Capacity for the management of kidney failure in the International Society of Nephrology Western Europe region: report from the 2023 ISN Global Kidney Health Atlas (ISN-GKHA).

Western Europe boasts advanced health care systems, robust kidney care guidelines, and a well-established health care workforce. Despite this, significant disparities in kidney replacement therapy incidence, prevalence, and transplant access exist. This paper presents the third International Society of Nephrology Global Kidney Health Atlas's findings on kidney care availability, accessibility, affordability, and quality in 22 Western European countries, representing 99% of the region's population. The known chronic kidney disease (CKD) prevalence across Western Europe averages 10.6%, slightly above the global median. Cardiovascular diseases account for a substantial portion of CKD-related deaths. Kidney failure incidence varies. Government health expenditure differs; however, most countries offer government-funded acute kidney injury, dialysis, and kidney transplantation care. Hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis are universally available, with variations in the number of dialysis centers. Kidney transplantation is available in all countries (except for 3 microstates), with variable transplant center prevalence. Conservative kidney management (CKM) is increasingly accessible. The region's kidney care workforce is substantial, exceeding global averages; however, workforce shortages are reported. Barriers to optimal kidney care include limited workforce capacity, lack of surveillance mechanisms, and suboptimal integration into national noncommunicable disease (NCD) strategies. Policy recognition of CKD as a health priority varies across countries. Although Western Europe exhibits strong kidney care infrastructure, opportunities for improvement exist, particularly in CKD prevention, surveillance, awareness, and policy implementation. Efforts to improve CKD care should include automated detection, educational support, and enhanced workflows. Based on these findings, health care professionals, stakeholders, and policymakers are called to act to enhance kidney care across the region.

Risk of infections related to endovascular catheters and cardiac implantable devices in hemodialysis patients.

Patients requiring dialysis are extremely vulnerable to infectious diseases. The high burden of comorbidities and weakened immune system due to uremia and previous immunosuppressive therapy expose the patient on dialysis to more infectious events than the general population. The infectious risk is further increased by the presence of endovascular catheters and implantable cardiologic devices. The former is generally placed as urgent vascular access for dialysis and in subjects requiring hemodialysis treatments without autogenous arteriovenous fistula. The high frequency of cardiovascular events also increases the likelihood of implanting indwelling implantable cardiac devices (CIED) such as pacemakers (PMs) and defibrillators (ICDs). The simultaneous presence of CVC and CIED yields an increased risk of developing severe prosthetic device-associated bloodstream infections often progressing to septicemia. Although, antibiotic therapy is the mainstay of prosthetic device-related infections, antibiotic resistance of biofilm-residing bacteria reduces the choice of infection eradication. In these cases, the resolution of the infection process relies on the removal of the prosthetic device. Compared to CVC removal, the extraction of leads is a more complex procedure and poses an increased risk of vessel tearing. As a result, the prevention of prosthetic device-related infection is of utmost importance in hemodialysis (HD) patients and relies principally on avoiding CVC as vascular access for HD and placement of a new class of wireless implantable medical devices. When the combination of CVC and CIED is inevitable, prevention of infection, mainly due translocation of skin bacteria, should be a mandatory priority for healthcare workers.

Scheduling of Remote Monitoring for Peritoneal Dialysis Patients.

Peritoneal dialysis (PD) is performed as a home-based treatment and in this context, telemedicine has been proven helpful for improving clinicians' surveillance and maintaining PD patients in their home setting. The new e-health devices make remote patient monitoring (RPM) for automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) treatment possible, evaluating the data at the end of every treatment and adapting the prescription at distance if necessary. This paper aims to share a method for improving clinical surveillance and enabling PD patients to receive their treatment at home. In the present case series, we delineate the clinical protocol of the Vicenza PD Center regarding patient characteristics, timing, and the purpose of the APD-RPM. We present the Vicenza PD Center's experience, illustrating its application through three case reports as exemplars. Telemedicine helps to carefully allocate healthcare resources while removing the barriers to accessing care. However, there is a risk of data overload, as some data might not be analyzed because of an increased workload for healthcare professionals. A proactive physician's attitude towards the e-health system has to be supported by clinical instructions and legislative rules. International and national guidelines may suggest which patients should be candidates for RPM, which parameters should be monitored, and with what timing. According to our experience, we suggest that the care team should define a workflow that helps in formulating a correct approach to RPM, adequately utilizing resources. The workflow has to consider the different needs of patients, in order to assure frequent remote control for incident or unstable patients, while prevalent and stable patients can perform their home treatment more independently, helped by periodic and deferred clinical supervision.

Ongoing Peritoneal Dialysis Training at Home Allows for the Improvement of Patients' Empowerment: A Single Center Experience.

INTRODUCTION: Peritoneal dialysis (PD), as a home treatment, ensures better patient autonomy and lower intrusiveness compared to hemodialysis. However, choosing PD comes with an increased burden of responsibility that the patient may not always be able to bear, due to advanced age and deteriorating health condition. Various approaches have been explored to address this issue and mitigate its primary complications. In this study, we aim to present the ongoing PD training at-home program implemented by the Vicenza PD Center, and evaluate its impact on patients' prognoses. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We enrolled 210 patients who underwent PD at Vicenza Hospital between 1 January 2019 and 1 January 2022 for a minimum of 90 days. Each patient was observed retrospectively for one year. We categorized the patients into three groups based on their level of autonomy regarding their PD management: completely independent patients; patients able to perform some parts of the PD method on their own, while the remaining aspects were carried out by a caregiver; and patients who required complete assistance from a caregiver, like in the assisted PD program (asPD). RESULTS: A total of 70% of the PD population were autonomous regarding their PD therapy, 14% had an intermediate degree of autonomy, and 16% were entirely dependent on caregivers. The PD nurses performed a median of four home visits per patient per year, with a tendency to make more visits to patients with a lower degree of autonomy. All the groups achieved similar clinical outcomes. At the end of the year of observation, only 6% of the patients witnessed a decline in their autonomy level, whereas 7% demonstrated an enhancement in their level of autonomy, and 87% remained stable. CONCLUSIONS: A home care assistance program ensures clinical support to a household with the purpose of improving the empowerment of the PD population and reducing the prevalence of assisted PD. Ongoing PD training at home helps patients to maintain a stable degree of autonomy and stay in their home setting, even though they present with relative attitudinal or social barriers.

Prevalence, clinical course and outcomes of COVID-19 in peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients: a single-center experience.

INTRODUCTION: There are limited data on the effects of COVID-19 on peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients. This study aimed to describe the impact of COVID-19 on the PD population. METHODS: A monocentric retrospective observational study was conducted on 146 consecutive PD patients followed from January 2020 to March 2022 at the University Hospital of Modena, Italy. RESULTS: Twenty-seven (18.4%) PD patients experienced 29 episodes of SARS-CoV-2 infection, corresponding to an incidence rate of 0.16 episodes/patient-year. Median age of COVID-19 patients was 60.4 (interquartile range [IQR] 50.2-66.5) years. In unvaccinated patients (n. 9), COVID-19 was always symptomatic and manifested with fever (100%) and cough (77.7%). COVID-19 caused hospital admission of three (33.3%) patients and two (22.2%) died of septic shock. COVID-19 was symptomatic in 83.3% of vaccinated subjects (n.18) and manifested with fever (61.1%) and cough (55.6%). Hospital admission occurred in 27.8% of the subjects but all were discharged home. Median SARS-CoV-2 shedding was 32 and 26 days in the unvaccinated and vaccinated groups, respectively. At the end of the follow-up, COVID-19 triggered the shift from PD to HD in two subjects without affecting the residual renal function of the remaining patients. Overall, COVID-19 caused an excess death of 22.2%. COVID-19 vaccination refusal accounted for only 1.6% in this cohort of patients. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 incident rate was 0.16 episodes/patient-year in the PD population. About one-third of the patients were hospitalized for severe infection. Fatal outcome occurred in two (7.4%) unvaccinated patients. A low vaccination refusal rate was observed in this population.

Risk of bleeding after percutaneous native kidney biopsy in patients receiving low-dose aspirin: a single-center retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Although discontinuation of antiplatelet agents at least 5 days before kidney biopsy is commonly recommended, the evidence behind this practice is of low level. Indeed, few non-randomized studies previously showed an equivalent risk of bleeding in patients receiving aspirin therapy. METHODS: We conducted a single center retrospective study comparing the risk of complications after percutaneous native kidney biopsy in patients who received low-dose aspirin (ASA) within 5 days from biopsy and those who did not. The main outcome was the difference in the incidence of major complications (red blood cell transfusion, need for selective arterial embolization, surgery, nephrectomy). Secondary outcomes included difference in minor complications, comparison between patients who received ASA within 48 h or within 3-5 days, identification of independent factors predictive of major complications. RESULTS: We analyzed data on 750 patients, of whom 94 received ASA within 5 days from biopsy. There were no significant differences in the proportion of major complications in patients receiving or not receiving ASA (2.59% and 3.19%, respectively, percentage point difference 1%, 95% CI - 3 to 4%, p = 0.74). Groups were also comparable for minor complications; among patients receiving ASA, there were no differences in major bleeding between those who received ASA within 48 h or 3-5 days from biopsy. Significant baseline predictors of major bleeding in our cohort were platelet count lower than 120*103/microliter, higher diastolic blood pressure and higher blood urea. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with low-dose ASA within 5 days from kidney biopsy did not increase the risk of complications after the procedure.

Skin reaction with Eosinophilia and Systemic Symptoms after lenalidomide in peritoneal Dialysis.

The Drug Reaction with Eosinophilia and Systemic Symptoms (DRESS) syndrome is a fatal and immune-mediated idiosyncratic drug reaction, with symptoms of fever, skin eruptions (that involves more than half of the body surface), facial oedema and hematological disorders, all presenting within the latent period following drug intake. Effects can also be seen on multiple organs, most notably hepatitis in liver and acute interstitial nephritis in kidney, generally post-administration of allopurinol. The European Registry of Severe Cutaneous Adverse Reactions (RegiSCAR) classifies the DRESS Syndrome cases as "definite", "probable" or "possible", based on clinical and laboratory features. Different pathogenetic mechanisms have been involved in this disease, including immunological reactions and HHV-6 reactivation. In our experience, a 72-year-old male, affected by myeloma in peritoneal dialysis, developed a rare case of DRESS syndrome after lenalidomide administration (less than ten cases are known) with HHV-6 reactivation. According to literature, we withdrew the drug and gave methylprednisolone 0,8 mg/kg orally and IVIG 1 gr/kg for two days. Despite this therapy, DRESS syndrome relapsed during steroid taper with rash, thrombocytopenia, hepatitis and high troponin level. A single cycle of intravenous immunoglobulin 0,5 g/kg for four days was enough for syndrome remission. Only few cases are reported in literature, but because of the increasing use of lenalidomide and the autoimmune sequelae of DRESS syndrome, a broad workup and a multidisciplinar careful approach could help in diagnosis, treatment and follow-up.

Rethinking Chronic Kidney Disease in the Aging Population.

The process of aging population will inevitably increase age-related comorbidities including chronic kidney disease (CKD). In light of this demographic transition, the lack of an age-adjusted CKD classification may enormously increase the number of new diagnoses of CKD in old subjects with an indolent decline in kidney function. Overdiagnosis of CKD will inevitably lead to important clinical consequences and pronounced negative effects on the health-related quality of life of these patients. Based on these data, an appropriate workup for the diagnosis of CKD is critical in reducing the burden of CKD worldwide. Optimal management of CKD should be based on prevention and reduction of risk factors associated with kidney injury. Once the diagnosis of CKD has been made, an appropriate staging of kidney disease and timely prescriptions of promising nephroprotective drugs (e.g., RAAS, SGLT-2 inhibitors, finerenone) appear crucial to slow down the progression toward end-stage kidney disease (ESKD). The management of elderly, comorbid and frail patients also opens new questions on the appropriate renal replacement therapy for this subset of the population. The non-dialytic management of CKD in old subjects with short life expectancy features as a valid option in patient-centered care programs. Considering the multiple implications of CKD for global public health, this review examines the prevalence, diagnosis and principles of treatment of kidney disease in the aging population.

Weekly Rapid Antigen Test Screening for COVID-19 in Patients on Hemodialysis.

BACKGROUND/AIM: COVID-19 is a concerning issue among in-center hemodialysis (HD) patients. To prevent COVID-19 diffusion in our HD facility, weekly rapid nasal antigen test screening was performed for all asymptomatic patients on chronic HD. This study aimed to assess the performance of weekly rapid antigen test in detecting SARS-CoV-2 infection among asymptomatic patients receiving HD. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted in HD patients who underwent rapid antigen test screening from December 2021 to March 2022. The diagnosis of COVID-19 with rapid antigen test was always confirmed by reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). RESULTS: During the observational period, 1,748 rapid antigen tests were performed in 220 HD patients. Mean age was 68.4±14.6 years. Fifteen (8.5%) patients resulted positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection using rapid antigen tests. The diagnosis was subsequently confirmed in 14 (93.3%) patients by RT-PCR. During the same period, 12 (5.4%) symptomatic patients, regularly screened with weekly rapid antigen test, resulted positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection using RT-PCR. Overall, weekly rapid antigen test screening identified 14 out of 26 (53.8%) COVID-19 cases and showed a positive predictive value of 93%. CONCLUSION: Weekly antigen test screening of asymptomatic patients on chronic HD detected around half of the COVID-19 cases in our population.

COVID-19 Rapid Antigen Test Screening in Patients on Hemodialysis.

Introduction: Patients receiving in-center hemodialysis are extremely vulnerable to COVID-19. It is unclear if routine screening of asymptomatic hemodialysis patients is an effective strategy to prevent COVID-19 outbreaks within the dialysis unit. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of in-center hemodialysis patients who underwent bimonthly COVID-19 rapid antigen test screening from February 15th to December 26th, 2021. Nasal rapid antigen testing was performed in all asymptomatic patients. All rapid antigen-positive tests were confirmed by RT-PCR nasopharyngeal swab. Besides universal rapid antigen screening, RT-PCR testing was conducted in all symptomatic patients and contacts of COVID-19 subjects. Results: Overall, 4079 rapid antigen tests were performed in 277 hemodialysis patients on chronic hemodialysis with a mean age of 68.4 ± 14.6 years. Thirty-eight (0.9%) rapid antigen tests resulted positive. Only five (13.8%) positive-rapid antigen tests were also positive by RT-PCR testing. During the same period, 219 patients regularly screened by rapid antigen tests bimonthly underwent 442 RT-PCR nasopharyngeal swabs for clinical reasons. RT-PCR testing yielded a positive result in 13 (5.9%) patients. The time elapsed between PCR and the negative-rapid antigen test was 7.7 ± 4.6 days (range 1.8-13.9 days). At the end of the follow-up, 6.4% of the population on in-center hemodialysis contracted COVID-19, and routine rapid antigen tests detected only 5 out of 18 (27.7%) COVID-19 cases. No outbreaks of COVID-19 were identified within the dialysis unit. Conclusion: Bimonthly rapid antigen screening led to the early diagnosis of COVID-19 in less than one-third of cases. The short incubation period of the new SARS-CoV-2 variants makes bimonthly test screening inadequate for an early diagnosis of COVID-19. More frequent tests are probably necessary to improve the utility of COVID-19 nasal rapid antigen test in patients on hemodialysis.

Automated Prediction of Kidney Failure in IgA Nephropathy with Deep Learning from Biopsy Images.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Digital pathology and artificial intelligence offer new opportunities for automatic histologic scoring. We applied a deep learning approach to IgA nephropathy biopsy images to develop an automatic histologic prognostic score, assessed against ground truth (kidney failure) among patients with IgA nephropathy who were treated over 39 years. We assessed noninferiority in comparison with the histologic component of currently validated predictive tools. We correlated additional histologic features with our deep learning predictive score to identify potential additional predictive features. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: Training for deep learning was performed with randomly selected, digitalized, cortical Periodic acid-Schiff-stained sections images (363 kidney biopsy specimens) to develop our deep learning predictive score. We estimated noninferiority using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) in a randomly selected group (95 biopsy specimens) against the gold standard Oxford classification (MEST-C) scores used by the International IgA Nephropathy Prediction Tool and the clinical decision supporting system for estimating the risk of kidney failure in IgA nephropathy. We assessed additional potential predictive histologic features against a subset (20 kidney biopsy specimens) with the strongest and weakest deep learning predictive scores. RESULTS: We enrolled 442 patients; the 10-year kidney survival was 78%, and the study median follow-up was 6.7 years. Manual MEST-C showed no prognostic relationship for the endocapillary parameter only. The deep learning predictive score was not inferior to MEST-C applied using the International IgA Nephropathy Prediction Tool and the clinical decision supporting system (AUC of 0.84 versus 0.77 and 0.74, respectively) and confirmed a good correlation with the tubolointerstitial score (r=0.41, P<0.01). We observed no correlations between the deep learning prognostic score and the mesangial, endocapillary, segmental sclerosis, and crescent parameters. Additional potential predictive histopathologic features incorporated by the deep learning predictive score included (1) inflammation within areas of interstitial fibrosis and tubular atrophy and (2) hyaline casts. CONCLUSIONS: The deep learning approach was noninferior to manual histopathologic reporting and considered prognostic features not currently included in MEST-C assessment. PODCAST: This article contains a podcast at https://www.asn-online.org/media/podcast/CJASN/2022_07_26_CJN01760222.mp3.

Reactogenicity of COVID-19 vaccine in hemodialysis patients: a single-center retrospective study.

Introduction: Some hemodialysis patients are reluctant to undergo COVID-19 vaccination for the fear of developing adverse events (AEs). The aim of this study was to verify the safety of the mRNA-1273 vaccine in hemodialysis patients. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of in-center hemodialysis patients who underwent mRNA-1273 vaccine from March 1st to April 30th, 2021. All AEs occurring after the first and the second doses were collected and classified as local or systemic. Results: Overall, 126 patients on chronic maintenance dialysis without a prior COVID-19 diagnosis were vaccinated with two doses of mRNA-1273 vaccine. Mean age was 68 (IQR, 54,7-76) years and 53.6% of patients were aged ≥65 years. During the observational period of 68 (IQR, 66-70) days, AEs occurred in 57.9% and 61.9% of patients after the first dose and second dose, respectively. The most common AEs were: injection-site pain (61.9%), erythema (4.8%), itching (4.8%), swelling (16.7%), axillary swelling/tenderness (2.4%), fever (17.5%) headache (7.9%), fatigue (23.8%), myalgia (17.5%), arthralgia (12.7%), dyspnoea (2.4%), nausea/vomiting (7.1%), diarrhoea (5.6%), shivers (4%) and vertigo (1.6%). The rates of local AEs were similar after the first and second doses (P=0.8), whereas systemic AEs occurred more frequently after the second dose (P=0.001). Fever (P=0.03), fatigue (P=0.02) and nausea/vomiting (P=0.03) were significantly more frequent after the second dose of the vaccine. There were no age-related differences in the rate of AEs. Overall, vaccine-related AEs in hemodialysis patients seem to be lower than in the general population. Conclusion: The RNA-1273 vaccine was associated with the development of transient AEs after the first and second doses in patients on chronic maintenance hemodialysis. They were mostly local, whereas systemic AEs were more prevalent after the second dose. Overall, all AEs lasted for a few days, without any apparent sequelae.

Ethical challenges in managing unvaccinated patients receiving chronic in-centre haemodialysis.

Insufficient vaccine coverage and dominance of the more transmissible severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants are the leading causes of the continued spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) worldwide. To curb the surge in infections, COVID-19 vaccination has been advocated as a priority measure, especially for frail populations and people at high risk of exposure. Patients on in-centre maintenance haemodialysis (HD) embody both conditions. They are at high risk of severe COVID-19 consequences due to their advanced age and weakened immune system and carry an increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission within shared dialysis rooms and public vehicles. Vaccination of the entire HD population is therefore the most effective strategy to protect patients from the dire consequences of COVID-19. Unfortunately, a minority of patients still express COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. The management of this group of patients, who have the full right to HD treatment, poses demanding problems from a patient safety perspective. The placement of unvaccinated patients within the dialysis room and the protection of all vaccinated patients are some of the most urgent problems the nephrologist faces during the COVID-19 pandemic. In light of these COVID-19-driven changes, an ethical reflection on the management of unvaccinated patients appears crucial to act responsibly and contribute to the health promotion of dialysis patients.

Awaiting a cure for COVID-19: therapeutic approach in patients with different severity levels of COVID-19.

COVID-19 is an unpredictable infectious disease caused by SARS-CoV-2. The development of effective anti-COVID-19 vaccines has enormously minimized the risk of severe illness in most immunocompetent patients. However, unvaccinated patients and non-responders to the COVID-19 vaccine are at risk of shortand long-term consequences. In these patients, the outcome of COVID-19 relies on an interplay of multiple factors including age, immunocompetence, comorbidities, inflammatory response triggered by the virus as well as the virulence of SARS-CoV-2 variants. Generally, COVID-19 is asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic in young people, but it may manifest with respiratory insufficiency requiring mechanical ventilation in certain susceptible groups of patients. Furthermore, severe SARS-CoV-2 infection induces multiorgan failure syndrome by affecting liver, kidney heart and nervous system. Since December 2019, multiple drugs have been tested to treat COVID-19, but only a few have been proven effective to mitigate the course of the disease that continues to cause death and comorbidity worldwide. Current treatment of COVID-19 patients is essentially based on the administration of supportive oxygen therapy and the use of specific drugs such as steroids, anticoagulants, antivirals, anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and immunomodulators. However, the rapid spread of new variants and the release of new data coming from the numerous ongoing clinical trials have created the conditions for maintaining a continuous updating of the therapeutic management of COVID-19 patients. Furthermore, we believe that a well-established therapeutic strategy along with the continuum of medical care for all patients with COVID-19 is pivotal to improving disease outcomes and restoring healthcare care fragmentation caused by the pandemic. This narrative review, focusing on the therapeutic management of COVID-19 patients, aimed to provide an overview of current therapies for (i) asymptomatic or mildly/moderate symptomatic patients, (ii) hospitalized patients requiring low-flow oxygen, (iii) high-flow oxygen and (iv) mechanical ventilation.

Acid base disorders in patients with COVID-19.

PURPOSE: Acid-base derangement has been poorly described in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Considering the high prevalence of pneumonia and kidneys injury in COVID-19, frequent acid-base alterations are expected in patients admitted with SARS-Cov-2 infection. The study aimed to assess the prevalence of acid-base disorders in symptomatic patients with a diagnosis of COVID-19. METHODS: The retrospective study enrolled COVID-19 patients hospitalized at the University Hospital of Modena from 4 March to 20 June 2020. Baseline arterial blood gas (ABG) analysis was collected in 211 patients. In subjects with multiple ABG analysis, we selected only the first measurement. A pH of less than 7.37 was categorized as acidemia and a pH of more than 7.43 was categorized as alkalemia. RESULTS: ABG analyses revealed a low arterial partial pressure of oxygen (PO2, 70.2 ± 25.1 mmHg), oxygen saturation (SO2, 92%) and a mild reduction of PO2/FiO2 ratio (231 ± 129). Acid-base alterations were found in 79.7% of the patient. Metabolic alkalosis (33.6%) was the main alteration followed by respiratory alkalosis (30.3%), combined alkalosis (9.4%), respiratory acidosis (3.3%), metabolic acidosis (2.8%) and other compensated acid-base disturbances (3.6%). All six patients with metabolic acidosis died at the end of the follow-up. CONCLUSION: Variations of pH occurred in the majority (79.7%) of patients admitted with COVID-19. The patients experienced all the type of acid-base disorders, notably metabolic and respiratory alkalosis were the most common alterations in this group of patients.