Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
BMC Nephrol ; 25(1): 248, 2024 Aug 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39090593

ABSTRACT

Given the substantial burden of chronic kidney disease associated with type 2 diabetes, an aggressive approach to treatment is required. Despite the benefits of guideline-directed therapy, there remains a high residual risk of continuing progression of chronic kidney disease and of cardiovascular events. Historically, a linear approach to pharmacologic management of chronic kidney disease has been used, in which drugs are added, then adjusted, optimized, or stopped in a stepwise manner based on their efficacy, toxicity, effects on a patient's quality of life, and cost. However, there are disadvantages to this approach, which may result in missing a window of opportunity to slow chronic kidney disease progression. Instead, a pillar approach has been proposed to enable earlier treatment that simultaneously targets multiple pathways involved in disease progression. Combination therapy in patients with chronic kidney disease associated with type 2 diabetes is being investigated in several clinical trials. In this article, we discuss current treatment options for patients with chronic kidney disease associated with type 2 diabetes and provide a rationale for tailored combinations of therapies with complementary mechanisms of action to optimize therapy using a pillar-based treatment strategy. [This article includes a plain language summary as an additional file].


Subject(s)
Cardiovascular Diseases , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 , Drug Therapy, Combination , Renal Insufficiency, Chronic , Humans , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/complications , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/drug therapy , Renal Insufficiency, Chronic/complications , Renal Insufficiency, Chronic/drug therapy , Cardiovascular Diseases/prevention & control , Cardiovascular Diseases/etiology , Hypoglycemic Agents/therapeutic use , Diabetic Nephropathies/drug therapy
2.
Kidney Int Rep ; 9(4): 888-897, 2024 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38765582

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Health system leaders aim to increase access to kidney transplantation in part by encouraging nephrologists to refer more patients for transplant evaluation. Little is known about nephrologists' referral decisions and whether nephrologists with older training vintage weigh patient criteria differently (e.g., more restrictively). Methods: Using a novel, iteratively validated survey of US-based nephrologists, we examined how nephrologists assess adult patients' suitability for transplant, focusing on established, important criteria: 7 clinical (e.g., overweight) and 7 psychosocial (e.g., insurance). We quantified variation in nephrologist restrictiveness-proportion of criteria interpreted as absolute or partial contraindications versus minor or negligible concerns-and tested associations between restrictiveness and nephrologist age (proxy for training vintage) in logistic regression models, controlling for nephrologist-level and practice-level factors. Results: Of 144 nephrologists invited, 42 survey respondents (29% response rate) were 85% male and 54% non-Hispanic White, with mean age 52 years, and 67% spent ≥1 day/wk in outpatient dialysis facilities. Nephrologists interpreted patient criteria inconsistently; consistency was lower for psychosocial criteria (intraclass correlation coefficient: 0.28) than for clinical criteria (intraclass correlation coefficient: 0.43; P < 0.01). With each additional 10 years of age, nephrologists' odds of interpreting criteria restrictively (top tertile) doubled (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.96; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.95-4.07), with marginal statistical significance. This relationship was significant when interpreting psychosocial criteria (aOR: 3.18; 95% CI: 1.16-8.71) but not when interpreting clinical criteria (aOR: 1.12; 95% CI: 0.52-2.38). Conclusion: Nephrologists interpret evaluation criteria variably when assessing patient suitability for transplant. Guideline-based educational interventions could influence nephrologists' referral decision-making differentially by age.

3.
Am J Kidney Dis ; 2024 Apr 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38640993

ABSTRACT

In 1988, the American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM) defined essential procedural skills in nephrology, and candidates for ABIM certification were required to present evidence of possessing the skills necessary for placement of temporary dialysis vascular access, hemodialysis, peritoneal dialysis, and percutaneous renal biopsy. In 1996, continuous renal replacement therapy was added to the list of nephrology requirements. These procedure requirements have not been modified since 1996 while the practice of nephrology has changed dramatically. In March 2021, the ABIM Nephrology Board embarked on a policy journey to revise the procedure requirements for nephrology certification. With the guidance of nephrology diplomates, training program directors, professional and patient organizations, and other stakeholders, the ABIM Nephrology Board revised the procedure requirements to reflect current practice and national priorities. The approved changes include the Opportunity to Train standard for placement of temporary dialysis catheters, percutaneous kidney biopsies, and home hemodialysis, which better reflects the current state of training in most training programs, and the new requirements for home dialysis therapies training will align with the national priority to address the underuse of home dialysis therapies. This perspective details the ABIM process for considering changes to the certification procedure requirements and how ABIM collaborated with the larger nephrology community in considering revisions and additions to these requirements.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL