Gender Differences in Experiences and Expectations of Hemodialysis in a Frail and Seriously Unwell Patient Population.

Introduction: Surprisingly few studies have explored the experiences of seriously unwell people with kidney disease on hemodialysis therapy: we conducted a mixed-methods study to investigate gender differences in illness experience, symptom burden, treatment considerations or expectations in this cohort. Methods: Seriously unwell people on hemodialysis (1-year mortality risk of >20%) at 3 hospital-based units were invited to take part in a structured interview or to complete the same questions independently via a questionnaire. A total of 54 people took part (36 males, 18 females); data analysis was undertaken using a thematic approach. Results: "Desire to keep living" is the most important and basic thought process when starting dialysis. Fear also predominates influencing risk assessment and decision-making. Once fear is managed, there are physical, social, practical and emotional issues to rationalize, but choice only seems possible if shared decision-making is part of the consultation.Gender differences were seen in perceived hopes and expectations of treatment. Males were more likely to prioritize achievement of physical goals, with females prioritizing a wish to feel well. Both genders reported significantly higher symptom scores than their health care provider perceived, however this difference was more marked in females. Dialysis regret existed in >50% of participants and 6 out of 54 (11%) stated that they would have chosen no dialysis at all. Females were more likely to report feeling depressed (P = 0.001). Conclusion: Different genders approach treatment decisions and prioritize treatment expectations differently. Recognizing this will allow personalized care plans to be developed and improve the experiences of seriously unwell people with kidney disease.

Perceptions of Illness Severity, Treatment Goals, and Life Expectancy: The ePISTLE Study.

INTRODUCTION: A better understanding of factors influencing perceived life expectancy (PLE), interactions between patient prognostic beliefs, experiences of illness, and treatment behavior is urgently needed. METHODS: Case-notes at 3 hemodialysis units were screened: patients with ≥20% 1-year mortality risk were included. Patients and their health care professionals (HCPs) were invited to complete a structured interview or mixed-methods questionnaire. Four hundred eleven patient notes were screened. Seventy-seven eligible patients were approached and 51 were included. RESULTS: Patients predicted significantly higher life expectancies than HCPs (P < 0.0001). Documented cognitive impairment, gender, or increasing age did not affect 1- or 5-year PLE. PLE influenced priorities of care: one-fifth of patients who estimated themselves to have >95% 1-year survival preferred "care focusing on relieving pain and discomfort," compared with nearly three-quarters of those reporting a ≤50% chance of 1-year survival. Twenty of 51 (39%) patients believed transplantation was an option for them, despite only 4 being waitlisted at the time of the interview. Patients who thought they were transplant candidates were significantly more confident they would be alive at 1 and 5 years and to want resuscitation attempted. Cognitive impairment had no effect on perceived transplant candidacy. A high symptom burden was present and underrecognized by HCPs. High symptom burden was associated with significantly lower PLE at both 1 and 5 years, increased anxiety/depression scores, and treatment choices more likely to prioritize relief of suffering. CONCLUSION: There is a disparity between patient PLE and those of their HCPs. Severity of symptom burden and beliefs regarding PLE or transplant candidacy affect patient treatment preferences.

Longevity of SARS-CoV-2 immune responses in hemodialysis patients and protection against reinfection.

Patients with end stage kidney disease receiving in-center hemodialysis (ICHD) have had high rates of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Following infection, patients receiving ICHD frequently develop circulating antibodies to SARS-CoV-2, even with asymptomatic infection. Here, we investigated the durability and functionality of the immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients receiving ICHD. Three hundred and fifty-six such patients were longitudinally screened for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and underwent routine PCR-testing for symptomatic and asymptomatic infection. Patients were regularly screened for nucleocapsid protein (anti-NP) and receptor binding domain (anti-RBD) antibodies, and those who became seronegative at six months were screened for SARS-CoV-2 specific T-cell responses. One hundred and twenty-nine (36.2%) patients had detectable antibody to anti-NP at time zero, of whom 127 also had detectable anti-RBD. Significantly, at six months, 71/111 (64.0%) and 99/116 (85.3%) remained anti-NP and anti-RBD seropositive, respectively. For patients who retained antibody, both anti-NP and anti-RBD levels were reduced significantly after six months. Eleven patients who were anti-NP seropositive at time zero, had no detectable antibody at six months; of whom eight were found to have SARS-CoV-2 antigen specific T cell responses. Independent of antibody status at six months, patients with baseline positive SARS-CoV-2 serology were significantly less likely to have PCR confirmed infection over the following six months. Thus, patients receiving ICHD mount durable immune responses six months post SARS-CoV-2 infection, with fewer than 3% of patients showing no evidence of humoral or cellular immunity.

Problems associated with hemodialysis and travel.

BACKGROUND: While there is a recognized risk of hepatitis C acquisition associated with dialysis away from the "home" center, there is little documented data on the effect that dialysis while traveling has on the dialysis patient's health. This study was designed to examine the incidence of travel within a hemodialysis population and to ascertain whether travel was associated with morbidity for patients on hemodialysis. METHODS: Travel data were collected prospectively over a 6-month period, from April 2009, for all patients receiving maintenance hemodialysis across our dialysis centers. Biochemical, microbiological, and hematological parameters as well as hepatitis serology and antibiotic starts were recorded for 12 weeks prior to and following dialysis away from center. RESULTS: A total of 172 individuals traveled on 200 occasions. The blood stream infection rate for travelers with a central venous catheter was 0.25 versus 0.83/1,000 access days (p = 0.038) in the 12 weeks pre-travel versus post-travel. Parenteral and oral antibiotic starts were both significantly elevated post-travel and were mainly instituted for either chest or urinary sepsis. There was evidence of raised inflammatory markers and anemia on return to center but no evidence of hepatitis B or hepatitis C seroconversion. CONCLUSIONS: Travel and dialysis away from a patient's usual hemodialysis unit is a common occurrence but is associated with an increased risk of bacterial infection, anemia, and inflammatory response. This study provides evidence for the concern that hemodialysis away from center is associated with increased morbidity.

Sodium citrate versus heparin catheter locks for cuffed central venous catheters: a single-center randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Sodium citrate has antibacterial and anticoagulant properties that are confined to the catheter when used as a catheter lock. Studies of its use as a catheter lock have suggested its efficacy in preventing infection and bleeding complications compared with sodium heparin. STUDY DESIGN: Open-label randomized controlled trial of 2 catheter locks to examine the hypothesis that sodium citrate catheter locks will reduce catheter-related bacteremia and exit-site infection. SETTINGS & PARTICIPANTS: 232 consenting long-term hemodialysis patients in 4 satellite dialysis units to a large dialysis program with protocolized treatment and targets. All patients were using twin-catheter single-lumen Tesio-Caths (MedComp, Harleysville, PA). INTERVENTION: 6 months' use of 46.7% sodium citrate (citrate) or 5% heparin (heparin) locked postdialysis in the dead space of the central venous catheter. OUTCOMES & MEASUREMENTS: Primary end point of catheter-related bacteremia and exit-site infection. Secondary end points of catheter thrombosis defined by the use of urokinase lock and infusion, new catheter insertion, catheter-related admission, blood transfusions, parenteral iron, and erythropoietin requirements. RESULTS: Catheter-related bacteremia did not differ in the 2 groups, with an incidence of 0.7 events/1,000 catheter-days. There was no significant difference in rates of exit-site infection (0.7 versus 0.5 events/1,000 catheter-days; P = 0.5). The secondary end point of catheter thrombosis defined by the use of a urokinase lock was significantly more common in the citrate group, with an incidence of 8 versus 4.3/1,000 catheter-days (P < 0.001). Other secondary end points did not differ. Citrate treatment was curtailed compared with heparin because of a greater incidence of adverse events, with a mean treatment duration before withdrawal of 4.8 +/- 2.0 versus 5.7 +/- 1.2 months, respectively (P < 0.001). LIMITATIONS: Low baseline catheter-related bacteremia and exit-site infection event rates may have underpowered this study. High adverse-event rates may have been related to high-concentration citrate that led to increased overspill and reduction in lock volume. This may also explain the increased rates of thrombosis in this group. CONCLUSION: Widespread and long-term use of 46.7% citrate catheter locks with Tesio-Cath access is not justified by this study.