Conservative management of chronic kidney disease stage 5: role of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: Benefits and risks of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE-I) in advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) are controversial. We tested the role of ACE-I in slowing the progression of renal damage in a real-world elderly population with CKD stage 5. METHODS: We evaluated all patients consecutively referred to our CKD stage 5 outpatient clinic from January 2002 to December 2013. Chronicity was defined as two consecutive estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) measurements below 15 ml/min/1.73 m2. We retrieved parameters of interest at baseline and assessed eGFR reduction rate during follow-up. We estimated GFR by the 4-variable Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) formula. RESULTS: Mean age of the 342 subjects analyzed was 72 years and eGFR 10 ml/min/1.73 m2. In the 188 patients on ACE-I at baseline, the subsequent annual rate of eGFR reduction was less than a third of that found in the 154 patients off ACE-I. Across phosphate quartiles, baseline eGFR significantly decreased while its annual reduction rate significantly increased. Of the original cohort, 60 patients (17 %) died, 201 (59 %) started dialysis and 81 (24 %) were still in conservative treatment at the end of the study. Multivariate analysis identified age, phosphate, proteinuria, baseline eGFR and its rate of progression as independent risk factors directly or inversely predictive of progression to dialysis. ACE-I use significantly reduced by 31 % the risk of dialysis. CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that proteinuria independently predicts further renal damage progression even in end-stage renal disease patients not yet in dialysis. In our cohort of elderly patients with very advanced CKD, ACE-I was effective in slowing down further renal damage progression.

Peritoneal ultrafiltration in patients with advanced decompensated heart failure.

The aim of the Best Practice guidelines on peritoneal ultrafiltration (UF) in patients with treatment-resistant advanced decompensated heart failure (TR-AHDF) is to achieve a common approach to the management of decompensated heart failure in those situations in which all conventional treatment options have been unsuccessful, and to stimulate a closer cooperation between nephrologists and cardiologists. The standardization of the case series of different centers would allow a better definition of the results published in the literature, without which they are nothing more than anecdotes. TR-AHDF is characterized by the persistence of severe symptoms even when all possible pharmacological and surgical options have been exhausted. These patients are often treated with methods that allow extracorporeal UF - slow continuous ultrafiltration (SCUF) and continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) - which have to be performed in hospital facilities. Peritoneal ultrafiltration (PUF) can be considered a treatment option in patients with TR-AHDF when, despite the fact that all treatment options have been used, patients meet the following criteria: • stage D decompensated heart failure (ACC/AHA classification); • INTERMACS level 4 decompensated heart failure; • INTERMACS frequent flyer profile; • chronic renal failure (estimated glomerular filtration rate <50 ml/min per 1.73 m2: KDOQI classification stage 3 chronic kidney disease); • no obvious contraindications to peritoneal UF. PUF treatment modes are derived from the treatment regimens proposed by various authors to obtain systemic UF in patients with severe decompensated heart failure, using manual and automated incremental peritoneal dialysis involving various glucose concentrations in addition to the single icodextrin exchange. These guidelines also identify a minimum set of tests and procedures for the follow-up phase, to be supplemented, according to the center's resources and policy, with other tests that are less routine or more complex also from a logistic/organizational standpoint, emphasizing the need for the patient's clinical and treatment program to involve both the nephrologist and the cardiologist. The pathophysiological aspects of a deterioration in kidney function in patients with decompensated heart failure are also considered, and the results of PUF in patients with decompensated heart failure reported in the various case series are reviewed.