Tunneled hemodialysis central venous catheters prevalence and bloodstream infection rates in Northern Italy: A survey of the "East Lombardy Nephrological Network".

BACKGROUND: Tunneled central venous catheter (tCVCs) is a vascular access frequently employed in hemodialysis patients. Catheter-related bloodstream infections (CRBSI) are potentially life-threatening complications. METHODS: We performed a retrospective survey regarding tCVCs prevalence as well as the CRBSI incidence and management within five hospitals in the Brescia province belonging to the "East Lombardy Nephrological Network"; this study was based upon 18 queries regarding the years 2020 and 2021. RESULTS: The data collected refer to an overall hemodialysis population of 736 patients in 2020 and 745 patients in 2021. The prevalence of tCVCs was respectively 22.1% and 24.2% with the initial placement being performed with fluoroscopy support in 80% of the centers. CRBSI incidence was respectively 0.88 and 0.77 episodes per 1000 days of tCVC use. When the CRBI was caused by Staphylococcus Aureus (SA) or Pseudomonas, differently from the recommendation of the KDOQI guidelines, the removal or the substitution of the tCVC did not occur immediately at the time of the diagnosis of the infection but only when the specific antibiotic therapy failed. A nose swab aimed at identifying SA carriers was performed in 60% of centers. The policy regarding the referral to other specialists (infectious disease specialist and microbiologist) was heterogenous across the centers according to their specific logistics. CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective survey performed by the "East Lombardy Nephrological Network" within the Brescia province describes the prevalence of tCVCs use as well as the incidence and management of CRBSIs in the hemodialysis patients of this area. The clinical impact of the differences in terms of clinical approach detected compared to the KDOQI guidelines will need to be clarified ideally in prospective studies.

[Steroidi tra necessità e tossicità].

Steroid minimization has always been one of the most desired goals regarding immunosuppressive therapy after renal transplantation. Following the introduction of cyclosporine different steroid-free protocols became available, but their implementation was limited due to the high risk of acute rejection. In the last few years, the use of a very low dose of prednisone (5 mg/day) has been deemed to guarantee a good balance between steroid toxicity and efficacy. However, high interpatient variability in prednisolone exposure prevented the standard low dose to be as safe as expected in all patients. Therefore, steroid side effects can still be observed in a variable percentage of patients. In this setting, the personalization of steroid dosage might prevent an over exposure to the drug, but this strategy is not available yet. Thus, steroid withdrawal remains the only available strategy to limit side effects. In the last 40 years, we learned that steroid free protocols are associated with a higher risk of acute rejection, but they do not reduce graft survival. Hence, patients at higher risk for acute rejection or recurrence of their primary renal disease are usually excluded from these protocols. Early steroid withdrawal (within 7 days after transplantation) has been widely used and also suggested by American guidelines. However, steroid withdrawal 3-4 months after transplantation has been preferred by many Authors and deemed equally efficient. In addition, early but not late steroid withdrawal should always be associated to induction therapy. Lastly, Tacrolimus plus Mycophenolic Acid has become the most used association in steroid minimization protocols.

A report from the Brescia Renal COVID Task Force on the clinical characteristics and short-term outcome of hemodialysis patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection.

The SARS-CoV-2 epidemic is pressuring healthcare systems worldwide. Disease outcomes in certain subgroups of patients are still scarce, and data are needed. Therefore, we describe here the experience of four dialysis centers of the Brescia Renal COVID Task Force. During March 2020, within an overall population of 643 hemodialysis patients, SARS-CoV-2 RNA positivity was detected in 94 (15%). At disease diagnosis, 37 of the 94 (39%) patients (group 1) were managed on an outpatient basis, whereas the remaining 57 (61%) (group 2) required hospitalization. Choices regarding management strategy were made based on disease severity. In group 1, 41% received antivirals and 76% hydroxychloroquine. Eight percent died and 5% developed acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). In group 2, 79% received antivirals and 77% hydroxychloroquine. Forty two percent died and 79% developed ARDS. Overall mortality rate for the entire cohort was 29%. History of ischemic cardiac disease, fever, older age (over age 70), and dyspnea at presentation were associated with the risk of developing ARDS, whereas fever, cough and a C-reactive protein higher than 50 mg/l at disease presentation were associated with the risk of death. Thus, in our population of hemodialysis patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection, we documented a wide range of disease severity. The risk of ARDS and death is significant for patients requiring hospital admission at disease diagnosis.

Incremental peritoneal dialysis: a 10 year single-centre experience.

INTRODUCTION: Incremental dialysis consists in prescribing a dialysis dose aimed towards maintaining total solute clearance (renal + dialysis) near the targets set by guidelines. Incremental peritoneal dialysis (incrPD) is defined as one or two dwell-times per day on CAPD, whereas standard peritoneal dialysis (stPD) consists in three-four dwell-times per day. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Single-centre cohort study. Enrollement period: January 2002-December 2007; end of follow up (FU): December 2012. INCLUSION CRITERIA: incident patients with FU ≥6 months, initial residual renal function (RRF) 3-10 ml/min/1.73 sqm BSA, renal indication for PD. RESULTS: Median incrPD duration was 17 months (I-III Q: 10; 30). There were no statistically significant differences between 29 patients on incrPD and 76 on stPD regarding: clinical, demographic and anthropometric characteristics at the beginning of treatment, adequacy indices, peritonitis-free survival (peritonitis incidence: 1/135 months-patients in incrPD vs. 1/52 months-patients in stPD) and patient survival. During the first 6 months, RRF remained stable in incrPD (6.20 ± 2.02 vs. 6.08 ± 1.47 ml/min/1.73 sqm BSA; p = 0.792) whereas it decreased in stPD (4.48 ± 2.12 vs. 5.61 ± 1.49; p < 0.001). Patient survival was affected negatively by ischemic cardiopathy (HR: 4.269; p < 0.001), peripheral and cerebral vascular disease (H2.842; p = 0.006) and cirrhosis (2.982; p = 0.032) and positively by urine output (0.392; p = 0.034). Hospitalization rates were significantly lower in incrPD (p = 0.021). Eight of 29 incrPD patients were transplanted before reaching full dose treatment. CONCLUSIONS: IncrPD is a safe modality to start PD; compared to stPD, it shows similar survival rates, significantly less hospitalization, a trend towards lower peritonitis incidence and slower reduction of renal function.