Novel Colorimetric and Light Scatter Methods to Identify and Manage Peritoneal Dialysis-Associated Peritonitis at the Point-of-Care.

Introduction: Peritoneal dialysis (PD)-related peritonitis (PDRP) is a common cause of transfer to hemodialysis, patient morbidity, and is a risk factor for mortality. Associated patient anxiety can deter selection of PD for renal replacement therapy. Diagnosis relies on hospital laboratory tests; however, this might be achieved earlier if such information was available at the point-of-care (POC), thereby significantly improving outcomes. The presence of culturable microbes and the concentration of leukocytes in effluent both aid peritonitis diagnosis, as specified in the International Society for Peritoneal Dialysis (ISPD) diagnostic guidelines. Here, we report the development of 2 new methods providing such information in simple POC tests. Methods: One approach uses a tetrazolium-based chemical reporting system, primarily focused on detecting bacterial contamination and associated vancomycin-sensitivity. The second approach uses a novel forward light-scatter device (QuickCheck) to provide an instant quantitative cell count directly from PD patient effluent. Results: The tetrazolium approach detected and correctly distinguished laboratory isolates, taking 10 hours to provide non-quantitative results. We compared the technical performance of the light scatter leukocyte counting approach with spectrophotometry, hemocytometer counting and flow cytometry (Sysmex) using patient effluent samples. QuickCheck had high accuracy (94%) and was the most precise (coefficient of variation <4%), showing minimal bias, overall performing similarly to flow cytometry. Conclusion: These complementary new approaches provide a simple means to obtain information to assist diagnosis at the POC. The first provides antibiotic sensitivity following 10 hours incubation, whereas the second optical approach (QuickCheck), provides instant accurate total leukocyte count.

Nephrologists' perspectives on communication and decision-making regarding technique survival in peritoneal dialysis: an international qualitative interview study.

OBJECTIVES: Peritoneal dialysis (PD) allows patients increased autonomy and flexibility; however, both infectious and non-infectious complications may lead to technique failure, which shortens treatment longevity. Maintaining patients on PD remains a major challenge for nephrologists. This study aims to describe nephrologists' perspectives on technique survival in PD. DESIGN: Qualitative semistructured interview study. Transcripts were thematically analysed. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: 30 nephrologists across 11 countries including Australia, the USA, the UK, Hong Kong, Canada, Singapore, Japan, New Zealand, Thailand, Colombia and Uruguay were interviewed from April 2017 to November 2019. RESULTS: We identified four themes: defining patient suitability (confidence in capacity for self-management, ensuring clinical stability and expected resilience), building endurance (facilitating access to practical support, improving mental well-being, optimising quality of care and training to reduce risk of complications), establishing rapport through effective communications (managing expectations to enhance trust, individualising care and harnessing a multidisciplinary approach) and confronting fear and acknowledging barriers to haemodialysis (preventing crash landing to haemodialysis, facing concerns of losing independence and positive framing of haemodialysis). CONCLUSION: Nephrologists reported that technique survival in PD is influenced by patients' medical circumstances, psychological motivation and positively influenced by the education and support provided by treating clinicians and families. Strategies to enhance patients' knowledge on PD and communication with patients about technique survival in PD are needed to build trust, set patient expectations of treatment and improve the process of transition off PD.

Outcomes for clinical trials involving adults with chronic kidney disease: a multinational Delphi survey involving patients, caregivers, and health professionals.

BACKGROUND: Many outcomes of high priority to patients and clinicians are infrequently and inconsistently reported across trials in CKD, which generates research waste and limits evidence-informed decision making. We aimed to generate consensus among patients/caregivers and health professionals on critically important outcomes for trials in CKD prior to kidney failure and the need for kidney replacement therapy, and to describe the reasons for their choices. METHODS: Online two-round international Delphi survey. Adult patients with CKD (all stages and diagnoses), caregivers and health professionals, who could read English, Spanish, or French were eligible. Participants rated the importance of outcomes using a Likert scale (7-9 indicating critical importance) and a best-worst scale. The scores for the two groups were assessed to determine absolute and relative importance. Comments were analysed thematically. RESULTS: In total, 1 399 participants from 73 countries completed Round 1 of the Delphi survey including 628 (45%) patients/caregivers and 771 (55%) health professionals. In Round 2, 790 participants (56% response rate) from 63 countries completed the survey including 383 (48%) patients/caregivers and 407 (52%) health professionals. The overall top five outcomes were: kidney function, need for dialysis/transplant, life participation, cardiovascular disease, and death. In the final round, patients/caregivers indicated higher scores for most outcomes (17/22 outcomes), and health professionals gave higher priority to mortality, hospitalization, and cardiovascular disease (mean difference > 0.3). Consensus was based upon the two groups yielding median scores of ≥ 7 and mean scores > 7, and the proportions of both groups rating the outcome as 'critically important' being greater than 50%. Four themes reflected the reasons for their priorities: imminent threat of a health catastrophe, signifying diminishing capacities, ability to self-manage and cope, and tangible and direct consequences. CONCLUSION: Across trials in CKD, the outcomes of highest priority to patients, caregivers, and health professionals were kidney function, need for dialysis/transplant, life participation, cardiovascular disease, and death.

Peritoneal Dialysis Care for People with Diabetes, Polycystic Kidney Disease, or Advanced Liver Disease.

People treated with peritoneal dialysis (PD) often have complicating conditions that require careful management. Three such conditions are reviewed in this article-diabetes mellitus, polycystic kidney disease, and chronic liver disease. Each of these conditions requires an understanding of both its effect on the delivery of the PD and the effect of the PD on the condition itself. In diabetes, glucose absorption from the dialysate complicates metabolic control and affects salt and water management and patient outcome. There is particular benefit in clinical care being delivered through a multidisciplinary team that involves both kidney and diabetes experts. In relation to polycystic kidney disease, a key issue is the potential for increased intraperitoneal pressure due to the combined effect of the enlarged polycystic organs and the presence of the dialysis solution, and therefore, the PD prescription requires to be managed with a particular focus on limiting that pressure. For patients with liver disease, key issues include nutritional support because PD can add to protein losses already consequent on the liver disease itself. Considered approaches are required to manage ascites and reduce infection risk and the potential for hernias and leaks to develop. Mortality in this group is unfortunately high-however, PD may present a better management option than hemodialysis in many patients-particularly in those where the liver disease is complicated by low BP, clotting abnormalities, or troublesome ascites. Overall, the choice to use PD in patients with these complicating conditions should be based on shared decision making with the patient and their family members informed by high-quality information in which risks, benefits, and management strategies are clearly presented.

Catheter Event Rates in Medical Compared to Surgical Peritoneal Dialysis Catheter Insertion.

Introduction: How patient, center, and insertion technique factors interact needs to be understood when designing peritoneal dialysis (PD) catheter insertion pathways. Methods: We undertook a prospective cohort study in 44 UK centers enrolling participants planned for first catheter insertion. Sequences of regressions were used to describe the associations linking patient and dialysis unit-level characteristics with catheter insertion technique and their impact on the occurrence of catheter-related events in the first year (catheter-related infection, hospitalization, and removal). Factors associated with catheter events were incorporated into a multistate model comparing the rates of catheter events between medical and surgical insertion alongside treatment modality transitions and mortality. Results: Of 784 first catheter insertions, 466 (59%) had a catheter event in the first year and 61.2% of transitions onto hemodialysis (HD) were immediately preceded by a catheter event. Catheter malfunction was less but infection was more common with surgical compared with medical insertions. Participants at centers with fewer late presenters and more new dialysis patients starting PD, had a lower probability of a catheter event. Adjusting for these factors, the hazard ratio for a catheter event following insertion (medical vs. surgical) was 0.70 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.43 to 1.13), and once established on PD 0.77 (0.62 to 0.96). Conclusion: Offering both medical and surgical techniques is associated with lower catheter event rates and keeps people on PD for longer.

The trajectory of a range of commonly captured symptoms with standard care in people with kidney failure receiving haemodialysis: consideration for clinical trial design.

BACKGROUND: Despite the recognized high symptom prevalence in haemodialysis population, how these symptoms change over time and its implications for clinical practice and research is poorly understood. METHODS: Prevalent haemodialysis patients in the SHAREHD trial reported 17 POS-S Renal symptoms (none, mild, moderate, severe and overwhelming) at baseline, 6, 12 and 18 months. To assess the prevalence change at population level in people reporting moderate or worse symptoms at baseline, the absolute change in prevalence was estimated using multi-level mixed effects probit regression adjusting for age, sex, time on haemodialysis and Charlson Comorbidity Score. To assess changes at individual level, the proportion of people changing their symptom score every 6 months was estimated. RESULTS: Five hundred fifty-two participants completed 1725 questionnaires at four timepoints. Across all 17 symptoms with moderate or worse symptom severity at baseline, the majority of the change in symptom prevalence at population level occurred in the 'severe' category. The absolute improvement in prevalence of the 'severe' category was ≤ 20% over 18 months in eleven of the seventeen symptoms despite a large degree of relatively balanced movement of individuals in and out of severe category every six months. Examples include depression, skin changes and drowsiness, which had larger proportion (75-80%) moving in and out of severe category each 6 months period but < 5% difference between movement in and out of severe category resulting in relatively static prevalence over time. Meanwhile, larger changes in prevalence of > 20% were observed in six symptoms, driven by a 9 to 18% difference between movement in and movement out of severe category. All symptoms had > 50% of people in severe group changing severity within 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: Changes in the severity of existing symptoms under standard care were frequent, often occurring within six months. Certain symptoms exhibited clinically meaningful shifts at both the population and individual levels. This highlighted the need to consider improvements in symptom severity when determining sample size and statistical power for trials. By accounting for potential symptom improvements with routine care, researchers can design trials capable of robustly detecting genuine treatment effects, distinguishing them from spontaneous changes associated with standard haemodialysis.

Effects of Steady Glucose Concentration Peritoneal Dialysis on Ultrafiltration Volume and Sodium Removal: A Pilot Crossover Trial.

BACKGROUND: Volume overload is common in patients treated with peritoneal dialysis (PD) and is associated with poor clinical outcome. Steady concentration PD is where a continuous glucose infusion maintains the intraperitoneal glucose concentration and as a result provides continuous ultrafiltration throughout the dwell. The primary objective of this study was to investigate the ultrafiltration rate and glucose ultrafiltration efficiency for steady concentration PD in comparison with a standard continuous ambulatory PD (CAPD) dwell, using the novel Carry Life UF device. METHODS: Eight stable patients treated with PD (six fast and two fast average transporters) were investigated four times: a standard 4-hour CAPD dwell with 2 L of 2.5% dextrose solution as control and three 5-hour steady concentration PD treatments (glucose dose 11, 14, 20 g/h, initial fill 1.5 L of 1.5% dextrose solution). All investigations were preceded by an overnight 2 L 7.5% icodextrin dwell. RESULTS: Intraperitoneal glucose concentration increased during the first 1-2 hours of the steady concentration PD treatments and remained stable thereafter. Ultrafiltration rates were significantly higher with steady concentration PD treatments (124±49, 146±63, and 168±78 mL/h with 11, 14, and 20 g/h, respectively, versus 40±60 mL/h with the control dwell). Sodium removal and glucose ultrafiltration efficiency (ultrafiltration volume/gram glucose uptake) were significantly higher with steady concentration PD treatments versus the control dwell, where the 11 g/h glucose dose was most efficient. CONCLUSIONS: Steady concentration PD performed with the Carry Life UF device resulted in higher ultrafiltration rates, more efficient use of glucose (increased ultrafiltration volume/gram glucose absorbed), and greater sodium removal compared with a standard 2.5% dextrose CAPD dwell. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY NAME AND REGISTRATION NUMBER: A Performance Analysis of the Peritoneal Ultrafiltration (PUF) Achieved With the Carry Life ® UF, NCT03724682 .

A learning process to deliver virtual staff training involving patients in shared haemodialysis care.

Shared haemodialysis (HD) care (SHC) is a person-centred approach delivering a flexible choice of options for centre-based HD patients to become more involved in their treatment. To support this, a 4-day course was developed to provide healthcare professionals with the confidence and skills to engage, involve, support and train patients in their care and has been accessed by >700 UK staff over 9 years. The disruption caused by the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic in 2020 prompted a revision of what was deliverable within the restrictions. In response to this, we designed, developed and tested a virtual training program that was shorter and more accessible while remaining effective in meeting its core objectives. This provides a greater geographical reach and enables a collaborative team approach with patients and staff learning from and with each other, thus supporting a partnership approach advocated in shared decision making. In this review we explore the learning that informed the virtual training program 2022 and provide qualitative evaluation to demonstrate evidence of understanding, behavioural change and organisational benefit. Using a validated evaluation, we present key themes that support the initiation, development and sustainability of SHC in the form of a roadmap to guide strategic planning.

Bio-impedance spectroscopy added to a fluid management protocol does not improve preservation of residual kidney function in incident hemodialysis patients in a randomized controlled trial.

Avoiding excessive dialysis-associated volume depletion may help preserve residual kidney function (RKF). To establish whether knowledge of the estimated normally hydrated weight from bioimpedance measurements (BI-NHW) when setting the post-hemodialysis target weight (TW) might mitigate rate of loss of RKF, we undertook an open label, randomized controlled trial in incident patients receiving HD, with clinicians and patients blinded to bioimpedance readings in controls. A total of 439 patients with over 500 ml urine/day or residual GFR exceeding 3 ml/min/1.73m2 were recruited from 34 United Kingdom centers and randomized 1:1, stratified by center. Fluid assessments were made for up to 24 months using a standardized proforma in both groups, supplemented by availability of BI-NHW in the intervention group. Primary outcome was time to anuria, analyzed using competing-risk survival models adjusted for baseline characteristics, by intention to treat. Secondary outcomes included rate of RKF decline (mean urea and creatinine clearance), blood pressure and patient-reported outcomes. There were no group differences in cause-specific hazard rates of anuria (0.751; 95% confidence interval (0.459, 1.229)) or sub-distribution hazard rates (0.742 (0.453, 1.215)). RKF decline was markedly slower than anticipated, pooled linear rates in year 1: -0.178 (-0.196, -0.159)), year 2: -0.061 (-0.086, -0.036)) ml/min/1.73m2/month. Blood pressure and patient-reported outcomes did not differ by group. The mean difference agreement between TW and BI-NHW was similar for both groups, Bioimpedance: -0.04 kg; Control: -0.25 kg. Thus, use of a standardized clinical protocol for fluid assessment when setting TW is associated with excellent preservation of RKF. Hence, bioimpedance measurements are not necessary to achieve this.

Factors associated with time to first dialysis-associated peritonitis episode: Data from the Peritonitis Prevention Study (PEPS).

INTRODUCTION: Peritonitis remains a potentially serious complication of peritoneal dialysis (PD) treatment. It is therefore important to identify risk factors in order to reduce the incidence of peritonitis. The aim of the present analysis was to identify factors associated with time to first peritonitis episode. METHODS: Incident PD patients from 57 centres in Europe participated in the prospective randomised controlled Peritonitis Prevention Study (PEPS) from 2010 to 2015. Peritonitis-free, self-care PD patients ≥18 years were randomised to a retraining or a control group and followed for 1-36 months after PD initiation. The association of biochemical, clinical and prescription data with time to first peritonitis episode was studied. RESULTS: A first peritonitis episode was experienced by 33% (223/671) of participants. Univariable Cox proportional hazard regression showed a strong association between the time-updated number of PD bags connected per 24 h (PD bags/24 h) and time to first peritonitis episode (HR 1.35; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.17-1.57), even after inclusion of PD modalities in the same model. Multivariable Cox regression revealed that the factors independently associated with time to first peritonitis episode included age (HR 1.16 per 10 years; 95% CI 1.05-1.28), PD bags/24 h (HR 1.32; 95% CI 1.13-1.54), serum albumin <35 versus >35 g/L (HR 1.39; 95% CI 1.06-1.82) and body weight per 10 kg (HR 1.10; 95% CI 1.01-1.19). CONCLUSION: This study of incident PD patients indicates that older age, greater number of PD bags connected/24 h, higher body weight and hypoalbuminaemia are independently associated with a shorter time to first peritonitis episode.

Catheter insertion techniques for improving catheter function and clinical outcomes in peritoneal dialysis patients.

BACKGROUND: Peritoneal dialysis (PD) relies on the optimal functionality of the flexible plastic PD catheter present within the peritoneal cavity to enable effective treatment. As a result of limited evidence, it is uncertain if the PD catheter's insertion method influences the rate of catheter dysfunction and, thus, the quality of dialysis therapy. Numerous variations of four basic techniques have been adopted in an attempt to improve and maintain PD catheter function. This review evaluates the association between PD catheter insertion technique and associated differences in  PD catheter function and post-PD catheter insertion complications OBJECTIVES: Our aims were to 1) evaluate if a specific technique used for PD catheter insertion has lower rates of PD catheter dysfunction (early and late) and technique failure; and 2) examine if any of the available techniques results in a reduction in post-procedure complication rates including postoperative haemorrhage, exit-site infection and peritonitis. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 24 November 2022 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) examining adults and children undergoing PD catheter insertion. The studies examined any two PD catheter insertion techniques, including laparoscopic, open-surgical, percutaneous and peritoneoscopic insertion. Primary outcomes of interest were PD catheter function and technique survival.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently performed data extraction and assessed the risk of bias for all included studies. Main outcomes in the Summary of Findings tables include primary outcomes - early PD catheter function, long-term PD catheter function, technique failure and postoperative complications. A random effects model was used to perform meta-analyses; risk ratios (RRs) were calculated for dichotomous outcomes, and mean differences (MD) were calculated for continuous outcomes, using 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for effect estimates. The certainty of the evidence was evaluated using the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach.  MAIN RESULTS: Seventeen studies were included in this review. Nine studies were suitable for inclusion in quantitative meta-analysis (670 randomised participants). Five studies compared laparoscopic with open PD catheter insertion, and four studies compared a 'medical' insertion technique with open surgical PD catheter insertion: percutaneous (2) and peritoneoscopic (2). Random sequence generation was judged to be at low risk of bias in eight studies. Allocation concealment was reported poorly, with only five studies judged to be at low risk of selection bias. Performance bias was judged to be high risk in 10 studies. Attrition bias and reporting bias were judged to be low in 14 and 12 studies, respectively. Six studies compared laparoscopic PD catheter insertion with open surgical insertion. Five studies could be meta-analysed (394 participants). For our primary outcomes, data were either not reported in a format that could be meta-analysed (early PD catheter function, long-term catheter function) or not reported at all (technique failure). One death was reported in the laparoscopic group and none in the open surgical group. In low certainty evidence, laparoscopic PD catheter insertion may make little or no difference to the risk of peritonitis (4 studies, 288 participants: RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.48; I² = 7%), PD catheter removal (4 studies, 257 participants: RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.64; I² = 0%), and dialysate leakage (4 studies, 330 participants: RR 1.40, 95% CI 0.49 to 4.02; I² = 0%), but may reduce the risk of haemorrhage (2 studies, 167 participants: RR 1.68, 95% CI 0.28 to 10.31; I² = 33%) and catheter tip migration (4 studies, 333 participants: RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.92; I² = 12%). Four studies compared a medical insertion technique with open surgical insertion (276 participants). Technique failure was not reported, and no deaths were reported (2 studies, 64 participants). In low certainty evidence, medical insertion may make little or no difference to early PD catheter function (3 studies, 212 participants: RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.29 to 1.83; I² = 0%), while one study reported long-term PD function may improve with peritoneoscopic insertion (116 participants: RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.92). Peritoneoscopic catheter insertion may reduce the episodes of early peritonitis (2 studies, 177 participants: RR 0.21, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.71; I² = 0%) and dialysate leakage (2 studies, 177 participants: RR 0.13, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.71; I² = 0%). Medical insertion had uncertain effects on catheter tip migration (2 studies, 90 participants: RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.15 to 3.73; I² = 0%). Most of the studies examined were small and of poor quality, increasing the risk of imprecision. There was also a significant risk of bias therefore cautious interpretation of results is advised. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The available studies show that the evidence needed to guide clinicians in developing their PD catheter insertion service is lacking. No PD catheter insertion technique had lower rates of PD catheter dysfunction. High-quality, evidence-based data are urgently required, utilising multi-centre RCTs or large cohort studies, in order to provide definitive guidance relating to PD catheter insertion modality.

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.

A different PET test: The relationship between pet ownership and peritonitis risk in the Peritoneal Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (PDOPPS).

Pet ownership is common around the world, with pet ownership increasing in many countries. Current guidelines are not supportive of pet ownership for peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients. We examined the association between ownership of cats and dogs and the incidence of peritonitis among PD patients participating in the prospective, observational Peritoneal Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study. A total of 3655 PD patients from eight different countries was included, with a median follow-up of 14 months and a total exposure time of 55,475 patient-months. There were 1347 peritonitis episodes with an overall peritonitis rate of 0.29 episodes per patient year. There was no significant increased risk of peritonitis with any type of pet ownership, adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of 1.09 (95% confidence interval (95% CI): 0.96-1.25). However, patients who owned both cats and dogs had an increased risk of peritonitis compared to patients without pets, HR = 1.45 (95% CI: 1.14-1.86). These results suggest that there is no increased risk of peritonitis with pet ownership except for those with both cats and dogs. This information should not prevent PD patients from owning pets but may be helpful for PD patients and their care team to direct training to minimise the risk of peritonitis.

Peritoneal dialysis in the modern era.

The practice and clinical outcomes of peritoneal dialysis (PD) have demonstrated significant improvement over the past 20 years. The aim of this review is to increase awareness and update healthcare professionals on current PD practice, especially with respect to patient and technique survival, patient modality selection, pathways onto PD, understanding patient experience of care and use prior to kidney transplantation. These improvements have been impacted, at least in part, by greater emphasis on shared decision-making in dialysis modality selection, the use of advanced laparoscopic techniques for PD catheter implantation, developments in PD connecting systems, glucose-sparing strategies, and modernising technology in managing automated PD patients remotely. Evidence-based clinical guidelines such as those prepared by national and international societies such as the International Society of PD have contributed to improved PD practice underpinned by a recognition of the place of continuous quality improvement processes.

Association of single and serial measures of serum phosphorus with adverse outcomes in patients on peritoneal dialysis: results from the international PDOPPS.

BACKGROUND: While high serum phosphorus levels have been related to adverse outcomes in hemodialysis patients, further investigation is warranted in persons receiving peritoneal dialysis (PD). METHODS: Longitudinal data (2014-17) from the Peritoneal Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (PDOPPS), a prospective cohort study, were used to examine associations of serum phosphorus with all-cause mortality and major adverse cardiovascular events via Cox regression adjusted for confounders. Serum phosphorus levels were parameterized by four methods: (i) baseline serum phosphorus; (ii) mean 6-month serum phosphorus; (iii) number of months with serum phosphorus >4.5 mg/dL; and (iv) mean area-under-the-curve of 6-month serum phosphorus control. RESULTS: The study included 5847 PD patients from seven countries; 9% of patients had baseline serum phosphorus <3.5 mg/dL, 24% had serum phosphorus ≥3.5 to ≤4.5 mg/dL, 30% had serum phosphorus >4.5 to <5.5 mg/dL, 20% had serum phosphorus ≥5.5 to <6.5 mg/dL, and 17% had serum phosphorus ≥6.5 mg/dL. Compared with patients with baseline serum phosphorus ≥3.5 to ≤4.5 mg/dL, the adjusted all-cause mortality hazard ratio (HR) was 1.19 (0.92,1.53) for patients with baseline serum phosphorus ≥5.5 to <6.5 mg/dL and HR was 1.53 (1.14,2.05) for serum phosphorus ≥6.5 mg/dL. Associations between serum phosphorus measurements over 6 months and clinical outcomes were even stronger than for a single measurement. CONCLUSIONS: Serum phosphorus >5.5 mg/dL was highly prevalent (37%) in PD patients, and higher serum phosphorus levels were a strong predictor of morbidity and death, particularly when considering serial phosphorus measurements. This highlights the need for improved treatment strategies in this population. Serial serum phosphorus measurements should be considered when assessing patients' risks of adverse outcomes.

Study protocol for Vascular Access outcome measure for function: a vaLidation study In hemoDialysis (VALID) : A multi-center, multinational validation study to assess the accuracy and feasibility of measuring vascular access function in clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: A functioning vascular access (VA) is crucial to providing adequate hemodialysis (HD) and considered a critically important outcome by patients and healthcare professionals. A validated, patient-important outcome measure for VA function that can be easily measured in research and practice to harvest reliable and relevant evidence for informing patient-centered HD care is lacking. Vascular Access outcome measure for function: a vaLidation study In hemoDialysis (VALID) aims to assess the accuracy and feasibility of measuring a core outcome for VA function established by the international Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology (SONG) initiative. METHODS: VALID is a prospective, multi-center, multinational validation study that will assess the accuracy and feasibility of measuring VA function, defined as the need for interventions to enable and maintain the use of a VA for HD. The primary objective is to determine whether VA function can be measured accurately by clinical staff as part of routine clinical practice (Assessor 1) compared to the reference standard of documented VA procedures collected by a VA expert (Assessor 2) during a 6-month follow-up period. Secondary outcomes include feasibility and acceptability of measuring VA function and the time to, rate of, and type of VA interventions. An estimated 612 participants will be recruited from approximately 10 dialysis units of different size, type (home-, in-center and satellite), governance (private versus public), and location (rural versus urban) across Australia, Canada, Europe, and Malaysia. Validity will be measured by the sensitivity and specificity of the data acquisition process. The sensitivity corresponds to the proportion of correctly identified interventions by Assessor 1, among the interventions identified by Assessor 2 (reference standard). The feasibility of measuring VA function will be assessed by the average data collection time, data completeness, feasibility questionnaires and semi-structured interviews on key feasibility aspects with the assessors. DISCUSSION: Accuracy, acceptability, and feasibility of measuring VA function as part of routine clinical practice are required to facilitate global implementation of this core outcome across all HD trials. Global use of a standardized, patient-centered outcome measure for VA function in HD research will enhance the consistency and relevance of trial evidence to guide patient-centered care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03969225. Registered on 31st May 2019.

Symptom burden according to dialysis day of the week in three times a week haemodialysis patients.

BACKGROUND: Haemodialysis patients experience significant symptom burden and effects on health-related quality of life. Studies have shown increases in fluid overload, hospitalization and mortality immediately after the long interdialytic interval in thrice weekly in-centre haemodialysis patients, however the relationship between the dialytic interval and patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) has not been quantified and the extent to which dialysis day of PROM completion needs to be standardised is unknown. METHODS: Three times a week haemodialysis patients participating in a stepped wedge trial to increase patient participation in haemodialysis tasks completed PROMs (POS-S Renal symptom score and EQ-5D-5L) at recruitment, six, 12 and 18 months. Time from the long interdialytic interval, HD day of the week, and HD days vs non-HD days were included in mixed effects Linear Regression, estimating severity (none to overwhelming treated as 0 to 4) of 17 symptoms and EQ-5D-5L, adjusting for age, sex, time on HD, control versus intervention and Charlson Comorbidity Score. RESULTS: 517 patients completed 1659 YHS questionnaires that could be assigned HD day (510 on Mon/Tue/Sun, 549 on Wed/Thu/Tue, 308 on Fri/Sat/Thu and 269 on non-HD days). With the exception of restless legs and skin changes, there was no statistically significant change in symptom severity or EQ-5D-5L with increasing time from the long interdialytic interval. Patients who responded on non-HD days had higher severity of poor appetite, constipation, difficulty sleeping, poor mobility and depression (approximately 0.2 severity level), and lower EQ-5D-5L (-0.06, CI -0.09 to -0.03) compared to HD days. CONCLUSIONS: Measuring symptom severity and EQ-5D-5L in haemodialysis populations does not need to account for dialysis schedule, but completion either on HD or non-HD days could introduce bias that may impact evaluation of interventions. Researchers should ensure completion of these instruments are standardized on either dialysis or non-dialysis days.

Establishing a Core Outcome Measure for Peritoneal Dialysis-related Peritonitis: A Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology-Peritoneal Dialysis Consensus Workshop Report.

Introduction: Peritoneal dialysis (PD)-related peritonitis is one of the leading causes of discontinuation of PD and is considered a critically important outcome for patients on PD. However, there is no universally accepted method of measuring this outcome in clinical trials. Methods: We convened an online consensus workshop to establish a core outcome measure for PD-related peritonitis in clinical trials. Results: A total of 53 participants, including 18 patients and caregivers, from 12 countries engaged in breakout discussions in this workshop. Transcripts were analyzed thematically. We identified the following 3 themes: (i) feasibility and applicability across diverse settings, which reflected the difficulty with implementing laboratory-based measures in resource-limited environments; (ii) ensuring validity, which included minimizing false positives and considering the specificity of symptoms; and (iii) being meaningful and tangible to patients, which meant that the measure should be easy to interpret, reflect the impact that symptoms have on patients, and promote transparency by standardizing the reporting of peritonitis among dialysis units. Conclusion: A core outcome measure for PD-related peritonitis should include both symptom-based and laboratory-based criteria. Thus, the International Society for Peritoneal Dialysis (ISPD) definition of peritonitis is acceptable. However, there should be consideration of reporting suspected peritonitis in cases where laboratory confirmation is not possible. The measure should include all infections from the time of catheter insertion and capture both the rate of infection and the number of patients who remain peritonitis free. A core outcome measure with these features would increase the impact of clinical trials on the care and decision-making of patients receiving PD.