Variation in performing kidney biopsy amongst nephrologists in the Asia-Pacific region: A multinational survey.

AIM: Kidney biopsy (KB) is the gold standard procedure for diagnosing kidney diseases. Globally, nephrologists are trained to perform KB. However, the past few decades have witnessed a transition where interventional radiologists (IRs) are now preferentially performing the procedure. Our survey-based cross-sectional study aimed to investigate the current trends of KB operators in the Asia-Pacific region (APR) in practicing interventional nephrologists. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The Association of Vascular Access and intervenTionAl Renal Physicians (AVATAR) Foundation from India conducted a multinational online survey among interventional nephrologists from the APR to investigate who does KB, if the nephrology training curriculum includes KB, and whether nephrologists have access to ultrasound. RESULTS: Out of 21 countries from the APR that participated in our survey, 10 countries (47.4%) reported that more than 70% of their nephrologists performed KB, whereas in 11 countries (57.6%), KB was most likely done by an IR. The frequency of nephrologists performing KB ranged from 0% in Afghanistan to 100% in countries such as Pakistan, Singapore, and Thailand. Formal training for KB and access to ultrasound was available to nephrologists in 80% of the responding countries. CONCLUSION: Our study shows that despite the availability of training and access to USG, a significant number of nephrologists are not performing KB in the APR. Similar to the trends observed in Western countries, the observed pattern in the APR could be due to lack of time, less incentive, hospital policy, or interest of nephrologists in other aspects of intervention nephrology.

Global variability of vascular and peritoneal access for chronic dialysis.

AIM: Vascular and peritoneal access are essential elements for sustainability of chronic dialysis programs. Data on availability, patterns of use, funding models, and workforce for vascular and peritoneal accesses for dialysis at a global scale is limited. METHODS: An electronic survey of national leaders of nephrology societies, consumer representative organizations, and policymakers was conducted from July to September 2018. Questions focused on types of accesses used to initiate dialysis, funding for services, and availability of providers for access creation. RESULTS: Data from 167 countries were available. In 31 countries (25% of surveyed countries), >75% of patients initiated haemodialysis (HD) with a temporary catheter. Seven countries (5% of surveyed countries) had >75% of patients initiating HD with arteriovenous fistulas or grafts. Seven countries (5% of surveyed countries) had >75% of their patients starting HD with tunnelled dialysis catheters. 57% of low-income countries (LICs) had >75% of their patients initiating HD with a temporary catheter compared to 5% of high-income countries (HICs). Shortages of surgeons to create vascular access were reported in 91% of LIC compared to 46% in HIC. Approximately 95% of participating countries in the LIC category reported shortages of surgeons for peritoneal dialysis (PD) access compared to 26% in HIC. Public funding was available for central venous catheters, fistula/graft creation, and PD catheter surgery in 57%, 54% and 54% of countries, respectively. CONCLUSION: There is a substantial variation in the availability, funding, workforce, and utilization of vascular and peritoneal access for dialysis across countries regions, with major gaps in low-income countries.

Practice of dialysis access interventional nephrology procedures in the Asia-Pacific region: Getting lay of the land.

AIM: This cross-sectional survey aimed to determine the prevalence of Interventional Nephrology (IN) practice amongst nephrologists in the Asia-Pacific Region (APR), specifically related to dialysis access (DA). METHODS: The Association of VA and intervenTionAl Renal physicians (AVATAR) Foundation from India conducted a multinational online survey amongst nephrologists from the Asia-Pacific to determine the practice of IN in the planning, creation, and management of dialysis access. The treatment modalities, manpower and equipment availability, monthly cost of treatment, specifics of dialysis access interventions, and challenges in the training and practice of IN by nephrologists were included in the survey. RESULTS: Twenty-one countries from the APR participated in the survey. Nephrologists from 18 (85.7%) countries reported performing at least one of the basic dialysis access-related IN procedures, primarily the placement of non-tunnelled central catheters (n-TCC; 71.5%). Only 10 countries (47.6%) reported having an average of <4% of nephrologists performing any of the advanced IN access procedures, the most common being the placement of a peritoneal dialysis (PD) catheter (20%). Lack of formal training (57.14%), time (42.8%), incentive (38%), institutional support (38%), medico-legal protection (28.6%), and prohibitive cost (23.8%) were the main challenges to practice IN. The primary obstacles to implementing the IN training were a lack of funding and skilled personnel. CONCLUSION: The practice of dialysis access-related IN in APR is inadequate, mostly due to a lack of training, backup support, and economic constraints, whereas training in access-related IN is constrained by a lack of a skilled workforce and finances.

Study protocol of a randomized controlled trial of fistula vs. graft arteriovenous vascular access in older adults with end-stage kidney disease on hemodialysis: the AV access trial.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) with hemodialysis requires surgical creation of an arteriovenous (AV) vascular access-fistula (AVF) or graft (AVG)-to avoid (or limit) the use of a central venous catheter (CVC). AVFs have long been considered the first-line vascular access option, with AVGs as second best. Recent studies have suggested that, in older adults, AVGs may be a better strategy than AVFs. Lacking evidence from well-powered randomized clinical trials, integration of these results into clinical decision making is challenging. The main objective of the AV Access Study is to compare, between the two types of AV access, clinical outcomes that are important to patients, physicians, and policy makers. METHODS: This is a prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled trial in adults ≥ 60 years old receiving chronic hemodialysis via a CVC. Eligible participants must have co-existing cardiovascular disease, peripheral arterial disease, and/or diabetes mellitus; and vascular anatomy suitable for placement of either type of AV access. Participants are randomized, in a 1:1 ratio, to a strategy of AVG or AVF creation. An estimated 262 participants will be recruited across 7 healthcare systems, with average follow-up of 2 years. Questionnaires will be administered at baseline and semi-annually. The primary outcome is the rate of CVC-free days per 100 patient-days. The primary safety outcome is the cumulative incidence of vascular access (CVC or AV access)-related severe infections-defined as access infections that lead to hospitalization or death. Secondary outcomes include access-related healthcare costs and patients' experiences with vascular access care between the two treatment groups. DISCUSSION: In the absence of studies using robust and unbiased research methodology to address vascular access care for hemodialysis patients, clinical decisions are limited to inferences from observational studies. The goal of the AV Access Study is to generate evidence to optimize vascular access care, based on objective, age-specific criteria, while incorporating goals of care and patient preference for vascular access type in clinical decision-making. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is being conducted in accordance with the tenets of the Helsinki Declaration, and has been approved by the central institutional review board (IRB) of Wake Forest University Health Sciences (approval number: 00069593) and local IRB of each participating clinical center; and was registered on Nov 27, 2020, at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04646226).

Kidney dysfunction requiring dialysis is a heterogeneous syndrome: we should treat it like one.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Advanced kidney failure requiring dialysis, commonly labeled end-stage kidney disease or chronic kidney disease stage 5D, is a heterogeneous syndrome -a key reason that may explain why: treating advanced kidney dysfunction is challenging and many clinical trials involving patients on dialysis have failed, thus far. Treatment with dialytic techniques - of which maintenance thrice-weekly hemodialysis is most commonly used - is broadly named kidney 'replacement' therapy, a term that casts the perception of a priori abandonment of intrinsic kidney function and subsumes patients into a single, homogeneous group. RECENT FINDINGS: Patients with advanced kidney failure necessitating dialytic therapy may have ongoing endogenous kidney function, and differ in their clinical manifestations and needs. Different terminology, for example, kidney dysfunction requiring dialysis (KDRD) with stages of progressive severity could better capture the range of phenotypes of patients who require kidney 'assistance' therapy. SUMMARY: Classifying patients with KDRD based on objective, quantitative levels of endogenous kidney function, as well as patient-reported symptoms and quality of life, would facilitate hemodialysis prescriptions tailored to level of kidney dysfunction, clinical needs, and personal priorities. Such classification would encourage clinicians to move toward personalized, physiological, and adaptive approach to hemodialysis therapy.

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.

New Devices and Technologies for Hemodialysis Vascular Access: A Review.

In the United States, hemodialysis remains the most common treatment modality for kidney failure, chosen by almost 90% of incident patients. A functioning vascular access is key to providing adequate hemodialysis therapy. Recently, major innovations in devices and technology for hemodialysis vascular access care have rapidly changed the landscape. Novel endovascular devices for creation of arteriovenous fistulas may offer a solution to the barriers encountered in initiating maintenance hemodialysis with a permanent vascular access rather than a central venous catheter (CVC). Furthermore, in the prevalent hemodialysis population, the minimally invasive endovascular arteriovenous fistula procedure should help improve long wait times for vascular access creation, which remains a major barrier to reducing CVC dependence. Bioengineered grafts are being developed and may offer another option to polytetrafluoroethylene grafts. Early studies with these biocompatible grafts are promising, as additional studies continue to evaluate their clinical outcomes in comparison to cryopreserved or synthetic options. Prolonging the vascular access patency with appropriate use of devices such as drug-coated balloons and stent grafts may complement the novel techniques of creating arteriovenous access. Finally, innovative solutions to treat stenosed and occluded thoracic central veins can provide an approach to creating a vascular access and allow patients with exhausted vasculature to remain on hemodialysis. The robust developments in hemodialysis vascular access are likely to change practice patterns in the near future.

Peritoneal dialysis: Status report in South and South East Asia.

BACKGROUND: Peritoneal dialysis (PD) as a modality of kidney replacement therapy (KRT) is largely underutilized globally. We analyzed PD utilization, impact of economic status, projected growth and impact of state policy(s) on PD growth in South Asia and Southeast Asia (SA&SEA) region. METHODS: The National Nephrology Societies of the region responded to a questionnaire on KRT practices. The responses were based on the latest registry data, acceptable community-based studies and societal perceptions. The representative countries were divided into high income and higher-middle income (HI & HMI) and low income and lower-middle income (LI & LMI) groups. RESULTS: Data provided by 15 countries showed almost similar percentage of GDP as health expenditure (4%-7%). But there was a significant difference in per capita income (HI & HMI -US$ 28 129 vs. LI & LMI - US$ 1710.2) between the groups. Even after having no significant difference in monthly cost of haemodialysis (HD) and PD in LI & LMI countries, they have poorer PD utilization as compared to HI & HMI countries (3.4% vs. 10.1%); the reason being lack of formal training/incentives and time constraints for the nephrologist while lack of reimbursement and poor general awareness of modalities has been a snag for the patients. The region expects ≥10% PD growth in the near future. Hong Kong and Thailand with 'PD first' policy have the highest PD utilization. CONCLUSION: Important deterrents to PD underutilization were lack of PD centric policies, lackadaisical patient/physician's attitude, lack of structured patient awareness programs, formal training programs and affordability.

Aetiology, practice patterns and burden of end-stage kidney disease in South Asia and South-East Asia: A questionnaire-based survey.

AIM: There is paucity of data on the epidemiology of end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) from South Asia and South-East Asia. The objective of this study was to assess the aetiology, practice patterns and disease burden and growth of ESKD in the region comparing the economies. METHODS: The national nephrology societies of the region; responded to the questionnaire; based on latest registries, acceptable community-based studies and society perceptions. The countries in the region were classified into Group 1 (High|higher-middle-income) and Group 2 (lower|lowermiddle income). Student t-test, Mann-Whitney U test and Fisher's exact test were used for comparison. RESULTS: Fifteen countries provided the data. The average incidence of ESKD was estimated at 226.7 per million population (pmp), (Group 1 vs. Group 2, 305.8 vs. 167.8 pmp) and average prevalence at 940.8 pmp (Group 1 vs. Group 2, 1306 vs. 321 pmp). Group 1 countries had a higher incidence and prevalence of ESKD. Diabetes, hypertension and chronic glomerulonephritis were most common causes. The mean age in Group 2 was lower by a decade (Group 1 vs. Group 2-59.45 vs 47.7 years). CONCLUSION: Haemodialysis was the most common kidney replacement therapy in both groups and conservative management of ESKD was the second commonest available treatment option within Group 2. The disease burden was expected to grow >20% in 50% of Group 1 countries and 78% of Group 2 countries along with the parallel growth in haemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis.

Post-traumatic thrombotic microangiopathy: What trauma surgeons need to know?

Thrombotic microangiopathy (TMA) is characterized by systemic microvascular thrombosis, target organ injury, anemia and thrombocytopenia. Thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura, atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome and Shiga toxin E-coli-related hemolytic uremic syndrome are the three common forms of TMAs. Traditionally, TMA is encountered during pregnancy/postpartum period, malignant hypertension, systemic infections, malignancies, autoimmune disorders, etc. Recently, the patients presenting with trauma have been reported to suffer from TMA. TMA carries a high morbidity and mortality, and demands a prompt recognition and early intervention to limit the target organ injury. Because trauma surgeons are the first line of defense for patients presenting with trauma, the prompt recognition of TMA for these experts is critically important. Early treatment of post-traumatic TMA can help improve the patient outcomes, if the diagnosis is made early. The treatment of TMA is also different from acute blood loss anemia namely in that plasmapheresis is recommended rather than platelet transfusion. This article familiarizes trauma surgeons with TMA encountered in the context of trauma. Besides, it provides a simplified approach to establishing the diagnosis of TMA. Because trauma patients can require multiple transfusions, the development of disseminated intravascular coagulation must be considered. Therefore, the article also provides different features of disseminated intravascular coagulation and TMA. Finally, the article suggests practical points that can be readily applied to the management of these patients.

Strategic plan for integrated care of patients with kidney failure.

There is a huge gap between the number of patients worldwide requiring versus those actually receiving safe, sustainable, and equitable care for kidney failure. To address this, the International Society of Nephrology coordinated the development of a Strategic Plan for Integrated Care of Patients with Kidney Failure. Implementation of the plan will require engagement of the whole kidney community over the next 5-10 years.

KDOQI Clinical Practice Guideline for Vascular Access: 2019 Update.

The National Kidney Foundation's Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (KDOQI) has provided evidence-based guidelines for hemodialysis vascular access since 1996. Since the last update in 2006, there has been a great accumulation of new evidence and sophistication in the guidelines process. The 2019 update to the KDOQI Clinical Practice Guideline for Vascular Access is a comprehensive document intended to assist multidisciplinary practitioners care for chronic kidney disease patients and their vascular access. New topics include the end-stage kidney disease "Life-Plan" and related concepts, guidance on vascular access choice, new targets for arteriovenous access (fistulas and grafts) and central venous catheters, management of specific complications, and renewed approaches to some older topics. Appraisal of the quality of the evidence was independently conducted by using a Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, and interpretation and application followed the GRADE Evidence to Decision frameworks. As applicable, each guideline statement is accompanied by rationale/background information, a detailed justification, monitoring and evaluation guidance, implementation considerations, special discussions, and recommendations for future research.

Identifying critically important vascular access outcomes for trials in haemodialysis: an international survey with patients, caregivers and health professionals.

BACKGROUND: Vascular access outcomes reported across haemodialysis (HD) trials are numerous, heterogeneous and not always relevant to patients and clinicians. This study aimed to identify critically important vascular access outcomes. METHOD: Outcomes derived from a systematic review, multi-disciplinary expert panel and patient input were included in a multilanguage online survey. Participants rated the absolute importance of outcomes using a 9-point Likert scale (7-9 being critically important). The relative importance was determined by a best-worst scale using multinomial logistic regression. Open text responses were analysed thematically. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 873 participants [224 (26%) patients/caregivers and 649 (74%) health professionals] from 58 countries. Vascular access function was considered the most important outcome (mean score 7.8 for patients and caregivers/8.5 for health professionals, with 85%/95% rating it critically important, and top ranked on best-worst scale), followed by infection (mean 7.4/8.2, 79%/92% rating it critically important, second rank on best-worst scale). Health professionals rated all outcomes of equal or higher importance than patients/caregivers, except for aneurysms. We identified six themes: necessity for HD, applicability across vascular access types, frequency and severity of debilitation, minimizing the risk of hospitalization and death, optimizing technical competence and adherence to best practice and direct impact on appearance and lifestyle. CONCLUSIONS: Vascular access function was the most critically important outcome among patients/caregivers and health professionals. Consistent reporting of this outcome across trials in HD will strengthen their value in supporting vascular access practice and shared decision making in patients requiring HD.

Correction to: Serum magnesium, mortality and disease progression in chronic kidney disease.

Following publication of the original article [1], we have been notified that the name of one author was spelled incorrectly as Georges N. Na khoul, when the correct spelling is Georges N. Nakhoul.

Serum magnesium, mortality and disease progression in chronic kidney disease.

INTRODUCTION: Magnesium disorders are commonly encountered in chronic kidney disease (CKD) and are typically a consequence of decreased kidney function or frequently prescribed medications such as diuretics and proton pump inhibitors. While hypomagnesemia has been linked with increased mortality, the association between elevated magnesium levels and mortality is not clearly defined. Additionally, associations between magnesium disorders, type of death, and CKD progression have not been reported. Therefore, we studied the associations between magnesium levels, CKD progression, mortality, and cause specific deaths in patients with CKD. METHODS: Using the Cleveland Clinic CKD registry, we identified 10,568 patients with estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR) between 15 and 59 ml/min/1.73 m2 in this range for a minimum of 3 months with a measured magnesium level. We categorized subjects into 3 groups based on these magnesium levels (≤ 1.7, 1.7-2.6 and > 2.6 mg/dl) and applied cox regression modeling and competing risk models to identify associations with overall and cause-specific mortality. We also evaluated the association between magnesium level and slope of eGFR using mixed models. RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 3.7 years, 4656 (44%) patients died. After adjusting for relevant covariates, a magnesium level < 1.7 mg/dl (vs. 1.7-2.6 mg/dl) was associated with higher overall mortality (HR = 1.14, 95% CI: 1.04, 1.24), and with higher sub-distribution hazards for non-cardiovascular non-malignancy mortality (HR = 1.29, 95% CI: 1.12, 1.49). Magnesium levels > 2.6 mg/dl (vs. 1.7-2.6 mg/dl) was associated with a higher risk of all-cause death only (HR = 1.23, 95% CI: 1.03, 1.48). We found similar results when evaluating magnesium as a continuous measure. There were no significant differences in the slope of eGFR across all three magnesium groups (p = 0.10). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with CKD stage 3 and 4, hypomagnesemia was associated with higher all-cause and non-cardiovascular non-malignancy mortality. Hypermagnesemia was associated with higher all-cause mortality. Neither hypo nor hypermagnesemia were associated with an increased risk of CKD progression.

Innovations in vascular access for hemodialysis.

Worldwide, hemodialysis remains the prevalent dialysis modality for more than 2 million patients who require well-functioning vascular access for this procedure. Creation of an arteriovenous fistula for long-term hemodialysis was the first innovation since the Scribner shunt and was followed by the development of an arteriovenous graft and catheter. Bioengineered vessels were developed during the last century, but this field has been energized by recent technology relating to the creation of human vessels. Novel endovascular techniques for creating an arteriovenous fistula may resolve some of the logistical issues involved in obtaining a timely arteriovenous fistula. Treatment of access stenosis, infection, and thrombosis has remained suboptimal, and innovative technologies are evolving. Many new approaches are now targeting the biological and mechanical aspects of vascular access, such as creation and maturation of arterial and venous anastomoses, development of a biological conduit for outflow, and negotiating the problems of central vein stenosis. Importantly, processes of access care that have long focused on arteriovenous fistulas are now recognizing the new paradigm, providing a complementary niche to arteriovenous grafts and dialysis catheters in the algorithm for individualized access placement. Cumulatively, to the credit of the multidisciplinary team approach, the long overdue focus on the very existential issue of vascular access for hemodialysis is being approached with newfound evidence-based enthusiasm as the vexing challenges related to regulations and reimbursement in hemodialysis persist. Patient choice and experience, often missed and ignored in the challenging management of an end-stage organ failure, need to stay central as we focus on patient-centered care of vascular access.

Best Vascular Access in the Elderly: Time for Innovation?

BACKGROUND: Conflicting data continue to surround the optimal dialysis access for the elderly. Many propose that catheters are the best option for this population; others emphasize the creation of an arteriovenous fistula. SUMMARY: While an arteriovenous access is the best available access, it has a high early failure rate, particularly in the elderly. However, significant differences exist in forearm (men ≥65 years ~70%; women ≥65 years ~80%) versus upper arm (men ≥65 years ~40%; women ≥65 years ~38%) fistula failure rates in the elderly, with upper arm having much lower failure rates. Two percutaneous innovative techniques that successfully establish fistulas at the upper arm using proximal radial/ulnar -artery as the inflow have been recently introduced. These procedures have been successfully performed in the elderly. Importantly, these techniques bypass the open surgical exploration and as such avoid the surgical manipulation of the juxta-anastomotic region (a common cause for the development of juxta-anastomotic stenosis and early fistula failure). Key Message: This article discusses the arteriovenous fistula creation in the elderly, highlights the factors necessary for successful fistula creation, and describes the 2 innovative techniques that can be used to provide a robust platform for successful fistula creation in this population.

Vascular access of last resort.

Exhausted vasculature is not uncommon in patients receiving long-term hemodialysis treatment. Certain patients exhaust their peripheral veins and do not retain the venous capital necessary for fistula creation. Others suffer from severe peripheral arterial disease and despite the presence of adequate venous capital are not able to receive an arteriovenous access successfully. Most importantly, in the case of occluded central veins, the creation of an arteriovenous access in the arms or thighs would be futile, even if peripheral veins and/or arteries were available. Because renal transplant is not readily available, such patients virtually face death in the absence of dialysis therapy. Hence, it is critically important that vascular access options be available to successfully receive renal replacement therapy. This article describes accesses of last resort and provides information vital to nephrologists for discussion with their patients and to surgeons in choosing an optimal option.

Report of the Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology-Hemodialysis (SONG-HD) Consensus Workshop on Establishing a Core Outcome Measure for Hemodialysis Vascular Access.

Vascular access outcomes in hemodialysis are critically important for patients and clinicians, but frequently are neither patient relevant nor measured consistently in randomized trials. A Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology-Hemodialysis (SONG-HD) consensus workshop was convened to discuss the development of a core outcome measure for vascular access. 13 patients/caregivers and 46 professionals (clinicians, policy makers, industry representatives, and researchers) attended. Participants advocated for vascular access function to be a core outcome based on the broad applicability of function regardless of access type, involvement of a multidisciplinary team in achieving a functioning access, and the impact of access function on quality of life, survival, and other access-related outcomes. A core outcome measure for vascular access required demonstrable feasibility for implementation across different clinical and trial settings. Participants advocated for a practical and flexible outcome measure with a simple actionable definition. Integrating patients' values and preferences was warranted to enhance the relevance of the measure. Proposed outcome measures for function included "uninterrupted use of the access without the need for interventions" and "ability to receive prescribed dialysis," but not "access blood flow," which was deemed too expensive and unreliable. These recommendations will inform the definition and implementation of a core outcome measure for vascular access function in hemodialysis trials.