Could incremental haemodialysis be a new standard of care? A suggestion from a long-term observational study.

Introduction: The term incremental haemodialysis (HD) means that both dialysis dose and frequency can be low at dialysis inception but should be progressively increased, to compensate for any subsequent reduction in residual kidney function. Policy of the Matera Dialysis Center is to attempt an incremental start of HD without a strict low-protein diet in all patients choosing HD and with urine output (UO) >500 ml/day. The present study aimed at analyzing the results of this policy over the last 20 years. Subjects and methods: The dataset of all patients starting HD between January 1st, 2000 and December 31st, 2019 was retrieved from the local electronic database. Exclusion criteria were: urine output <500 ml/day or follow-up <3 months after the start of the dialysis treatment. Results: A total of 266 patients were retrieved; 64 of them were excluded from the study. The remaining 202 patients were enrolled into the study and subdivided into 3 groups (G1, G2 and G3) according to the frequency of treatment at the start of dialysis: 117 patients (57.9%) started with once-a-week (1HD/wk) (G1); 46 (22.8%) with twice-a-week (2HD/wk) (G2); 39 (19.3%) with thrice-a-week (3HD/wk) dialysis regimen (G3). Patients of G1 remained on 1HD/wk for 11.9 ±14.8 months and then transferred to 2HD/wk for further 13.0 ±20.3 months. Patients of G2 remained on 2HD/wk for 16.7 ±23.2 months. Altogether, 25943 sessions were administered during the less frequent treatment periods instead of 47988, that would have been delivered if the patients had been on 3HD/wk, thus saving 22045 sessions (45.9%). Gross mortality of the entire group was 12.6%, comparable to the mean mortality of the Italian dialysis population (16.2%). Survival at 1 and 5 years was not significantly different among the 3 groups: 94% and 61% (G1); 83% and 39% (G2); 84% and 46% (G3). Conclusions: Our long-term observational study suggests that incremental HD is a valuable option for incident patients. For most of them (80.7%) it is viable for about 1-2 years, with obvious socio-economic benefits and survival rates comparable to that of the Italian dialysis population. However, randomized controlled trials are lacking and therefore urgently needed. If they will confirm observational data, incremental HD will be a new standard of care.

The spectrum of kidney dysfunction requiring chronic dialysis therapy: Implications for clinical practice and future clinical trials.

Staging to capture kidney function and pathophysiologic processes according to severity is widely used in chronic kidney disease or acute kidney injury not requiring dialysis. Yet the diagnosis of "end-stage kidney disease" (ESKD) considers patients as a single homogeneous group, with negligible kidney function, in need of kidney replacement therapy. Herein, we review the evidence behind the heterogeneous nature of ESKD and discuss potential benefits of recasting the terminology used to describe advanced kidney dysfunction from a monolithic entity to a disease with stages of ascending severity. We consider kidney assistance therapy in lieu of kidney replacement therapy to better reconcile all available types of therapy for advanced kidney failure including dietary intervention, kidney transplantation, and dialysis therapy at varied schedules. The lexicon "kidney dysfunction requiring dialysis" (KDRD) with stages of ascending severity based on levels of residual kidney function (RKF)-that is, renal urea clearance-and manifestations related to uremia, fluid status, and other abnormalities is discussed. Subtyping KDRD by levels of RKF could advance dialysis therapy as a form of kidney assistance therapy adjusted based on RKF and clinical symptoms. We focus on intermittent hemodialysis and underscore the need to personalize dialysis treatments and improve characterization of patients included in clinical trials.

Kidney dysfunction requiring dialysis is a heterogeneous syndrome: we should treat it like one.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Advanced kidney failure requiring dialysis, commonly labeled end-stage kidney disease or chronic kidney disease stage 5D, is a heterogeneous syndrome -a key reason that may explain why: treating advanced kidney dysfunction is challenging and many clinical trials involving patients on dialysis have failed, thus far. Treatment with dialytic techniques - of which maintenance thrice-weekly hemodialysis is most commonly used - is broadly named kidney 'replacement' therapy, a term that casts the perception of a priori abandonment of intrinsic kidney function and subsumes patients into a single, homogeneous group. RECENT FINDINGS: Patients with advanced kidney failure necessitating dialytic therapy may have ongoing endogenous kidney function, and differ in their clinical manifestations and needs. Different terminology, for example, kidney dysfunction requiring dialysis (KDRD) with stages of progressive severity could better capture the range of phenotypes of patients who require kidney 'assistance' therapy. SUMMARY: Classifying patients with KDRD based on objective, quantitative levels of endogenous kidney function, as well as patient-reported symptoms and quality of life, would facilitate hemodialysis prescriptions tailored to level of kidney dysfunction, clinical needs, and personal priorities. Such classification would encourage clinicians to move toward personalized, physiological, and adaptive approach to hemodialysis therapy.

IHDIP: a controlled randomized trial to assess the security and effectiveness of the incremental hemodialysis in incident patients.

BACKGROUND: Most people who make the transition to renal replacement therapy (RRT) are treated with a fixed dose thrice-weekly hemodialysis réegimen, without considering their residual kidney function (RKF). Recent papers inform us that incremental hemodialysis is associated with preservation of RKF, whenever compared with conventional hemodialysis. The objective of the present controlled randomized trial (RCT) is to determine if start HD with one sessions per week (1-Wk/HD), it is associated with better patient survival and other safety parameters. METHODS/DESIGN: IHDIP is a multicenter RCT experimental open trial. It is randomized in a 1:1 ratio and controlled through usual clinical practice, with a low intervention level and non-commercial. It includes 152 incident patients older than 18 years, with a RRF of ≥4 ml/min/1.73 m2, measured by renal clearance of urea (KrU). The intervention group includes 76 patients who will start with incremental HD (1-Wk/HD). The control group includes 76 patients who will start with thrice-weekly hemodialysis régimen. The primary outcome is assessing the survival rate, while the secondary outcomes are the morbidity rate, the clinical parameters, the quality of life and the efficiency. DISCUSSION: This study will enable to know the number of sessions a patient should receive when starting HD, depending on his RRF. The potentially important clinical and financial implications of incremental hemodialysis warrant this RCT. TRIAL REGISTRATION: U.S. National Institutes of Health, ClinicalTrials.gov . Number: NCT03239808 , completed 13/04/2017. SPONSOR: Foundation for Training and Research of Health Professionals of Extremadura.

Justificación y diseño de DiPPI: un ensayo controlado aleatorizado para evaluar la seguridad y la efectividad de la hemodiálisis progresiva en pacientes incidentes / Rationale and design of DiPPI: A randomized controlled trial to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of progressive hemodialysis in incident patients

INTRODUCCIÓN: La hemodiálisis (HD) progresiva es una modalidad de inicio del tratamiento renal sustitutivo adaptada a las necesidades individuales de cada paciente. Está condicionada fundamentalmente por la función renal residual (FRR). En ella, la frecuencia de sesiones con las que el paciente inicia HD (una o 2 sesiones por semana) es menor que en la HD convencional (3 por semana). Dicha frecuencia aumenta (de una a 2, y de 2 a 3) con el declinar de la FRR. Metodología/diseño: DiPPI es un estudio abierto, multicéntrico, experimental, aleatorizado 1:1 y controlado con procedimiento de práctica clínica habitual, de bajo nivel de intervención y no comercial. Incluye 152 pacientes mayores de 18 años, con enfermedad renal crónica estadio 5, que inician HD como tratamiento renal sustitutivo; y la FRR, medida por aclaramiento renal de urea (KrU) es ≥ 4ml/min/1,73 m2. El estudio se basa en un grupo de intervención con 76 pacientes que iniciarán HD con una sola sesión por semana (modalidad progresiva) y un grupo control con 76 pacientes que comenzarán con 3 sesiones por semana. El objetivo primario es evaluar la supervivencia y los objetivos secundarios son la morbilidad (hospitalizaciones), los parámetros clínicos habituales, la calidad de vida y la eficiencia. DISCUSIÓN: Este estudio permitirá conocer, con la máxima evidencia científica, cuántas sesiones debe recibir un paciente al inicio del tratamiento con HD, dependiendo de su FRR. Registro: Registrado en U.S. National Institutes of Health, ClinicalTrials.gov con número NCT03239808

INTRODUCTION: Progressive haemodialysis (HD) is a starting regime for renal replacement therapy (RRT) adapted to each patient's necessities. It is mainly conditioned by the residual renal function (RRF). The frequency of sessions with which patients start HD (one or two sessions per week), is lower than that for conventional HD (three times per week). Such frequency is increased (from one to two sessions, and from two to three sessions) as the RRF declines. Methodology/DESIGN: IHDIP is a multicentre randomised experimental open trial. It is randomised in a 1:1 ratio and controlled through usual clinical practice, with a low intervention level and non-commercial. It includes 152 patients older than 18 years with chronic renal disease stage 5 and start HD as RRT, with an RRF of ≥ 4 ml/min/1.73 m2, measured by renal clearance of urea (KrU). The intervention group includes 76 patients who will start with one session of HD per week (progressive HD). The control group includes 76 patients who will start with three sessions per week (conventional HD). The primary purpose is assessing the survival rate, while the secondary purposes are the morbidity rate (hospital admissions), the clinical parameters, the quality of life and the efficiency. DISCUSSION: This study will enable us to know, with the highest level of scientific evidence, the number of sessions a patient should receive when starting the HD treatment, depending on his/her RRF. Trial registration: Registered at the U.S. National Institutes of Health, ClinicalTrials.gov under the number NCT03239808

Rationale and design of DiPPI: A randomized controlled trial to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of progressive hemodialysis in incident patients. / Justificación y diseño de DiPPI: un ensayo controlado aleatorizado para evaluar la seguridad y la efectividad de la hemodiálisis progresiva en pacientes incidentes.

INTRODUCTION: Progressive haemodialysis (HD) is a starting regime for renal replacement therapy (RRT) adapted to each patient's necessities. It is mainly conditioned by the residual renal function (RRF). The frequency of sessions with which patients start HD (one or two sessions per week), is lower than that for conventional HD (three times per week). Such frequency is increased (from one to two sessions, and from two to three sessions) as the RRF declines. METHODOLOGY/DESIGN: IHDIP is a multicentre randomised experimental open trial. It is randomised in a 1:1 ratio and controlled through usual clinical practice, with a low intervention level and non-commercial. It includes 152 patients older than 18 years with chronic renal disease stage 5 and start HD as RRT, with an RRF of ≥4ml/min/1.73m2, measured by renal clearance of urea (KrU). The intervention group includes 76 patients who will start with one session of HD per week (progressive HD). The control group includes 76 patients who will start with three sessions per week (conventional HD). The primary purpose is assessing the survival rate, while the secondary purposes are the morbidity rate (hospital admissions), the clinical parameters, the quality of life and the efficiency. DISCUSSION: This study will enable us to know, with the highest level of scientific evidence, the number of sessions a patient should receive when starting the HD treatment, depending on his/her RRF. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered at the U.S. National Institutes of Health, ClinicalTrials.gov under the number NCT03239808.

Long-term effects of high-efficiency on-line haemodiafiltration on uraemic toxicity. A multicentre prospective randomized study.

BACKGROUND: Haemodiafiltration (HDF) may improve survival of chronic dialysis patients. This prospective, multicentre randomized cross-over study evaluated the effects of long-term on-line HDF on the levels of solutes of different molecular weight markers or causative agents of the most common metabolic derangements in uraemia. METHODS: Sixty-nine patients from eight Italian centres were randomly assigned to two 6-month treatment sequences: A-B and B-A [A, low-flux haemodialysis (HD) and B, on-line HDF]. Comparative evaluation of basal levels of small, medium-sized and protein-bound solutes at the end of the two treatment periods and analysis of parameters dependence during the interventions were performed. RESULTS: On-line HDF showed greater efficiency than low-flux HD in removing small solutes (eKt/Vurea 1.60 ± 0.31 versus 1.44 ± 0.26, P < 0.0001) and in reducing basal levels of beta2-microglobulin (22.2 ± 7.8 versus 33.5 ± 11.8 mg/L, P < 0.0001), total homocysteine (15.4 ± 5.0 versus 18.7 ± 8.2 µmol/L, P = 0 .003), phosphate (4.6 ± 1.3 versus 5.0 ± 1.4 mg/dL, P = 0.008) and, remarkably, of intact parathyroid hormone (202 ± 154 versus 228 ± 176 pg/mL, P = 0.03). Moreover, in on-line HDF, lower levels of C-reactive protein (5.5 ± 5.5 versus 6.7 ± 6.1 mg/L, P = 0.03) and triglycerides (148 ± 77 versus 167 ± 87 mg/dL, P = 0.008) and increased HDL cholesterol (49.2 ± 12.7 versus 44.7 ± 12.4 mg/dL, P = <0.0001) were observed. The asymmetric dimethylarginine level was not significantly affected (0.97 ± 0.4 versus 0.84 ± 0.37 µmol/L). Erythropoietin and phosphate binders' doses could be reduced. CONCLUSIONS: On-line high-efficiency HDF resulted in enhanced removal and lower basal levels of small, medium-sized and protein-bound solutes, which are markers or causative agents of uraemic pathologies, mainly inflammation, secondary hyperparathyroidism and dyslipidaemia. This may contribute to reducing uraemic complications and possibly to improving patient survival.

Removal of uraemic retention solutes in standard bicarbonate haemodialysis and long-hour slow-flow bicarbonate haemodialysis.

BACKGROUND: Several studies already stressed the importance of haemodialysis (HD) time in the removal of uraemic toxins. In those studies, however, also the amount of dialysate and/or processed blood was altered. The present study aimed to investigate the isolated effect of the factor time t (by processing the same total blood and dialysate volume in two different time schedules) on the removal and kinetic behaviour of some small, middle and protein-bound molecules. METHODS: The present study had a crossover design: 11 stable anuric HD patients underwent two bicarbonate HD sessions (~ 4 and ~ 8 h) in a random sequence, at least 1 week apart. The GENIUS single-pass batch dialysis system and the high-flux FX80 dialysers (Fresenius Medical Care, Bad Homburg, Germany) were used. The volume of blood and dialysate processed, volume of ultrafiltration, and dialysate composition were prescribed to be the same. For each patient, blood was sampled from the arterial line at 0, 60, 120, 180 and 240 min (all sessions), and at 360 and 480 min (8-h sessions). Dialysate was sampled at the end of HD from the dialysate tank. The following solutes were investigated: (i) small molecules: urea, creatinine, phosphorus and uric acid; (ii) middle molecule: ß(2)M; and (iii) protein-bound molecules: homocysteine, hippuric acid, indole-3-acetic acid and indoxyl sulphate. Total solute removals (solute concentration in the spent dialysate of each analyte × 90 L - the volume of dialysate) (TSR), clearances (TSR of a solute/area under the plasma water concentration time curve of the solute) (K), total cleared volumes (K × dialysis time) (TCV), and dialyser extraction ratios (K/blood flow rate) (ER) were determined. The percent differences of TSR, K, TCV and ER between 4- and 8-h dialyses were calculated. Single-pool Kt/Vurea, and post-dialysis percent rebounds of urea, creatinine and ß(2)M were computed. RESULTS: TSR, TCV and ER were statistically significantly larger during prolonged HD for all small and middle molecules (at least, P < 0.01). Specifically, the percent increases of TSR (8 h vs 4 h) were: for urea 22.6.0% (P < 0.003), for creatinine 24.8% (P < 0.002), for phosphorus 26.6% (P < 0.001), and for ß(2)M 39.2% (P < 0.005). No statistically significant difference was observed for protein-bound solutes in any of the parameters being studied. Single-pool Kt/Vurea was 1.41 ± 0.19 for the 4-h dialysis sessions and 1.80 ± 0.29 for the 8-h ones. The difference was statistically significant (P < 0.0001). Post-dialysis percent rebounds of urea, creatinine and ß(2)M were statistically significantly greater in the 4-h dialysis sessions (at least, P < 0.0002). CONCLUSIONS: The present controlled study using a crossover design indicates that small and middle molecules are removed more adequately from the deeper compartments when performing a prolonged HD, even if blood and dialysate volumes are kept constant. Hence, factor time t is very important for these retention solutes. The kinetic behaviour of protein-bound solutes is completely different from that of small and middle molecules, mainly because of the strength of their protein binding.

Level of renal function in patients starting dialysis: an ERA-EDTA Registry study.

BACKGROUND: The aims of this European study were (i) to compare the level of renal function at the start of dialysis between age groups, gender, primary renal disease, comorbid conditions, treatment modality, time periods and countries, and (ii) to determine which baseline characteristics are associated with the level of renal function at the start of dialysis. METHODS: Renal registries participating in the European Renal Association-European Dialysis and Transplant Association Registry provided data on serum creatinine 0-4 weeks before the start of dialysis in incident dialysis patients in 1999 and 2003. Data were available in 11 472 patients from nine renal registries. Glomerular filtration rate (GFR) was estimated by the four-variable Modification of Diet in Renal Disease equation. RESULTS: The unadjusted median eGFR at the start of dialysis was 7.0 mL/min/1.73 m(2) in the 1999 data (median serum creatinine 7.5 mg/dL) and 7.7 mL/min/1.73 m(2) in the 2003 data (serum creatinine 7.0 mg/dL). Using linear regression with adjustment for the other covariates, older patients, males, patients with diabetes mellitus, hypertension/renal vascular disease (HT/RVD) as primary renal disease (vs glomerulonephritis), ischaemic heart disease or peripheral vascular disease and patients starting on peritoneal dialysis (PD) initiated dialysis at higher levels of eGFR (range Δ eGFR: 0.1-1.2 mL/min/1.73 m(2)). Using the same analyses, eGFR differed between countries (range: 6.5-8.6 mL/min/1.73 m(2)). CONCLUSIONS: During 2003, patients started dialysis at somewhat higher eGFR levels than those starting during 1999. There were also international differences in eGFR. Such differences may, at least in part, be explained by differences in creatinine measurement methods between countries and time periods. Finally, older patients, males, patients with HT/RVD or comorbidity and those starting on PD had slightly higher eGFR levels than younger patients, females, those with glomerulonephritis, without comorbidity and those starting on haemodialysis. Further research is needed into other, more clinically related factors affecting the decision to start dialysis.

A simple approach for assessing equilibrated Kt/V beta 2-M on a routine basis.

BACKGROUND: Large observational studies have shown a reduction in morbidity and mortality in patients on high-flux haemodialysis (HD) or convective techniques, compared with low-flux HD. An index to evaluate treatment efficiency in middle molecule (MM) removal would be recommended. Since beta-2-microglobulin (beta2-M) is a recognized MM marker, we evaluated an easy approach for Kt/V(beta2-M) assessment on a routine basis, avoiding other complex methods. METHODS: An equation that estimates single-pool (sp) Kt/V(beta2-M) was derived from Leypoldt's formula, which calculates beta2-M dialyser clearance (K(beta2-M)) from the post/pre-dialysis beta2-M concentration (C(t)/C(0)) ratio and the weight loss/end-dialysis weight (Delta W/W) ratio. Our equation, spKt/V(beta2-M) = 6.12 Delta W/W [1 - ln(C(t)/C(0))/ln(1 + 6.12 Delta W/W)], was derived by assuming urea distribution volume (V(u)) as 49% of W and beta2-M volume (V(beta2-M)) as V(u)/3, in agreement with the average patient values in the HEMO Study. The spKt/V(beta2-M) values calculated with our equation (F) in 129 patients on 407 sessions of different high-flux treatments were compared with those calculated with the method applied in the HEMO Study (HM). Equilibrated beta2-M concentration (C(eq)) of the same sessions was also estimated with the equation for C(eq) by Tattersall, and equilibrated Kt/V (eKt/V(beta2-M)) was calculated by introducing Tattersall's equation into our simplified spKt/V(beta2-M) formula. RESULTS: Mean results of our spKt/V(beta2-M) equation (F) were very close to those of the HM method (1.48 +/- 0.38 vs 1.47 +/- 0.37). The difference was less than +/-0.1 in 95% of cases. A mean end-session beta2-M rebound of 44 +/- 14% was predicted, which caused a mean reduction in actual Kt/V(beta2-M) of ~27% (eKt/V(beta2-M) = 1.08 +/- 0.26). CONCLUSIONS: The method proposed to estimate spKt/V(beta2-M) and eKt/V(beta2-M) could become a simple tool to monitor the efficiency of high-flux HD and convective techniques and to evaluate the adequacy of treatments in terms of MM removal. Moreover, it might help to better understand the effects of different dialysis schedules. Validation on a larger dialysis population is required.

Residual renal function at the start of dialysis and clinical outcomes.

BACKGROUND: This study evaluates the association between estimated GFR (eGFR) at the start of dialysis and mortality within Europe. METHODS: Renal registries participating in the ERA-EDTA Registry were asked to provide data on serum creatinine recorded 0-4 weeks before the start of dialysis in incident dialysis patients in 1999 and 2003. Within this cohort study, data were available in 11 472 patients from nine national or regional European renal registries. Cox regression analyses were performed to examine the association between GFR estimated by the four-variable MDRD equation (eGFR) and all-cause mortality, using a follow-up through 31 December 2005. RESULTS: In the 2003 data, the mean eGFR was 8.6 ml/min/1.73 m(2). The unadjusted survival analyses showed that an increase in eGFR of 1 ml/min/1.73 m(2) was associated with a higher mortality risk (HR = 1.03; 95% CI: 1.03-1.04) that remained similar after adjustment for age, gender, primary renal disease, treatment modality, country and comorbidity. The findings were consistent across gender, treatment modalities, geographical regions and time periods (2003 versus 1999), but the association between a higher eGFR at the start of dialysis and mortality was the strongest in the youngest age groups and in patients with glomerulonephritis. Analyses at centre level showed that a 10% increase in the percentage of patients starting dialysis at high eGFR levels (>or=10.5 ml/min) was associated with a 22% higher mortality risk (HR = 1.22; 95% CI: 1.18-1.26). CONCLUSIONS: This European study showed that a higher eGFR at the start of dialysis was associated with a higher mortality risk. However, an answer to the question when to start dialysis needs to come from randomized controlled trials.

Simple and accurate quantification of dialysis in acute renal failure patients during either urea non-steady state or treatment with irregular or continuous schedules.

BACKGROUND: The quantification of dialysis in critically ill acute renal failure (ARF) patients requires a unifying expression that can establish kinetic equivalence amongst patients treated with irregular or frequent intermittent haemodialysis (IHD) schedules or with differing renal replacement therapies. EKRjc is a generalized form of the equivalent urea renal clearance (EKRc), and represents the equivalent continuous urea clearance that will result in the given time-averaged concentration of urea, for the given amount of urea removal. The suitability of EKRjc for the measurement of dialysis dose in this setting is examined. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: 420 weeks of renal replacement therapy (IHD and continuous renal replacement therapy) were simulated in 15 virtual 'patients' using a variable volume double pool urea kinetic model. Additional data from eight ARF patients were used to exemplify calculations. 1260 EKRjc values were calculated using both formal urea kinetic modelling, as well as a simplified method that requires input of changes in patient fluid state and blood urea nitrogen concentrations over a period of observation, in addition to an initial estimate of patient post-dialysis urea distribution volume (V(T)). RESULTS: EKRjc is shown to provide a unifying expression of dialysis dose irrespective of IHD schedule or renal replacement therapy. EKRjc is shown to be independent from the assumption of the urea steady state, and intrinsically normalized to patient urea distribution volume to allow dose comparisons between patients of different size. Residual renal urea clearance is easily incorporated where present. EKRjc is easily calculated using the simplified method without the need for iterative urea kinetic modelling. The accuracy of this simplified method is maintained when the initial estimation of V(T) is both 25% greater or smaller than the true value. Calculation of EKRjc is exemplified using the clinical data. CONCLUSIONS: EKRjc is the most suitable urea kinetic expression for the quantification of dialysis in critically ill ARF patients.

Epidemiology of end-stage renal disease in an interregional perspective: Registries of Puglia and Basilicata, southern Italy.

BACKGROUND: This report on the 1994-1998 Dialysis and Transplantation Registry (DTR) of Puglia and Basilicata provides the first epidemiological profile of ESRD in southern Italy. METHODS: Frequency measures of patients in renal replacement therapy (RRT) were computed for Puglia and Basilicata (inhabitants: 4,086,422 and 610,000 respectively). Hazard ratios (HR) of death in relation to sex, age, educational level, primary nephropathies, and modality of dialysis, were estimated by applying the Cox model to patients starting dialysis as first RRT in 1994-1998 in Puglia. RESULTS: The prevalence of treated ESRD in Puglia was 881 per million population (p.m.p.) (dialysis: 721 p.m.p.) in 1998, 713 p.m.p. (dialysis: 617 p.m.p.) in 1994. In Basilicata the prevalence of ESRD was 795 p.m.p. (dialysis: 669 p.m.p.) in 1998, 636 p.m.p. (dialysis: 575 p.m.p.) in 1994. Mean age at start of dialysis of incident cases of Puglia was 60 yr (median: 64 yr). Figures of diabetes, vascular diseases, and glomerulonephritis, were: 16%, 21%, 17%. Out of 2,152 incident patients on dialysis for at least one month, 293 started with peritoneal dialysis (PD). A 60-70% higher risk of death was observed for diabetic nephropathy and PD. In the Puglia/Basilicata DTR pooled analysis, lower educational level was associated with a 60% increased mortality risk. CONCLUSIONS: The associations of PD and low education with the risk of death are very likely to be due to comorbid conditions, unavailable in these databases as in most regional and national DTR. By looking at variations of rates and outcomes among areas, potential improvements of local DTR for planning and research uses are discussed.