Wearables in Nephrology: Fanciful Gadgetry or Prêt-à-Porter?

Telemedicine and digitalised healthcare have recently seen exponential growth, led, in part, by increasing efforts to improve patient flexibility and autonomy, as well as drivers from financial austerity and concerns over climate change. Nephrology is no exception, and daily innovations are underway to provide digitalised alternatives to current models of healthcare provision. Wearable technology already exists commercially, and advances in nanotechnology and miniaturisation mean interest is also garnering clinically. Here, we outline the current existing wearable technology pertaining to the diagnosis and monitoring of patients with a spectrum of kidney disease, give an overview of wearable dialysis technology, and explore wearables that do not yet exist but would be of great interest. Finally, we discuss challenges and potential pitfalls with utilising wearable technology and the factors associated with successful implementation.

Remote digital urinalysis with smartphone technology as part of remote management of glomerular disease during the SARS-CoV-2 virus pandemic: single-centre experience in 25 patients.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has necessitated the provision of healthcare through remote and increasingly digitalized means. The management of glomerular pathology, for which urinalysis is crucial, has been notably affected. Here we describe our single-centre experience of using remote digital urinalysis in the management of patients with glomerular disease during the COVID-19 pandemic. Method: All patients with native kidney glomerular disease who consented to participate in digital smartphone urinalysis monitoring between March 2020 and July 2021 were included. Electronic health records were contemporaneously reviewed for outcome data. Patient feedback was obtained through the testing portal. Results: Twenty-five patients utilized the digital urinalysis application. A total of 105 digital urinalysis tests were performed for a wide variety of indications. Four patients experienced a relapse (detected remotely) and two patients underwent three successful pregnancies. The majority of patients were managed virtually (60%) or virtually and face to face (F2F) combined (32%). The average number of clinic reviews and urine tests performed during the pandemic either virtually and/or F2F was comparable to levels pre-pandemic and the ratio of reviews to urinalysis (R:U) was stable (pre-pandemic 1:0.9 versus during the pandemic 1:0.8). Patients seen exclusively F2F with supplementary home monitoring had the highest R:U ratio at 1:2.1. A total of 95% of users provided feedback, all positive. Conclusion: Remote urinalysis proved a safe and convenient tool to facilitate decision-making where traditional urinalysis was difficult, impractical or impossible. Our approach allowed us to continue care in this vulnerable group of patients despite a lack of access to traditional urinalysis.

Using CPAP in COVID-19 patients outside of the intensive care setting: a comparison of survival and outcomes between dialysis and non-dialysis dependent patients.

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) is a novel coronavirus associated with high mortality rates. The use of Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP) has been recognised as a management option for severe COVID-19 (NHS, Specialty guides for patient management during the coronavirus pandemic Guidance for the role and use of non-invasive respiratory support in adult patients with coronavirus (confirmed or suspected), https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng159 ). We offered ward-based CPAP to COVID-19, dialysis patients not suitable for escalation to ICU. The aim of the study was to evaluate the use of CPAP for COVID-19 dialysis patients compared to non-dialysis COVID-19 patients outside of the intensive care setting. We further aimed to investigate factors associated with improved outcomes. METHODS: Data was collected from a single centre (Royal Preston Hospital, UK), from March to June 2020. Treatment outcomes were compared for dialysis and non-dialysis dependent patients who received CPAP with limitations on their escalation and resuscitation status. Kaplan-Meier survival curves and Cox regression models were used to compare outcomes. The primary study outcome was 30 day mortality. Confounders including length of admission, systemic anticoagulation and ultrafiltration volumes on dialysis were also analysed. RESULTS: Over the study period, 40 dialysis patients tested positive for COVID-19, with 30 requiring hospital admission. 93% (n = 28) required supplementary oxygen and 12% (n = 9) required CPAP on the ward. These patients were compared to a serial selection of 14 non-dialysis patients treated with CPAP during the same period. Results showed a significant difference in 30 day survival rates between the two groups: 88.9% in the dialysis group vs. 21.4% in the non-dialysis group. Statistical modelling showed that anticoagulation was also an important factor and correlated with better outcomes. CONCLUSION: This is to the best of our knowledge, the largest series of COVID-19 dialysis patients treated with CPAP in a ward-based setting. In general, dialysis dependent patients have multiple co-morbidities including cardiovascular disease and diabetes mellitus making them vulnerable to COVID-19 and not always suitable for treatment in ICU. We showed a significantly lower 30 day mortality rate with the use of CPAP in the dialysis group (11.1%) compared to the non-dialysis group (78.6%). Despite a small sample size, we believe this study provides impetus for further work clarifying the role of CPAP in treating COVID-19 dialysis dependent patients.

Opportunities in the cloud or pie in the sky? Current status and future perspectives of telemedicine in nephrology.

The use of telehealth to support, enhance or substitute traditional methods of delivering healthcare is becoming increasingly common in many specialties, such as stroke care, radiology and oncology. There is reason to believe that this approach remains underutilized within nephrology, which is somewhat surprising given the fact that nephrologists have always driven technological change in developing dialysis technology. Despite the obvious benefits that telehealth may provide, robust evidence remains lacking and many of the studies are anecdotal, limited to small numbers or without conclusive proof of benefit. More worryingly, quite a few studies report unexpected obstacles, pitfalls or patient dissatisfaction. However, with increasing global threats such as climate change and infectious disease, a change in approach to delivery of healthcare is needed. The current pandemic with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has prompted the renal community to embrace telehealth to an unprecedented extent and at speed. In that sense the pandemic has already served as a disruptor, changed clinical practice and shown immense transformative potential. Here, we provide an update on current evidence and use of telehealth within various areas of nephrology globally, including the fields of dialysis, inpatient care, virtual consultation and patient empowerment. We also provide a brief primer on the use of artificial intelligence in this context and speculate about future implications. We also highlight legal aspects and pitfalls and discuss the 'digital divide' as a key concept that healthcare providers need to be mindful of when providing telemedicine-based approaches. Finally, we briefly discuss the immediate use of telenephrology at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. We hope to provide clinical nephrologists with an overview of what is currently available, as well as a glimpse into what may be expected in the future.

​False-positive paracetamol levels in a patient with hyperbilirubinaemia: clinical perspectives.

​Serum concentrations of paracetamol are measured to investigate the cause of acute hepatitis, monitor the clearance of paracetamol from the body and to determine if supratherapeutic levels warrant treatment with N-acetylcysteine (NAC). ​A 49-year-old man treated for ischaemic colitis developed worsening renal and liver function tests. As part of the investigation of hepatorenal failure, paracetamol levels were requested, which were elevated at 14 mg/L (normal <4 mg/L) resulting in treatment with NAC. Despite treatment, levels of paracetamol remained elevated and the link between hyperbilirubinemia and false-positive paracetamol levels was identified. ​Bilirubin and its by-products have intense absorbance in the ultraviolet and visible regions of the electromagnetic spectrum, causing interference in the enzymatic colorimetric assay most commonly used to measure paracetamol concentration, resulting in false-positive paracetamol levels. Laboratories correct for this interference above a predetermined bilirubin concentration, termed the Icteric Index; however, in our case this interference occurred at a lower level of hyperbilirubinaemia than previously identified as significant. This interaction was found to be more significant at lower bilirubin levels when low or no paracetamol levels were present in the serum, resulting in a change to laboratory practice and development of a 'Sliding Scale' approach to analysis. ​Concurrent bilirubin or Icteric Index measurement is recommended for all laboratories that use the enzymatic colorimetric assay for paracetamol measurement. Lower Icteric Index or bilirubin thresholds are required when low or no paracetamol levels are present in the serum to prevent false-positive paracetamol results. We describe a new 'Sliding Scale' approach to analysis, and highlight an important interaction for clinicians to be aware of.

Let food be thy medicine and medicine be thy food?

Ensuring adequate nutrition in children with chronic kidney disease whilst avoiding hyperkalaemia can be a difficult balance to achieve. Pre-treatment of feeds, whether milk, formula or enteral nutrition, with sodium polystyrene sulfonate (SPS) is practiced in some paediatric centres internationally. Such treatments are purported to avoid the potentially serious complications of direct administration of SPS, such as intestinal necrosis, aspiration pneumonitis and metabolic alkalosis to name but a few. Although described some 45 years ago, this study by Palma et al. is only the second retrospective study to describe the clinical consequence of pre-treating feeds with SPS with the majority of earlier studies describing only the in vitro effects of this method. Whilst effective in reducing serum potassium, the authors justifiably highlight the high incidence of complications, such as hypokalaemia (31.6%) and hypernatraemia (26.3%). We have further highlighted this with a summary of the available literature on this subject demonstrating the gross alterations of the electrolyte composition of feeds following SPS pre-treatment and clinical complications in its application. We heartily agree and support the conclusion by Palma et al. that where this therapy is practiced, close monitoring of electrolytes is essential and much more work is needed to identify those patient cohorts for which this can indeed be considered a safe and effective intervention.