European Nephrologists' Attitudes toward the Application of Artificial Intelligence in Clinical Practice: A Comprehensive Survey.

INTRODUCTION: The rapid advancement of artificial intelligence and big data analytics, including descriptive, diagnostic, predictive, and prescriptive analytics, has the potential to revolutionize many areas of medicine, including nephrology and dialysis. Artificial intelligence and big data analytics can be used to analyze large amounts of patient medical records, including laboratory results and imaging studies, to improve the accuracy of diagnosis, enhance early detection, identify patterns and trends, and personalize treatment plans for patients with kidney disease. Additionally, artificial intelligence and big data analytics can be used to identify patients' treatment who are not receiving adequate care, highlighting care inefficiencies in the dialysis provider, optimizing patient outcomes, reducing healthcare costs, and consequently creating values for all the involved stakeholders. OBJECTIVES: We present the results of a comprehensive survey aimed at exploring the attitudes of European physicians from eight countries working within a major hemodialysis network (Fresenius Medical Care NephroCare) toward the application of artificial intelligence in clinical practice. METHODS: An electronic survey on the implementation of artificial intelligence in hemodialysis clinics was distributed to 1,067 physicians. Of the 1,067 individuals invited to participate in the study, 404 (37.9%) professionals agreed to participate in the survey. RESULTS: The survey showed that a substantial proportion of respondents believe that artificial intelligence has the potential to support physicians in reducing medical malpractice or mistakes. CONCLUSION: While artificial intelligence's potential benefits are recognized in reducing medical errors and improving decision-making, concerns about treatment plan consistency, personalization, privacy, and the human aspects of patient care persist. Addressing these concerns will be crucial for successfully integrating artificial intelligence solutions in nephrology practice.

Patient Survival With Extended Home Hemodialysis Compared to In-Center Conventional Hemodialysis.

Introduction: More frequent and/or longer hemodialysis (HD) has been associated with improvements in numerous clinical outcomes in patients on dialysis. Home HD (HHD), which allows more frequent and/or longer dialysis with lower cost and flexibility in treatment planning, is not widely used worldwide. Although, retrospective studies have indicated better survival with HHD, this issue remains controversial. In this multicenter study, we compared thrice-weekly extended HHD with in-center conventional HD (ICHD) in a large patient population with a long-term follow-up. Methods: We matched 349 patients starting HHD between 2010 and 2014 with 1047 concurrent patients on ICHD by using propensity scores. Patients were followed-up with from their respective baseline until September 30, 2018. The primary outcome was overall survival. Secondary outcomes were technique survival; hospitalization; and changes in clinical, laboratory, and medication parameters. Results: The mean duration of dialysis session was 418 ± 54 minutes in HHD and 242 ± 10 minutes in patients on ICHD. All-cause mortality rate was 3.76 and 6.27 per 100 patient-years in the HHD and the ICHD groups, respectively. In the intention-to-treat analysis, HHD was associated with a 40% lower risk for all-cause mortality than ICHD (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.60; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.45 to 0.80; P < 0.001). In HHD, the 5-year technical survival was 86.5%. HHD treatment provided better phosphate and blood pressure (BP) control, improvements in nutrition and inflammation, and reduction in hospitalization days and medication requirement. Conclusion: These results indicate that extended HHD is associated with higher survival and better outcomes compared to ICHD.