Use of Analog and Human Insulin in a European Hemodialysis Cohort With Type 2 Diabetes: Associations With Mortality, Hospitalization, MACE, and Hypoglycemia.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Poor glycemic control may contribute to the high mortality rate in patients with type 2 diabetes receiving hemodialysis. Insulin type may influence glycemic control, and its choice may be an opportunity to improve outcomes. This study assessed whether treatment with analog insulin compared with human insulin is associated with different outcomes in people with type 2 diabetes and kidney failure receiving hemodialysis. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: People in the Analyzing Data, Recognizing Excellence and Optimizing Outcomes (AROii) study with kidney failure commencing hemodialysis and type 2 diabetes being treated with insulin within 288 dialysis facilities between 2007 and 2009 across 7 European countries. Study participants were followed for 3 years. People with type 1 diabetes were excluded using an established administrative data algorithm. EXPOSURE: Treatment with an insulin analog or human insulin. OUTCOME: All-cause mortality, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), all-cause hospitalization, and confirmed hypoglycemia (blood glucose<3.0mmol/L sampled during hemodialysis). ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Inverse probability weighted Cox proportional hazards models to estimate hazard ratios for analog insulin compared with human insulin. RESULTS: There were 713 insulin analog and 733 human insulin users. Significant variation in insulin type by country was observed. Comparing analog with human insulin at 3 years, the percentage of patients experiencing end points and adjusted hazard ratios (AHR) were 22.0% versus 31.4% (AHR, 0.808 [95% CI, 0.66-0.99], P=0.04) for all-cause mortality, 26.8% versus 35.9% (AHR, 0.817 [95% CI, 0.68-0.98], P=0.03) for MACE, and 58.2% versus 75.0% (AHR, 0.757 [95% CI, 0.67-0.86], P<0.001) for hospitalization. Hypoglycemia was comparable between insulin types at 14.1% versus 15.0% (AHR, 1.169 [95% CI, 0.80-1.72], P=0.4). Consistent strength and direction of the associations were observed across sensitivity analyses. LIMITATIONS: Residual confounding, lack of more detailed glycemia data. CONCLUSIONS: In this large multinational cohort of people with type 2 diabetes and kidney failure receiving maintenance hemodialysis, treatment with analog insulins was associated with better clinical outcomes when compared with human insulin. PLAIN-LANGUAGE SUMMARY: People with diabetes who are receiving dialysis for kidney failure are at high risk of cardiovascular disease and death. This study uses information from 1,446 people with kidney failure from 7 European countries who are receiving dialysis, have type 2 diabetes, and are prescribed either insulin identical to that made in the body (human insulin) or insulins with engineered extra features (insulin analog). After 3 years, fewer participants receiving analog insulins had died, had been admitted to the hospital, or had a cardiovascular event (heart attack, stroke, heart failure, or peripheral vascular disease). These findings suggest that analog insulins should be further explored as a treatment leading to better outcomes for people with diabetes on dialysis.

Identifying individuals at risk of needing CKD associated medications in a European kidney disease cohort.

BACKGROUND: The consequences of chronic kidney disease (CKD) can be addressed with a range of pharmacotherapies primarily prescribed by nephrologists. More accurate information regarding future CKD-related pharmacotherapy requirements could guide clinical decisions including follow-up frequency. METHODS: Following assignment to derivation and validation groups (2,1), variables predicting individually future use of vitamin D receptor agonists (VDRA), phosphate binders, erythropoiesis stimulating agents (ESAs) and iron were identified using logistic regression in a prospective cohort study containing demography, comorbidity, hospitalization, laboratory, and mortality data in patients with CKD stage G4/G5 across six European countries. Discriminative ability was measured using C-statistics, and predicted probability of medication use used to inform follow-up frequency. RESULTS: A total of 2196 patients were included in the analysis. During a median follow-up of 735 days 648 initiated hemodialysis and 1548 did not. Combinations of age, diabetes status and iPTH, calcium, hemoglobin and serum albumin levels predicted the use of ESA, iron, phosphate binder or VDRA, with C-statistics of 0.70, 0.64, 0.73 and 0.63 in derivation cohorts respectively. Model performance in validation cohorts were similar. Sixteen percent of patients were predicted to have a likelihood of receiving any of these medications of less than 20%. CONCLUSIONS: In a multi-country CKD cohort, prediction of ESA and phosphate binder use over a two-year period can be made based on patient characteristics with the potential to reduce frequency of follow-up in individuals with low risk for requiring these medications.

Relationship Between Standardized Measures of Chronic Kidney Disease-associated Pruritus Intensity and Health-related Quality of Life Measured with the EQ-5D Questionnaire: A Mapping Study.

Chronic kidney disease-associated pruritus is linked with decreased health-related quality of life assessed using disease-specific instruments. The extent to which worsening pruritus reduces generic quality of life assessed using the EQ-5D instrument is unknown. Prevalent kidney failure patients receiving in-centre haemodialysis from 5 centres completed the EQ-5D-5L quality of life measure, worst Itching Intensity Numerical Rating Scale and 5-D itch pruritus instruments. Latent class models were used to identify clusters of patients with similarly affected body parts, and mixture models were used to map the pruritus measures to the EQ-5D. Data on 487 respondents were obtained. Latent class analysis identified 3 groups of patients who had progressively worsening severity and an increasing number of body parts affected. Although the worst itching intensity numerical rating scale and 5-D itch instruments correlated with each other, only the latter had a strong relationship with EQ-5D. When controlling for age, sex, diabetes and years receiving dialysis, the meanpredicted EQ-5D utility (1: perfect health, 0: dead) decreased progressively from 0.69 to 0.41. These findings suggest that pruritus instruments that include domains capturing how the individual is physically, mentally and socially affected by their pruritus, in addition to severity, more closely approximate the EQ-5D generic quality of life measure.

Treatment inequity in antiplatelet therapy for ischaemic heart disease in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease: releasing the evidence vacuum.

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a global health problem and an independent risk factor for cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Despite evidence-based therapies significantly improving cardiovascular mortality outcomes in the general population and those with non-dialysis-dependent CKD, this risk reduction has not translated to patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD). Absent from all major antiplatelet trials, this has led to insufficient safety data for P2Y12 inhibitor prescriptions and treatment inequity in this subpopulation. This review article presents an overview of the progression of research in understanding antiplatelet therapy for ischaemic heart disease in patients with advanced CKD (defined as eGFR <30 mL/min/1.73 m2). Beyond trial recruitment strategies, new approaches should focus on registry documentation by CKD stage, risk stratification with biomarkers associated with inflammation and haemorrhage and building a knowledge base on optimal duration of dual and single antiplatelet therapies.

What is the context? Patients with kidney disease are more likely to experience a heart attack than those without.Those with advanced kidney disease have a higher risk of death following a heart attack.Over the past two decades, advances in treatment following a heart attack have reduced the risk of death, however this has not translated to those with advanced kidney disease.Progression of kidney disease influences antiplatelet (e.g. clopidogrel) treatment efficacy.What is new?This contemporary review analyses registry and trial data to highlight some of the issues surrounding treatment inequity in patients with advanced kidney disease.This article describes potential mechanisms by which progression of kidney disease can influence clotting, bleeding and antiplatelet treatments.What is the impact?Further research into antiplatelet therapy for patients with advanced kidney disease is required.Registry and trial data can improve upon classification of kidney disease for future research.Future trials in antiplatelet therapy for advanced kidney disease are anticipated.

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.

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.

A multicenter feasibility randomized controlled trial to assess the impact of incremental versus conventional initiation of hemodialysis on residual kidney function.

Twice-weekly hemodialysis, as part of incremental initiation, has reported benefits including preservation of residual kidney function (RKF). To explore this, we initiated a randomized controlled feasibility trial examining 55 incident hemodialysis patients with urea clearance of 3 ml/min/1.73 m2 or more across four centers in the United Kingdom randomized to standard or incremental schedules for 12 months. Incremental hemodialysis involved twice-weekly sessions, upwardly adjusting hemodialysis dose as RKF was lost, maintaining total (Dialysis+Renal) Std Kt/V above 2. Standard hemodialysis was thrice weekly for 3.5-4 hours, minimum Dialysis Std Kt/V of 2. Primary outcomes were feasibility parameters and effect size of group differences in rate of loss of RKF at six months. Health care cost impact and patient-reported outcomes were explored. Around one-third of patients met eligibility criteria. Half agreed to randomization; 26 received standard hemodialysis and 29 incremental. At 12 months, 21 incremental patients remained in the study vs 12 in the standard arm with no group differences in the urea clearance slope. Ninety-two percent of incremental and 75% of standard arm patients had a urea clearance of 2 ml/min/1.73 m2 or more at six months. Serious adverse events were less frequent in incremental patients (Incidence Rate Ratio 0.47, confidence interval 0.27-0.81). Serum bicarbonate was significantly lower in incremental patients indicating supplementation may be required. There were three deaths in each arm. Blood pressure, extracellular fluid and patient-reported outcomes were similar. There was no signal of benefit of incremental hemodialysis in terms of protection of RKF or Quality of Life score. Median incremental hemodialysis costs were significantly lower compared to standard hemodialysis. Thus, incremental hemodialysis appears safe and cost-saving in incident patients with adequate RKF, justifying a definitive trial.

Patient Preferences for Longer or More Frequent In-Center Hemodialysis Regimens: A Multicenter Discrete Choice Study.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Longer and more frequent hemodialysis sessions are associated with both benefits and harms. However, their relative importance to patients and how they influence acceptability for patients have not been quantified. STUDY DESIGN: Discrete-choice experiment in which a scenario followed by 12 treatment choice sets were presented to patients in conjunction with varying information about the clinical impact of the treatments offered. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Patients with kidney failure treated with maintenance dialysis for≥1 year in 5 UK kidney centers. PREDICTORS: Length and frequency of hemodialysis sessions and their prior reported associations with survival, quality of life, need for fluid restriction, hospitalization, and vascular access complications. OUTCOME: Selection of longer (4.5 hours) or more frequent (4 sessions per week) hemodialysis regimens versus remaining on 3 sessions per week with session lengths of 4 hours. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Multinomial mixed effects logistic regression estimating the relative influence of different levels of the predictors on the selection of longer and more frequent dialysis, controlling for patient demographic characteristics. RESULTS: Among 183 prevalent in-center hemodialysis patients (mean age of 63.7 years, mean dialysis vintage of 4.7 years), 38.3% (70 of 183) always chose to remain on regimens of 3 sessions per week with session duration of 4 hours. Depicted associations of increasing survival and quality of life, reduced need for fluid restriction, and avoiding additional access complications were all significantly associated with choosing longer or more frequent treatment regimens. Younger age, fatigue, previous experience of vascular access complications, absence of heart failure, and shorter travel time to dialysis centers were associated with preference for 4 sessions per week. Patients expressed willingness to trade up to 2 years of life to avoid regimens of 4 sessions per week or access complications. After applying estimated treatment benefits and harms from existing literature, the fully adjusted model revealed that 27.1% would choose longer regimens delivered 3 times per week and 34.3% would choose 4 hours 4 times per week. Analogous estimates for younger fatigued patients living near their unit were 23.5% and 62.5%, respectively. LIMITATIONS: Estimates were based on stated preferences rather than observed behaviors. Predicted acceptance of regimens was derived from data on treatment benefits and harms largely sourced from observational studies. CONCLUSIONS: Predicted acceptance of longer and more frequent hemodialysis regimens substantially exceeds their use in current clinical practice. These findings underscore the need for robust data on clinical effectiveness of these more intensive regimens and more extensive consideration of patient choice in the selection of dialysis regimens.

Measuring quality of life in trials including patients on haemodialysis: methodological issues surrounding the use of the Kidney Disease Quality of Life Questionnaire.

BACKGROUND: Haemodialysis (HD) treatment causes a significant decrease in quality of life (QoL). When enrolled in a clinical trial, some patients are lost prior to follow-up because they die or they receive a kidney transplant. It is unclear how these patients are dealt with in the analysis of QoL data. There are questions surrounding the consistency of how QoL measures are used, reported and analysed. METHODS: A systematic search of electronic databases for trials measuring QoL in HD patients using any variation of the Kidney Disease Quality of Life (KDQoL) Questionnaire was conducted. The review was conducted in Covidence version 2. Quantitative analysis was conducted in Stata version 16. RESULTS: We included 61 trials in the review, of which 82% reported dropouts. The methods to account for missing data due to dropouts include imputation (7%) and complete case analysis (72%). Few trials (7%) conducted a sensitivity analysis to assess the impact of missing data on the study results. Single imputation techniques were used, but are only valid under strong assumptions regarding the type and pattern of missingness. There was inconsistency in the reporting of the KDQoL, with many articles (70%) amending the validated questionnaires or reporting only statistically significant results. CONCLUSIONS: Missing data are not dealt with according to the missing data mechanism, which may lead to biased results. Inconsistency in the use of patient-reported outcome measures raises questions about the validity of these trials. Methodological issues in nephrology trials could be a contributing factor to why there are limited effective interventions to improve QoL in this patient group. PROSPERO REGISTRATION: CRD42020223869.

Centre variation in mortality following post-hospitalization acute kidney injury: analysis of a large national cohort.

BACKGROUND: Routine monitoring of outcomes for patients with acute kidney injury (AKI) is important to drive ongoing quality improvement in patient care. In this study we describe the development of a case mix-adjusted 30-day mortality indicator for patients with post-hospitalization AKI (PH-AKI) across England to facilitate identification of any unwarranted centre variation in outcomes. METHODS: We utilized a routinely collected national dataset of biochemically detected AKI cases linked with national hospitals administrative and mortality data. A total of 250 504 PH-AKI episodes were studied across 103 National Health Service hospital trusts between January 2017 and December 2018. Standardized mortality ratios (SMRs) were calculated for each trust using logistic regression, adjusting for age, sex, primary diagnosis, comorbidity score, AKI severity, month of AKI and admission method. RESULTS: The mean 30-day mortality rate was high, at 28.6%. SMRs for 23/103 trusts were classed as outliers, 12 above and 11 below the 95% confidence limits. Patients with PH-AKI had mortality rates >5 times higher than the overall hospitalized population in 90/136 diagnosis groups and >10 times higher in 60/136 groups. Presentation at trusts with a co-located specialist nephrology service was associated with a lower mortality risk, as was South Asian or Black ethnicity. Deprivation, however, was associated with higher mortality. CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest multicentre analysis of mortality for patients with biochemically ascertained PH-AKI to date, demonstrating once again the considerable risk associated with developing even mild elevations in serum creatinine. Mortality rates varied considerably across centres and those identified as outliers will now need to carefully interrogate local care pathways to understand and address the reasons for this, with national policy required to tackle the identified health disparities.

Propensity Score and Instrumental Variable Techniques in Observational Transplantation Studies: An Overview and Worked Example Relating to Pre-Transplant Cardiac Screening.

Inferring causality from observational studies is difficult due to inherent differences in patient characteristics between treated and untreated groups. The randomised controlled trial is the gold standard study design as the random allocation of individuals to treatment and control arms should result in an equal distribution of known and unknown prognostic factors at baseline. However, it is not always ethically or practically possible to perform such a study in the field of transplantation. Propensity score and instrumental variable techniques have theoretical advantages over conventional multivariable regression methods and are increasingly being used within observational studies to reduce the risk of confounding bias. An understanding of these techniques is required to critically appraise the literature. We provide an overview of propensity score and instrumental variable techniques for transplant clinicians, describing their principles, assumptions, strengths, and weaknesses. We discuss the different patient populations included in analyses and how to interpret results. We illustrate these points using data from the Access to Transplant and Transplant Outcome Measures study examining the association between pre-transplant cardiac screening in kidney transplant recipients and post-transplant cardiac events.

A propensity score-matched analysis indicates screening for asymptomatic coronary artery disease does not predict cardiac events in kidney transplant recipients.

Screening for asymptomatic coronary artery disease prior to kidney transplantation aims to reduce peri- and post-operative cardiac events. It is uncertain if this is achieved. Here, we investigated whether pre-transplant screening with a stress test or coronary angiogram associated with any difference in major adverse cardiac events (MACE) up to five years post-transplantation. We examined a national prospective cohort recruited to the Access to Transplant and Transplant Outcome Measures study who received a kidney transplant between 2011-2017, and linked patient demographics and details of cardiac screening investigations to outcome data extracted from the Hospital Episode Statistics dataset and United Kingdom Renal Registry. Propensity score matched groups were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox survival analyses. Overall, 2572 individuals were transplanted in 18 centers; 51% underwent screening and the proportion undergoing screening by center ranged from 5-100%. The incidence of MACE at 90 days, one and five years was 0.9%, 2.1% and 9.4% respectively. After propensity score matching based on the presence or absence of screening, 1760 individuals were examined (880 each in screened and unscreened groups). There was no statistically significant association between screening and MACE at 90 days (hazard ratio 0.80, 95% Confidence Interval 0.31-2.05), one year (1.12, 0.51-2.47) or five years (1.31, 0.86-1.99). Age, male sex and history of ischemic heart disease were associated with MACE. Thus, there is no association between screening for asymptomatic coronary artery disease and MACE up to five years post-transplant. Practices involving unselected screening of transplant recipients should be reviewed.

Renal albumin excretion in healthy young adults and its association with mortality risk in the US population.

BACKGROUND: Current classification systems do not specify a healthy normal range for urinary albumin excretion. Occult microvascular disease induced by a Western lifestyle may mean that normal values for apparently healthy adults exceed optimal levels defined by mortality risk. METHODS: Using a national population sample [the US Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES III) cohort; n = 11 887], the distributions of albumin:creatinine ratio (ACR) and fractional excretion of albumin (FEalb) were studied in healthy young adults [ages 20-40 years, without cardiovascular disease (CVD) or risk factors]. The threshold for mortality risk prediction in the whole adult population sample was then studied across ACR/FEalb categories corresponding to quartiles for healthy young adults. RESULTS: ACR quartiles for healthy young adults were 2.7, 4.2 and 5.9 mg/g in men and 3.8, 6.2 and 9.8 mg/g in women. Increases in ACR below the medians for healthy young adults were not associated with increased mortality or with cardiovascular risk factors when tested in the whole adult population. Increases above this threshold were independently associated with mortality risk [hazard ratio 1.2 (95% confidence interval 1.1-1.4) and 1.8 (1.6-2.0) for Quartiles 3 and 4, respectively]. The prevalence of an optimal ACR below the mortality risk threshold was <25% in the setting of diabetes, hypertension, age >70 years or CVD. Using FEalb to define quartiles of albuminuria gave the same findings. CONCLUSION: Based on mortality risk in the whole adult population, there is an optimal range of albumin excretion (ACR < 6 mg/g and 4 mg/g for women and men, respectively). However, only half of even apparently healthy young US adults fall within this range.

Hospitalization and mortality following non-attendance for hemodialysis according to dialysis day of the week: a European cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The extension of the interdialytic interval due to due to dialysis session non-attendance varies according to which session of the week the patient misses. The impact of this on subsequent hospitalization and mortality is unknown. METHODS: The ARO cohort study prospectively collected data from hemodialysis patients across 15 European countries on demography, comorbidity, laboratory, hospitalisation, mortality and individual hemodialysis sessions from 2007 to 2014. Event rates for death and hospitalisation according to dialysis day of the week were calculated for patients who attended the three previous scheduled hemodialysis sessions, who then on the next scheduled dialysis day either attended or did not attend. The hazard ratio for these events following non-attendance for the first compared to the second dialysis session of the week was estimated using Cox proportional hazards model adjusted for patient demographics. RESULTS: 3.8 million hemodialysis sessions in 9397 patients were analysed. The non-attendance rates for Monday/Wednesday/Friday sessions were 0.8, 0.9% & 1.4% respectively, and for Tuesday/Thursday/Saturday sessions were 0.6, 1.0% & 1.2% respectively. Compared to those who attended, for the 48-72 h between non-attendance and the next scheduled haemodialysis session, mortality significantly increased from 4.86 to 51.9/100 pt-yrs and hospitalisation increased from 0.58 to 2.1/yr. As time from the two-day break increased, the risk associated with non-attendance lessened: compared to missing the second hemodialysis session, missing the first session had a hazard ratio for mortality of 2.04 (95% CI 1.27-3.29), and for hospitalisation 1.78 (95% CI 1.29-2.47). In patients who attended their scheduled dialysis session and the three preceding, after the two-day break there were absolute increases in mortality (8.3 vs. 4.9/100 pt-yrs) and hospitalisation (1.0 vs. 0.6/yr for the rest of the week) comparable to previous studies. CONCLUSIONS: In addition to hospitalisation and mortality increases seen after the two-day break, additional harm may be manifested in the greater increases in mortality and hospitalisation observed after non-attendance for the first hemodialysis session after the two-day break compared to missing other sessions.

The association between longer haemodialysis treatment times and hospitalization and mortality after the two-day break in individuals receiving three times a week haemodialysis.

BACKGROUND: On the first haemodialysis (HD) day after the 2-day break in three times a week (3×W) in-centre HD, mortality and hospitalization are higher. If longer HD sessions prescribed 3×W is associated with a reduction in these events is unknown. METHODS: HD session length in 19 557 prevalent European in-centre 3×W HD patients participating in the Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (1998-2011) were categorized into <200, 200-225, 226-250 or >250 min. Standardized event rates on the first (HD1) versus the second (HD2) HD day after the 2-day break, with supporting Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for patient and dialysis characteristics, were generated for all-cause mortality, all-cause hospitalization, out-of-hospital death and fluid overload hospitalization. RESULTS: By comparing HD1 with HD2, increased rates of all endpoints were observed (all P < 0.002). As HD session lengthened across the four groups, all-cause mortality per 100 patient-years on the HD1 (23.0, 20.4, 16.4 and 14.6) and HD2 (26.1, 13.3, 13.4 and 12.1) reduced. Similar improvements were observed for out-of-hospital death but were less marked for hospitalization endpoints. However, even patients dialysing >250 min were at significantly greater risk on HD1 when compared with their HD2 for out-of-hospital death [hazard ratio (HR) = 2.1, 95% CI 1.0-4.3], all-cause hospitalization (HR = 1.3, 95% CI 1.2-1.4) and fluid overload hospitalization (HR = 3.2, 95% CI 1.8-6.0). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the association between reduced mortality across all dialysis days in patients performing longer sessions, elevated risk on the first dialysis day relative to the second persists even in patients dialysing 4.5 h 3×W.

The impact of smoking on mortality after acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention: a retrospective cohort outcome study at 3 years.

The "smoker's paradox", where smokers have improved survival post-myocardial infarction, was predominantly observed in the thrombolytic era. However, evidence for the smoker's paradox in the current era of PCI therapy is both limited and inconsistent. We aimed to examine the effect of smoking status on survival in unselected ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients managed by primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Data were collected for all patients with acute STEMI undergoing primary PCI at The South Yorkshire Cardiothoracic Centre, UK over a 5-year period between 2009 and 2014. Differences in survival by smoking status were assessed before and after adjustment for differences in baseline variables using a Kaplan-Meier curve and a Cox regression analysis, respectively. A total of 3133 STEMI patients were included in the study. After adjustment for differences in baseline variables, smoking was associated with a significantly increased mortality (hazard ratio 1.35 (95% CI 1.04-1.74)) compared to never smokers after 3 years. The risk for ex-smokers (hazard ratio 0.99 (0.76-1.28)) was similar to never smokers. There were no significant differences in survival by smoking status at 30 days and 1 year. In this large registry of STEMI patients managed by primary PCI, smokers had a significantly higher 3-year mortality than non-smokers. This study is the first to not only dispel the existence of the smoker's paradox, but to highlight a high-risk subgroup who may warrant tailored secondary prevention treatment, including smoking cessation.

Renal Association Clinical Practice Guideline on Haemodialysis.

This guideline is written primarily for doctors and nurses working in dialysis units and related areas of medicine in the UK, and is an update of a previous version written in 2009. It aims to provide guidance on how to look after patients and how to run dialysis units, and provides standards which units should in general aim to achieve. We would not advise patients to interpret the guideline as a rulebook, but perhaps to answer the question: "what does good quality haemodialysis look like?"The guideline is split into sections: each begins with a few statements which are graded by strength (1 is a firm recommendation, 2 is more like a sensible suggestion), and the type of research available to back up the statement, ranging from A (good quality trials so we are pretty sure this is right) to D (more like the opinion of experts than known for sure). After the statements there is a short summary explaining why we think this, often including a discussion of some of the most helpful research. There is then a list of the most important medical articles so that you can read further if you want to - most of this is freely available online, at least in summary form.A few notes on the individual sections: 1. This section is about how much dialysis a patient should have. The effectiveness of dialysis varies between patients because of differences in body size and age etc., so different people need different amounts, and this section gives guidance on what defines "enough" dialysis and how to make sure each person is getting that. Quite a bit of this section is very technical, for example, the term "eKt/V" is often used: this is a calculation based on blood tests before and after dialysis, which measures the effectiveness of a single dialysis session in a particular patient. 2. This section deals with "non-standard" dialysis, which basically means anything other than 3 times per week. For example, a few people need 4 or more sessions per week to keep healthy, and some people are fine with only 2 sessions per week - this is usually people who are older, or those who have only just started dialysis. Special considerations for children and pregnant patients are also covered here. 3. This section deals with membranes (the type of "filter" used in the dialysis machine) and "HDF" (haemodiafiltration) which is a more complex kind of dialysis which some doctors think is better. Studies are still being done, but at the moment we think it's as good as but not better than regular dialysis. 4. This section deals with fluid removal during dialysis sessions: how to remove enough fluid without causing cramps and low blood pressure. Amongst other recommendations we advise close collaboration with patients over this. 5. This section deals with dialysate, which is the fluid used to "pull" toxins out of the blood (it is sometimes called the "bath"). The level of things like potassium in the dialysate is important, otherwise too much or too little may be removed. There is a section on dialysate buffer (bicarbonate) and also a section on phosphate, which occasionally needs to be added into the dialysate. 6. This section is about anticoagulation (blood thinning) which is needed to stop the circuit from clotting, but sometimes causes side effects. 7. This section is about certain safety aspects of dialysis, not seeking to replace well-established local protocols, but focussing on just a few where we thought some national-level guidance would be useful. 8. This section draws together a few aspects of dialysis which don't easily fit elsewhere, and which impact on how dialysis feels to patients, rather than the medical outcome, though of course these are linked. This is where home haemodialysis and exercise are covered. There is an appendix at the end which covers a few aspects in more detail, especially the mathematical ideas. Several aspects of dialysis are not included in this guideline since they are covered elsewhere, often because they are aspects which affect non-dialysis patients too. This includes: anaemia, calcium and bone health, high blood pressure, nutrition, infection control, vascular access, transplant planning, and when dialysis should be started.

Obesity modulates the association between systolic blood pressure and albuminuria.

Background: Obesity is associated with albuminuria and incident kidney disease. Increased vulnerability of the glomerular microcirculation to elevated systemic blood pressure is postulated to contribute to adverse effects of obesity on the kidney. We therefore hypothesized that obesity would modulate the association between systolic blood pressure (sBP) and albuminuria. Methods: The relationship between obesity and albuminuria [fractional albumin excretion (FEalb) or albumin:creatinine ratio (ACR)] was modelled using linear/logistic regression in the US National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 1999-2010 cohorts (N = 23 710). Associations between sBP and albuminuria were examined across strata of waist circumference and body mass index (BMI) using interaction terms. Results: Obesity was associated with albuminuria through an interaction with sBP. Among participants in the 4th/5th quintiles of waist circumference each 10 mmHg increase in sBP was accompanied by approximately double the increment in FEalb observed among those in quintile 2 (14% versus 7%, P < 0.001). There was also evidence of a lower sBP threshold for the relationship between sBP and albuminuria in obesity. While FEalb increased with sBP >110 mmHg in quintile 5 of waist circumference, in quintile 2 FEalb did not increase until sBP was >130 mmHg. Findings were consistent when defining obesity by BMI or waist circumference and when quantifying albuminuria by ACR or FEalb. Assessing albuminuria as the odds ratio of ACR >30 mg/g also gave similar results. Conclusion: The interaction between sBP and obesity supports the premise that obesity sensitizes the kidney to increased systemic blood pressure.

Rationale and design for SHAREHD: a quality improvement collaborative to scale up Shared Haemodialysis Care for patients on centre based haemodialysis.

BACKGROUND: The study objective is to assess the effectiveness and economic impact of a structured programme to support patient involvement in centre-based haemodialysis and to understand what works for whom in what circumstances and why. It implements a program of Shared Haemodialysis Care (SHC) that aims to improve experience and outcomes for those who are treated with centre-based haemodialysis, and give more patients the confidence to dialyse independently both at centres and at home. METHODS/DESIGN: The 24 month mixed methods cohort evaluation of 600 prevalent centre based HD patients is nested within a 30 month quality improvement program that aims to scale up SHC at 12 dialysis centres across England. SHC describes an intervention where patients who receive centre-based haemodialysis are given the opportunity to learn, engage with and undertake tasks associated with their treatment. Following a 6-month set up period, a phased implementation programme is initiated across 12 dialysis units using a randomised stepped wedge design with 6 centres participating in each of 2 steps, each lasting 6 months. The intervention utilises quality improvement methodologies involving rapid tests of change to determine the most appropriate mechanisms for implementation in the context of a learning collaborative. Running parallel with the stepped wedge intervention is a mixed methods cohort evaluation that employs patient questionnaires and interviews, and will link with routinely collected data at the end of the study period. The primary outcome measure is the number of patients performing at least 5 dialysis-related tasks collected using 3 monthly questionnaires. Secondary outcomes measures include: the number of people choosing to perform home haemodialysis or dialyse independently in-centre by the end of the study period; end-user recommendation; home dialysis establishment delay; staff impact and confidence; hospitalisation; infection and health economics. DISCUSSION: The results from this study will provide evidence of impact of SHC, barriers to patient and centre level adoption and inform development of future interventions to support its implementation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN Number: 93999549 , (retrospectively registered 1st May 2017); NIHR Research Portfolio: 31566.