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.

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.

A Comprehensive Comparison of Clinical Presentation and Outcomes of Kidney Transplant Recipients with COVID-19 during Wave 1 versus Wave 2 at a Tertiary Care Center, India.

Data comparing the clinical spectrum of COVID-19 in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) during the first and second waves of the pandemic in India is limited. Our single-center retrospective study compared the clinical profile, mortality, and associated risk factors in KTRs with COVID-19 during the 1st wave (1st February 2020 to 31st January 2021) and the second wave (1st March-31st August 2021). 156 KTRs with PCR confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection treated at a tertiary care hospital in New Delhi during the 1st and the second waves were analyzed. The demographics and baseline transplant characteristics of the patients diagnosed during both waves were comparable. Patients in the second wave reported less frequent hospitalization, though the intensive care unit (ICU) and ventilator requirements were similar. Strategies to modify immunosuppressants such as discontinuation of antinucleoside drugs with or without change in calcineurin inhibitors and the use of steroids were similar during both waves. Overall patient mortality was 27.5%. The demographics and baseline characteristics of survivors and nonsurvivors were comparable. A higher percentage of nonsurvivors presented with breathing difficulty, low SpO2, and altered sensorium. Both wave risk factors for mortality included older age, severe disease, ICU/ventilator requirements, acute kidney injury (AKI) needing dialysis, Chest Computerized Tomographic (CT) scan abnormalities, and higher levels of inflammatory markers particularly D-dimer and interleukin-6 levels. Conclusions. KTRs in both COVID-19 waves had similar demographics and baseline characteristics, while fewer patients during the second wave required hospitalization. The D-dimer and IL-6 levels are directly correlated with mortality.