Non-valvular atrial fibrillation in patients on peritoneal dialysis, prevalence, treatment and professionals involved.

Atrial fibrillation is the most frequent chronic arrhythmia in patients with chronic kidney disease. Oral anticoagulation with vitamin K antagonists and now direct oral anticoagulants have been and are the fundamental pillars for the prevention of thromboembolic events. However, there are no randomized clinical trials on the risk-benefit profile of oral anticoagulation in patients with chronic kidney disease stage 5 on peritoneal dialysis and there is little evidence in the literature in this population. The objective of our study was to know the prevalence, treatment and professionals involved in the management of atrial fibrillation in peritoneal dialysis patients. For this purpose, we performed a descriptive analysis through a survey sent to different peritoneal dialysis units in Spain. A total of 1,403 patients on peritoneal dialysis were included in the study, of whom 186 (13.2%) had non-valvular atrial fibrillation. In addition, the assessment of the scores of thromboembolic and bleeding risks for the indication of oral anticoagulation was mainly carried out by the cardiologist (60% of the units), as well as its prescription (cardiologist 47% or in consensus with the nephrologist 43%). In summary, patients on peritoneal dialysis have a remarkable prevalence of non-valvular atrial fibrillation. Patients frequently receive oral anticoagulation with vitamin K antagonists, as well as direct oral anticoagulants. The data obtained regarding the scores used for the assessment of thromboembolic and bleeding risk, treatment and involvement by Nephrology indicates that there is a need for training and involvement of the nephrologist in this pathology.

Treatment of Chronic Heart Failure in Advanced Chronic Kidney Disease: The HAKA Multicenter Retrospective Real-World Study.

INTRODUCTION: Chronic heart failure (HF) has high rates of mortality and hospitalization in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (aCKD). However, randomized clinical trials have systematically excluded aCKD population. We have investigated current HF therapy in patients receiving clinical care in specialized aCKD units. METHODS: The Heart And Kidney Audit (HAKA) was a cross-sectional and retrospective real-world study including outpatients with aCKD and HF from 29 Spanish centers. The objective was to evaluate how the treatment of HF in patients with aCKD complied with the recommendations of the European Society of Cardiology Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of HF, especially regarding the foundational drugs: renin-angiotensin system inhibitors (RASi), angiotensin receptor blocker/neprilysin inhibitors (ARNI), beta-blockers (BBs), mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs), and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i). RESULTS: Among 5,012 aCKD patients, 532 (13%) had a diagnosis of HF. Of them, 20% had reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), 13% mildly reduced EF (HFmrEF), and 67% preserved EF (HFpEF). Only 9.3% of patients with HFrEF were receiving quadruple therapy with RASi/ARNI, BB, MRA, and SGLT2i, but the majority were not on the maximum recommended doses. None of the patients with HFrEF and CKD G5 received quadruple therapy. Among HFmrEF patients, approximately half and two-thirds were receiving RASi and/or BB, respectively, while less than 15% received ARNI, MRA, or SGLT2i. Less than 10% of patients with HFpEF were receiving SGLT2i. CONCLUSIONS: Under real-world conditions, HF in aCKD patients is sub-optimally treated. Increased awareness of current guidelines and pragmatic trials specifically enrolling these patients represent unmet medical needs.

Impacto de la modalidad de diálisis sobre la morbimortalidad tras el fracaso del injerto renal: análisis con eventos competitivos / Impact of dialysis modality on morbimortality of kidney transplant recipients after allograft failure. Analysis in the presence of competing events

ANTECEDENTES Y OBJETIVO: El número de personas que inician diálisis por el fracaso del injerto aumenta cada día. La modalidad de diálisis mejor para este tipo de pacientes no está bien definida y la mayoría de ellos son derivados a hemodiálisis (HD). El objetivo de nuestro estudio es evaluar el impacto de la modalidad de diálisis sobre la morbilidad y la mortalidad en individuos trasplantados que inician este procedimiento tras el fracaso del injerto. MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS: Estudio multicéntrico retrospectivo observacional y de cohortes que compara la evolución de los pacientes que inician diálisis tras el fracaso del injerto, desde enero del año 2000 a diciembre del 2013. Un grupo lo hace en diálisis peritoneal (DP) y otro en HD. Se realizó un seguimiento a los pacientes hasta el cambio de técnica de diálisis, retrasplante o fallecimiento. Se analizaron datos antropométicos, comorbilidad, el filtrado glomerular (FG) con el que iniciaban la diálisis, la presencia de un acceso óptimo para esta, la presencia de intolerancia al injerto y el retrasplante. Estudiamos el motivo de los 10 primeros ingresos hospitalarios tras el inicio de la diálisis. Para el análisis estadístico, se tuvo en cuenta la presencia de eventos competitivos que dificultaran la aparición del evento de interés, muerte o ingreso hospitalario. RESULTADOS: Se incluyeron 175 pacientes. En DP 86 y 89 en HD. Los individuos que iniciaron DP eran más jóvenes, tenían menor comorbilidad y lo hacían con FG más bajos que los de HD. El seguimiento medio fue de 34 ± 33 meses, con una mediana de 24 (IQR siete a 50 meses), siendo mayor en los pacientes en HD que en los de DP (35 vs. 18 meses, p = < 0,001). Los factores de riesgo que influyeron en la mortalidad fueron la edad (coeficiente del sub Hazard Ratio [sHR] 1,06 (IC 95%: 1,033 a 1,106, p = 0,000), el uso no óptimo del acceso (sHR 3,00 (IC 95%: 1,507 a 5,982, p = 0,028) y el tipo de diálisis, la DP sHR[DP/HD] 0,36 (IC 95%: 0,148 a 0,890, p = 0,028). Los pacientes en DP tenían menos riesgo de un ingreso hospitalario sHR[DP/HD] 0,52 (IC 95%: 0,369 a 0,743, p = < 0,001) y menos probabilidad de desarrollar una intolerancia al injerto HR 0,307 (IC 95% 0,142 a 0,758, p = 0,009). CONCLUSIONES: Con las limitaciones de un estudio retrospectivo y no randomizado, es la primera vez a nivel nacional que se demuestra que la DP en términos de supervivencia es mejor que la HD cuando fracasa el injerto durante el primer año y medio en diálisis. La presencia de un acceso no óptimo para este procedimiento es un factor de riesgo de mortalidad independiente y modificable. La remisión precoz de los pacientes a las unidades de enfermedad renal crónica avanzada (ERCA) es fundamental para que estos elijan la técnica que más se adapte a sus circunstancias y preparar un acceso óptimo para el inicio de diálisis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The number of patients who start dialysis due to graft failure increases every day. The best dialysis modality for this type of patient is not well defined and most patients are referred to HD. The objective of our study is to evaluate the impact of the dialysis modality on morbidity and mortality in transplant patients who start dialysis after graft failure. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A multicentre retrospective observation and cohort study was performed to compare the evolution of patients who started dialysis after graft failure from January 2000 to December 2013. One group started on PD and the other on HD. The patients were followed until the change of dialysis technique, retransplantation or death. Anthropometric data, comorbidity, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) at start of dialysis, the presence of an optimal access for dialysis, the appearance of graft intolerance and retransplantation were analysed. We studied the causes for the first 10 hospital admissions after starting dialysis. For the statistical analysis, the presence of competitive events that hindered the observation of the event of interest, death or hospital admission was analysed. RESULTS: 175 patients were included, 86 in DP and 89 in HD. The patients who started PD were younger, had less comorbidity and started dialysis with lower eGFR than those on HD. The mean follow-up was 34 ± 33 months, with a median of 24 months (IQR 7 - 50 months), Patients on HD had longer follow-up than patients on PD (35 vs. 18 months, p = < 0.001). The mortality risk factors were age sHR 1.06 (95% CI: 1.033 - 1.106, p = 0.000), non-optimal use of access for dialysis sHR 3.00 (95% CI: 1.507 - 5.982, p = 0.028) and the dialysis modality sHR (PD / HD) 0.36 (95% CI: 0.148 - 0.890, p = 0.028). Patients on PD had a lower risk of hospital admission sHR [DP / HD] 0.52 (95% CI: 0.369-0.743, p = < 0.001) and less probability of developing graft intolerance HR 0.307 (95% CI 0.142-0.758, p = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS: With the limitations of a retrospective and non-randomized study, it is the first time nationwide that PD shows in terms of survival to be better than HD during the first year and a half after the kidney graft failure. The presence of a non-optimal access for dialysis was an independent and modifiable risk factor for mortality. Early referral of patients to advanced chronic kidney disease units is essential for the patient to choose the technique that best suits their circumstances and to prepare an optimal access for the start of dialysis

Impact of dialysis modality on morbimortality of kidney transplant recipients after allograft failure. Analysis in the presence of competing events. / Impacto de la modalidad de diálisis sobre la morbimortalidad tras el fracaso del injerto renal: análisis con eventos competitivos.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The number of patients who start dialysis due to graft failure increases every day. The best dialysis modality for this type of patient is not well defined and most patients are referred to HD. The objective of our study is to evaluate the impact of the dialysis modality on morbidity and mortality in transplant patients who start dialysis after graft failure. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A multicentre retrospective observation and cohort study was performed to compare the evolution of patients who started dialysis after graft failure from January 2000 to December 2013. One group started on PD and the other on HD. The patients were followed until the change of dialysis technique, retransplantation or death. Anthropometric data, comorbidity, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) at start of dialysis, the presence of an optimal access for dialysis, the appearance of graft intolerance and retransplantation were analysed. We studied the causes for the first 10 hospital admissions after starting dialysis. For the statistical analysis, the presence of competitive events that hindered the observation of the event of interest, death or hospital admission was analysed. RESULTS: 175 patients were included, 86 in DP and 89 in HD. The patients who started PD were younger, had less comorbidity and started dialysis with lower eGFR than those on HD. The mean follow-up was 34 ± 33 months, with a median of 24 months (IQR 7 - 50 months), Patients on HD had longer follow-up than patients on PD (35 vs. 18 months, p = < 0.001). The mortality risk factors were age sHR 1.06 (95% CI: 1.033 - 1.106, p = 0.000), non-optimal use of access for dialysis sHR 3.00 (95% CI: 1.507 - 5.982, p = 0.028) and the dialysis modality sHR (PD / HD) 0.36 (95% CI: 0.148 - 0.890, p = 0.028). Patients on PD had a lower risk of hospital admission sHR [DP / HD] 0.52 (95% CI: 0.369-0.743, p = < 0.001) and less probability of developing graft intolerance HR 0.307 (95% CI 0.142-0.758, p = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS: With the limitations of a retrospective and non-randomized study, it is the first time nationwide that PD shows in terms of survival to be better than HD during the first year and a half after the kidney graft failure. The presence of a non-optimal access for dialysis was an independent and modifiable risk factor for mortality. Early referral of patients to advanced chronic kidney disease units is essential for the patient to choose the technique that best suits their circumstances and to prepare an optimal access for the start of dialysis.

Impact of dialysis modality on morbimortality of kidney transplant recipients after allograft failure. Analysis in the presence of competing events.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The number of patients who start dialysis due to graft failure increases every day. The best dialysis modality for this type of patient is not well defined and most patients are referred to HD. The objective of our study is to evaluate the impact of the dialysis modality on morbidity and mortality in transplant patients who start dialysis after graft failure. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A multicentre retrospective observation and cohort study was performed to compare the evolution of patients who started dialysis after graft failure from January 2000 to December 2013. One group started on PD and the other on HD. The patients were followed until the change of dialysis technique, retransplantation or death. Anthropometric data, comorbidity, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) at start of dialysis, the presence of an optimal access for dialysis, the appearance of graft intolerance and retransplantation were analyzed. We studied the causes for the first 10 hospital admissions after starting dialysis. For the statistical analysis, the presence of competitive events that hindered the observation of the event of interest, death or hospital admission was analyzed. RESULTS: 175 patients were included, 86 in DP and 89 in HD. The patients who started PD were younger, had less comorbidity and started dialysis with lower eGFR than those on HD. The mean follow-up was 34 ± 33 months, with a median of 24 months (IQR 7-50 months), Patients on HD had longer follow-up than patients on PD (35 vs. 18 months, p = < 0.001). The mortality risk factors were age sHR 1.06 (95% CI: 1.03-1.106, p = 0.000), non-optimal use of access for dialysis sHR 3.00 (95% CI: 1.507-5.982, p = 0.028) and the dialysis modality sHR (PD/HD) 0.36 (95% CI: 0.148-0.890, p = 0.028). Patients on PD had a lower risk of hospital admission sHR [DP/HD] 0.52 (95% CI: 0.369-0.743, p = < 0.001) and less probability of developing graft intolerance HR 0.307 (95% CI 0.142-0.758, p = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS: With the limitations of a retrospective and non-randomized study, it is the first time nationwide that PD shows in terms of survival to be better than HD during the first year and a half after the kidney graft failure. The presence of a non-optimal access for dialysis was an independent and modifiable risk factor for mortality. Early referral of patients to advanced chronic kidney disease units is essential for the patient to choose the technique that best suits their circumstances and to prepare an optimal access for the start of dialysis.

Reacciones cutáneas debido al uso de icodextrina en pacientes en diálisis peritoneal / Skin reactions with the use of icodextrin in peritoneal dialysis patients

No disponible

Efluente peritoneal turbio debido a un síndrome de intolerancia al injerto renal / Cloudy peritoneal dialysate effluent due to graft intolerance syndrome

No disponible

Valoración de la afección renal mediante la cistatina C: un biomarcador olvidado. Respuesta / Assessment of renal involvement by Cystatin C: a forgotten biomarker. Response

No disponible

Valoración de afección renal, disfunción renal aguda e hiperpotasemia por fármacos usados en cardiología y nefrotoxicidad por contrastes / Assessment of renal function, iatrogenic hyperkalemia and acute renal dysfunction in cardiology. Contrast-induced nephropathy

La afección renal en los pacientes con enfermedad cardiovascular confiere un carácter pronóstico y un incremento del riesgo cardiovascular. La disfunción renal es un marcador de lesiones en otras partes del árbol vascular. Su detección permite la identificación precoz de individuos con riesgo elevado de acontecimientos cardiovasculares. La valoración de la afección renal del paciente con enfermedad cardiovascular se llevará a cabo mediante la determinación de albuminuria en una muestra aislada de orina y por la estimación del filtrado glomerular a partir de fórmulas o ecuaciones predictivas derivadas de la creatinina. Se recomienda la fórmula de la Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration o la de Modification of Diet in Renal Disease. Como alternativa, puede utilizarse la fórmula de Cockcroft-Gault. La administración de fármacos que bloqueen el sistema renina-angiotensina puede asociarse en determinadas ocasiones a disfunción renal aguda o hiperpotasemia. Es importante conocer las situaciones con riesgo de que se produzcan estas complicaciones para dar el mejor tratamiento posible: la prevención. Dado el incremento progresivo de los procedimientos diagnósticos y terapéuticos con contraste intravenoso en el ámbito de la cardiología, la nefrotoxicidad por contraste supone un problema relevante. Es de interés detectar los factores de riesgo y a los pacientes con mayor probabilidad de sufrirla, así como prevenir su aparición (AU)

Renal impairment influences the prognosis of patients with cardiovascular disease and increases cardiovascular risk. Renal dysfunction is a marker of lesions in other parts of the vascular tree and detection facilitates early identification of individuals at high risk of cardiovascular events. In patients with cardiovascular disease, renal function is assessed by measuring albuminuria in a spot urine sample and by estimating the glomerular filtration rate using creatinine-derived predictive formulas or equations. We recommend the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration or the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease formulas. The Cockcroft-Gault formula is a possible alternative. The administration of drugs that block the angiotensin-renin system can, on occasion, be associated with acute renal dysfunction or hyperkalemia. We need to know when risk of these complications exists so as to provide the best possible treatment: prevention. Given the growing number of diagnostic and therapeutic procedures in the field of cardiology that use intravenous contrast media, contrast-induced nephrotoxicity represents a significant problem. We should identify the risk factors and patients at greatest risk, and prevent it from appearing (AU)

[Assessment of renal function, iatrogenic hyperkalemia and acute renal dysfunction in cardiology. Contrast-induced nephropathy]. / Valoración de afección renal, disfunción renal aguda e hiperpotasemia por fármacos usados en cardiología y nefrotoxicidad por contrastes.

Renal impairment influences the prognosis of patients with cardiovascular disease and increases cardiovascular risk. Renal dysfunction is a marker of lesions in other parts of the vascular tree and detection facilitates early identification of individuals at high risk of cardiovascular events. In patients with cardiovascular disease, renal function is assessed by measuring albuminuria in a spot urine sample and by estimating the glomerular filtration rate using creatinine-derived predictive formulas or equations. We recommend the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration or the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease formulas. The Cockcroft-Gault formula is a possible alternative. The administration of drugs that block the angiotensin-renin system can, on occasion, be associated with acute renal dysfunction or hyperkalemia. We need to know when risk of these complications exists so as to provide the best possible treatment: prevention. Given the growing number of diagnostic and therapeutic procedures in the field of cardiology that use intravenous contrast media, contrast-induced nephrotoxicity represents a significant problem. We should identify the risk factors and patients at greatest risk, and prevent it from appearing.