected in clinical practice.

An overview of frailty in kidney transplantation: measurement, management and future considerations.

The construct of frailty was first developed in gerontology to help identify older adults with increased vulnerability when confronted with a health stressor. This article is a review of studies in which frailty has been applied to pre- and post-kidney transplantation (KT) populations. Although KT is the optimal treatment for end-stage kidney disease (ESKD), KT candidates often must overcome numerous health challenges associated with ESKD before receiving KT. After KT, the impacts of surgery and immunosuppression represent additional health stressors that disproportionately impact individuals with frailty. Frailty metrics could improve the ability to identify KT candidates and recipients at risk for adverse health outcomes and those who could potentially benefit from interventions to improve their frail status. The Physical Frailty Phenotype (PFP) is the most commonly used frailty metric in ESKD research, and KT recipients who are frail at KT (~20% of recipients) are twice as likely to die as nonfrail recipients. In addition to the PFP, many other metrics are currently used to assess pre- and post-KT vulnerability in research and clinical practice, underscoring the need for a disease-specific frailty metric that can be used to monitor KT candidates and recipients. Although frailty is an independent risk factor for post-transplant adverse outcomes, it is not factored into the current transplant program risk-adjustment equations. Future studies are needed to explore pre- and post-KT interventions to improve or prevent frailty.

To kidney or not to kidney: Applying lessons learned from the simultaneous liver-kidney transplant policy to simultaneous heart-kidney transplantation.

As the medical community is increasingly offering transplantation to patients with increasing comorbidity burdens, the number of simultaneous heart-kidney (SHK) transplants is rising in the United States. How to determine eligibility for SHK transplant versus heart transplant alone is unknown. In this review, we situate this problem in the broader picture of organ shortage. We critically appraise available literature on outcomes in SHK versus heart transplant alone. We posit staged kidney-after-heart transplantation as a plausible alternative to SHK transplantation and review the pros and cons. Drawing lessons from the field of simultaneous liver-kidney transplant, we argue for an analogous policy for SHK transplant with standardized minimal eligibility criteria and a modified Safety Net provision. The new policy will serve as a starting point for comparing simultaneous versus staged approaches and refining the medical eligibility criteria for SHK.

Native kidney cytomegalovirus nephritis and cytomegalovirus prostatitis in a kidney transplant recipient.

We present a case of cytomegalovirus (CMV) native kidney nephritis and prostatitis in a CMV D+/R- kidney transplant recipient who had completed six months of CMV prophylaxis four weeks prior to the diagnosis of genitourinary CMV disease. The patient had a history of benign prostatic hypertrophy and urinary retention that required self-catheterization to relieve high post-voiding residual volumes. At 7 months post-transplant, he was found to have a urinary tract infection, moderate hydronephrosis of the transplanted kidney, and severe hydroureteronephrosis of the native left kidney and ureter, and underwent native left nephrectomy and transurethral resection of the prostate. Histopathologic examination of kidney and prostate tissue revealed CMV inclusions consistent with invasive CMV disease. This case highlights that CMV may extend beyond the kidney allograft to involve other parts of the genitourinary tract, including the native kidneys and prostate. Furthermore, we highlight the tissue-specific risk factors that preceded CMV tissue invasion. In addition to concurrent diagnoses, health care providers should have a low threshold for considering late-onset CMV disease in high-risk solid organ transplant recipients presenting with signs and symptoms of genitourinary tract pathology.

A new approach to kidney wait-list management in the kidney allocation system era: Pilot implementation and evaluation.

Kidney transplant wait-list management is becoming increasingly complex. We introduced a novel wait-list management strategy at our center, the Transplant Readiness Assessment Clinic (TRAC), whereby patients whose Kidney Allocation Scores surpass a threshold are actively managed. From January 1, 2016 through June 30, 2017, we evaluated 195 patients through TRAC. Compared to pre-TRAC systems at our institution, TRAC resulted in a higher proportion of activation at 18 months (38% vs 22%-26%, P < 0.0001), despite being enriched in patients with long dialysis duration. TRAC also resulted in a higher proportion of wait-list removal (15% vs 8%-9%, P < 0.05) although combined wait-list removal and death on wait-list did not differ (18% vs 16%-17%). Median time to activation was 356 days from TRAC evaluation. Of the transplant barriers, need for cardiovascular studies was the most common (31%), followed by other medical issues (23%), poor functional status (13%), and psychosocial issues (10%). By concentrating center resources on patients most likely to be transplanted after activation and performing active patient management close to the time of transplant, TRAC has the potential to significantly enhance kidney transplant success in regions with long wait-times.

A large, international study on post-transplant glomerular diseases: the TANGO project.

BACKGROUND: Long-term outcomes in kidney transplantation (KT) have not significantly improved during the past twenty years. Despite being a leading cause of graft failure, glomerular disease (GD) recurrence remains poorly understood, due to heterogeneity in disease pathogenesis and clinical presentation, reliance on histopathology to confirm disease recurrence, and the low incidence of individual GD subtypes. Large, international cohorts of patients with GD are urgently needed to better understand the disease pathophysiology, predictors of recurrence, and response to therapy. METHODS: The Post-TrANsplant GlOmerular Disease (TANGO) study is an observational, multicenter cohort study initiated in January 2017 that aims to: 1) characterize the natural history of GD after KT, 2) create a biorepository of saliva, blood, urine, stools and kidney tissue samples, and 3) establish a network of patients and centers to support novel therapeutic trials. The study includes 15 centers in America and Europe. Enrollment is open to patients with biopsy-proven GD prior to transplantation, including IgA nephropathy, membranous nephropathy, focal and segmental glomerulosclerosis, atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome, dense-deposit disease, C3 glomerulopathy, complement- and IgG-positive membranoproliferative glomerulonephritis or membranoproliferative glomerulonephritis type I-III (old classification). During phase 1, patient data will be collected in an online database. The biorepository (phase 2) will involve collection of samples from patients for identification of predictors of recurrence, biomarkers of disease activity or response to therapy, and novel pathogenic mechanisms. Finally, through phase 3, we will use our multicenter network of patients and centers to launch interventional studies. DISCUSSION: Most prior studies of post-transplant GD recurrence are single-center and retrospective, or rely upon registry data that frequently misclassify the cause of kidney disease. Systematically determining GD recurrence rates and predictors of clinical outcomes is essential to improving post-transplant outcomes. Furthermore, accurate molecular phenotyping and biomarker development will allow better understanding of individual GD pathogenesis, and potentially identify novel drug targets for GD in both native and transplanted kidneys. The TANGO study has the potential to tackle GD recurrence through a multicenter design and a comprehensive biorepository.

Home Dialysis in the Prospective Payment System Era.

The ESRD Prospective Payment System introduced two incentives to increase home dialysis use: bundling injectable medications into a single payment for treatment and paying for home dialysis training. We evaluated the effects of the ESRD Prospective Payment System on home dialysis use by patients starting dialysis in the United States from January 1, 2006 to August 31, 2013. We analyzed data on dialysis modality, insurance type, and comorbidities from the United States Renal Data System. We estimated the effect of the policy on home dialysis use with multivariable logistic regression and compared the effect on Medicare Parts A/B beneficiaries with the effect on patients with other types of insurance. The ESRD Prospective Payment System associated with a 5.0% (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 4.0% to 6.0%) increase in home dialysis use by the end of the study period. Home dialysis use increased by 5.8% (95% CI, 4.3% to 6.9%) among Medicare beneficiaries and 4.1% (95% CI, 2.3% to 5.4%) among patients covered by other forms of health insurance. The difference between these groups was not statistically significant (1.8%; 95% CI, -0.2% to 3.8%). Conversely, in both populations, the training add-on did not associate with increases in home dialysis use beyond the effect of the policy. The ESRD Prospective Payment System bundling, but not the training add-on, associated with substantial increases in home dialysis, which were identical for both Medicare and non-Medicare patients. These spill-over effects suggest that major payment changes in Medicare can affect all patients with ESRD.