Christopher R. Blagg

Survival with Dialysis and Transplantation in Patients with End-Stage Renal Disease

We examined the survival experience of 1038 white patients with end-stage renal disease to compare transplantation with maintenance dialysis. A mathematical model was used that permitted adjustment for the confounding effects of age and morbidity at the start of treatment as well as for the year in which treatment began. For patients with all kinds of renal disease, survival was related to age and morbidity but not to the year of starting treatment. Transplantation with a graft from a living related donor was associated with significantly better survival than either transplantation with a cadaveric graft (relative risk, 0.54) or dialysis (relative risk, 0.55). No significant difference in survival was found between treatment by dialysis and by cadaveric transplantation (relative risk, 1.01). In view of this experience, the decision about whether a patient on dialysis should receive a cadaveric transplant should be based on evaluation of the differences in complications associated with the two treatments and the potential effects of these on the patients general life style, opportunity for rehabilitation, and family and social responsibilities. Whether the use of cyclosporine will change this assessment in the future remains to be seen.

Short daily haemodialysis: survival in 415 patients treated for 1006 patient-years.

BACKGROUND Survival statistics for daily haemodialysis are lacking as most centres providing this have treated only a small number of patients for short observation times. We pooled our 23-year, 1006-patient-year, five-centre experience of 415 patients treated by short daily haemodialysis. METHODS One hundred and fifty patients were treated in-centre, most because of medical complications and 265 by home or self-care haemodialysis. Patients were on daily haemodialysis for 29 +/- 31 (0-272) months. Forty-two percent had primary and 31% had secondary renal failure. Treatment time was 136 +/- 35 min, frequency 5.8 +/- 0.5 times/week and weekly stdKt/V 2.7 +/- 0.55. RESULTS Eighty-five patients (20%) died; 5-year cumulative survival was 68 +/- 4.1% and 10-year survival was 42 +/- 9%. Age, secondary renal failure and in-centre dialysis were associated with mortality, while gender, frequency of dialysis (5, 6 or 7 per week), continent, country and blood access were not. Survival was compared with matched patients from the USRDS 2005 Data Report using the standardized mortality ratio and cumulative survival curves. Both comparisons showed that the survival of the daily haemodialysis patients was 2-3 times higher and the predicted 50% survival time 2.3-10.9 years longer than that of the matched US haemodialysis patients. Survival of patients dialyzing daily at home was similar to that of age-matched recipients of deceased donor renal transplants. CONCLUSIONS Survival of patients on short daily haemodialysis was 2-3 times better than that of matched three times weekly haemodialysis patients reported by the USRDS.

Survival and hospitalization among patients using nocturnal and short daily compared to conventional hemodialysis: a USRDS study

We estimated the survival and hospitalization among frequent hemodialysis users in comparison to those patients undergoing thrice-weekly conventional hemodialysis. All patients had similar characteristics and medical histories. In this cohort study of frequent hemodialysis users and propensity score-matched controls, the collaborating clinicians identified 94 patients who used nocturnal hermodialysis (NHD) and 43 patients who used short-duration daily hemodialysis (SDHD) for a minimum of 60 days. Ten propensity score-matched control patients for each NHD and SDHD patient were identified from the United States Renal Data System database. Primary outcomes were risk for all-cause mortality and risk for the composite outcome of mortality or major morbid event (acute myocardial infarction or stroke) estimated using Cox proportional hazards models. Risks for all-cause, cardiovascular-related, infection-related, and vascular access-related hospital admissions were also studied. Nocturnal hemodialysis was associated with significant reductions in mortality risk and risk for mortality or major morbid event when compared to conventional hemodialysis. There was a reduced but non-significant risk of death for patients using SDHD compared to controls. All-cause and specific hospitalizations did not differ significantly between NHD and SDHD patients and their matched control cohorts. Our study suggests that NHD may improve patient survival.

Dialysate made from dry chemicals using citric acid increases dialysis dose

A new dry dialysate concentrate acidified with citric acid (citrate dialysate) has been used in two separate clinical studies of hemodialysis patients. The first compared a single treatment using this dialysate, with one dialysis using regular standard dialysate acidified with acetic acid (regular dialysate) in a prospective, randomized, crossover study of 74 dialyses. Changes in blood levels of electrolytes and other blood constituents during dialysis were calculated by subtracting postdialysis from predialysis blood concentrations. Compared with acetic acid dialysate, citrate dialysate was associated with significantly greater decreases in total and ionized calcium, magnesium, and chloride levels. Citrate dialysate was also associated with greater increases in serum sodium and citrate concentrations, although their postdialysis concentrations remained within or just outside normal ranges. Changes in other blood constituents were similar with both dialysates. The second study used citrate dialysate exclusively for all dialyses over a 12-week period in 25 patients. Predialysis blood samples were drawn at the start of the study and at 4-week intervals thereafter, and postdialysis blood samples were obtained after the first and last dialysis. Repeated-measure analysis showed that although predialysis blood concentrations of magnesium, potassium, and citrate remained within the normal range, there was a significant declining trend over the course of the study. At the same time, predialysis serum bicarbonate levels increased, and significantly more patients had a predialysis bicarbonate concentration within the normal range at the end of the study than at the start (15 versus 8 patients; P = 0.001, chi-square). In 19 patients (excluding 3 patients for whom the type of dialyzer was changed during the study), the dose of dialysis for the first and last dialysis was calculated by urea reduction ratio and Kt/V. There was a significant increase in both measurements without changes in dialysis time, blood and dialysate flows, or dialyzer used. The urea reduction ratio increased from 68% +/- 5.9% to 73% +/- 5.3% (P < 0. 03), and the Kt/V from 1.23 +/- 0.19 to 1.34 +/- 0.20 (P = 0.01) from the first to last dialysis, respectively. In conclusion, this citric acid dialysate was well tolerated, and intradialytic changes in blood chemistries were similar to those seen with regular dialysate. Using dialysate containing citric instead of acetic acid increases the delivered dialysis dose.

Home Hemodialysis: Six Years' Experience

Abstract Fifty-two patients trained for unattended overnight home hemodialysis were followed for six to 64 months. The overall mortality was 31 per cent. Deaths and morbidity were associated mainly with complications only indirectly related to uremia and in many cases related to the dialysis treatment. More than 80 per cent of the patients were rehabilitated and returned to their previous occupations. Psychologic problems were appreciable in 19 per cent of patients and moderate in 16 per cent, but 65 per cent adjusted well to home hemodialysis. Many of the difficulties that these patients experienced were related to anticoagulation, cannulas and equipment malfunctions. Home hemodialysis has medical, psychologic, financial and logistical advantages over center dialysis. Future improvements required include portable anticoagulant-free equipment, an alternative to overnight dialysis for some patients, better circulatory access, improvement in equipment reliability and service, better physician education, and...

Comparison of survival between short-daily hemodialysis and conventional hemodialysis using the standardized mortality ratio.

More frequent hemodialysis (5 or more times weekly, both short during the day and long overnight) has been shown to improve patient well‐being, reduce symptoms during and between treatments, and have beneficial effects on clinical outcomes. Because of the relatively small patient sample sizes, there are little or no data on mortality from any single study at this time. This study compares survival in 117 U.S. patients treated by short‐daily hemodialysis in 2003 and 2004, with patients reported in the 2003 data from the United States Renal Data System (USRDS). Expected mortality was calculated from the USRDS and compared with observed actual mortality. The standardized mortality ratio (SMR) was used to adjust for differences in patient age, sex, race, and cause of renal failure. The SMR for the short‐daily hemodialysis patients was 0.39, statistically significantly better (p<0.005) than data from the overall U.S. population of hemodialysis patients and indicating that daily hemodialysis patients had a 61% better survival. Patients treated by short‐daily hemodialysis have a better survival rate than comparable populations treated by conventional hemodialysis.

Serum Albumin Concentration-Related Health Care Financing Administration Quality Assurance Criterion Is Method-Dependent: Revision Is Necessary

The objective of this study was to examine quantitative differences between the two commonly used methods for determining serum albumin concentration, bromcresol green (BCG) and bromcresol purple (BCP), in normal subjects and in 235 unselected dialysis patients in view of recently established Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA) quality assurance review criteria. The mean of normal results by the BCG method was 4.4 g/dL, and 97.5% of values were 3.8 g/dL or higher. The mean of normal results by the BCP method was 3.9 g/dL, and 97.5% of values were 3.3 g/dL or higher. Serum albumin concentrations in samples from the dialysis patients had respectively lower mean values by both methods. For the BCG method, the mean was 3.8 g/dL, and 82% of values were 3.5 g/dL or higher; for the BCP method, the mean was 3.3 g/dL, and 82% of values were 3.0 g/dL or higher. Likewise, for the reference immunonephelometric procedure, the mean value for the dialysis patients was 3.3 g/dL, and 82% of values were 3.0 g/dL or higher. For the samples from the dialysis patients, in comparison with the immunonephelometric method, the BCG method exhibited both constant (intercept = 9.3 g/L) and proportional error (slope = 0.87). The mean albumin value for the BCG method was 3.8 g/dL, 15% higher. In contrast, the BCP method compared closely with the reference method: slope = 1.00, intercept = 0.8 g/L, mean x = 3.3 g/dL, mean y = 3.3 g/dL. The HCFA quality assurance criteria are valid only for the BCG method.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Exercise Coaching and Rehabilitation Counseling Improve Quality of Life for Predialysis and Dialysis Patients

Advances in medical treatment have improved the rehabilitation potential of predialysis (P) and dialysis (D) patients, but deficits remain in their physical and vocational functioning. We studied 18 P (expected to begin dialysis in 6–12 months) and 18 D patients (on dialysis 1–5 years) for 1 year. Exercise coaching and rehabilitation counseling were provided at no cost for the first 6 months to half of each patient group (rehabilitation group = R); the other half were assigned randomly to controls (C). No R services were provided during 6 months of follow-up. PR walked further in 6 min at 6 months (+3.9 m) and 12 months (+4.1 m) than initially (p < 0.01). Hematocrit increased in R (p < 0.05), but not in C. Symptom scores were stable in D, worsened 21% in PC, and improved 15% in PR. Sickness impact profile scores were better in PR than PC at 6 months (p < 0.05) and 12 months (NS). Comorbidity correlated with symptoms (r = +0.34, p < 0.05), self-rated affect (r = –0.35, p < 0.05), and self-rated Karnofsky index of disability (r = –0.37, p < 0.05), but not with physician-rated affect or physician-rated Karnofsky index of disability. Thus, quality of life was stable or improved in PR, but declined in PC; PR benefited more than DR. Rehabilitation services are more beneficial before than after patients stabilize on dialysis, and quality of life monitoring should continue indefinitely.

Survival with short-daily hemodialysis: Association of time, site, and dose of dialysis

In thrice‐weekly hemodialysis, survival correlates with the length of time (t) of each dialysis and the dose (Kt/V), and deaths occur most frequently on Mondays and Tuesdays. We studied the influence of t and Kt/V on survival in 262 patients on short‐daily hemodialysis (SDHD) and also noted death rate by weekday. Contingency tables, Kaplan‐Meier analysis, regression analysis, and stepwise Cox proportional hazard analysis were used to study the associations of clinical variables with survival. Patients had been on SDHD for a mean of 2.1 (range 0.1–11) years. Mean dialysis time was 12.9 ± 2.3 h/wk and mean weekly stdKt/V was 2.7 ± 0.5. Fifty‐two of the patients died (20%) and 8‐year survival was 54 ± 5%. In an analysis of 4 groups by weekly dialysis time, 5‐year survival continuously increased from 45 ± 8% in those dialyzing <12 hours to 100% in those dialyzing >15 hours without any apparent threshold. There was no association between Kt/V and survival. In Cox proportional hazard analysis, 4 factors were independently associated with survival: age in years Hazard Ratio (HR)=1.05, weekly dialysis hours HR=0.84, home dialysis HR=0.50, and secondary renal disease HR=2.30. Unlike conventional HD, no pattern of excessive death occurred early in the week during SDHD. With SDHD, longer time and dialysis at home were independently associated with improved survival, while Kt/V was not. Homedialysis and dialysis 15+ h/wk appear to maximize survival in SDHD.

How to Overcome Barriers and Establish a Successful Home HD Program

Home hemodialysis (HD) is an underused dialysis modality in the United States, even though it provides an efficient and probably cost-effective way to provide more frequent or longer dialysis. With the advent of newer home HD systems that are easier for patients to learn, use, and maintain, patient and provider interest in home HD is increasing. Although barriers for providers are similar to those for peritoneal dialysis, home HD requires more extensive patient training, nursing education, and infrastructure support in order to maintain a successful program. In addition, because many physicians and patients do not have experience with home HD, reluctance to start home HD programs is widespread. This in-depth review describes barriers to home HD, focusing on patients, individual physicians and practices, and dialysis facilities, and offers suggestions for how to overcome these barriers and establish a successful home HD program.