Outcomes of Extended-Hours Hemodialysis Performed Predominantly at Home

Long-term survival of patients receiving home hemodialysis with self-punctured arteriovenous access

OBJECTIVE

To determine the long-term survival of patients receiving home hemodialysis (HHD) through self-punctured arteriovenous access.

METHODS

We conducted an observational study of all patients receiving HHD at our facility between 2001 and 2020. The primary outcome was treatment survival, and it was defined as the duration from HHD initiation to the first event of death or technique failure. The secondary outcomes were the cumulative incidence of technique failure and mortality. Cox proportional hazard models were used to identify the predictive factors for treatment survival.

RESULTS

A total of 77 patients (mean age, 50.7 years; 84.4% male; 23.4% with diabetes) were included. The median dialysis duration was 18 hours per week, and all patients self-punctured their arteriovenous fistula. During a median follow-up of 116 months, 30 treatment failures (11 deaths and 19 technique failures) were observed. The treatment survival was 100% at 1 year, 83.5% at 5 years, 67.2% at 10 years, and 34.6% at 15 years. Age (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.07) and diabetes (aHR, 2.45) were significantly associated with treatment survival. Cardiovascular disease was the leading cause of death, and vascular access-related issues were the primary causes of technique failure, which occurred predominantly after 100 months from HHD initiation.

CONCLUSION

This study showed a favorable long-term prognosis of patients receiving HHD. HHD can be a sustainable form of long-term kidney replacement therapy. However, access-related technique failures occur more frequently in patients receiving it over the long term. Therefore, careful management of vascular access is crucial to enhance technique survival.

Home hemodialysis technique survival: insights and challenges

Home hemodialysis (HHD) offers several clinical, quality of life and cost-saving benefits for patients with end-stage kidney disease. While uptake of this modality has increased in recent years, its prevalence remains low and high rates of discontinuation remain a challenge. This comprehensive narrative review aims to better understand what is currently known about technique survival in HHD patients, elucidate the clinical factors that contribute to attrition and expand on possible strategies to prevent discontinuation. With increasing efforts to encourage home modalities, it is imperative to better understand technique survival and find strategies to help maintain patients on the home therapy of their choosing. It is crucial to better target high-risk patients, examine ideal training practices and identify practices that are potentially modifiable to improve technique survival.

Risk factors for infection-related hospitalization in end-stage renal disease patients during peri-dialysis period

Infection-related hospitalization during the peri-dialysis period (PDP) in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) has received less attention. Considering the limited data, we explored the risk factors in this population. Retrospective analysis using the data system to examine factors for infection in ESRD during PDP between January 2012 and December 2017. Patients were divided into infected group and non-infected group according to the history of infection. Binary Logistic Regression Model was used to search for risk factors. A total of 478 patients were hospitalized during their PDP. One hundred and ninety patients developed infection (39.75%). Thirty-six patients (18.95%) had two or more infection events, all due to recurrent respiratory infections. The respiratory system was the main site of infection (63.68%), followed by the urinary system and digestive system. Compared with the non-infected group, the infected group had more patients with hypoproteinemia and coronary heart disease. The following factors: C-reactive protein >15 mg/L, procalcitonin >1 ng/L, neutrophil percentage >75%, age >52.5 years, platelet >300 × 10⁹ /L, neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio, and concomitant coronary heart disease were associated with the occurrence of infection in ESRD patients during PDP. Patients with ESRD have a high incidence of infection during the PDP, with respiratory infection most commonly seen. This research identified several factors associated with risk for infection, which should guide the design of infection prevention strategies.

Essentials of Vascular Access for Home Hemodialysis

Hemodialysis (HD) at home has gained increasing popularity in recent years because of regulatory and financial issues. Creation and maintenance of a well-functioning, cannulatable vascular access is essential for performance of home HD (HHD). A vascular access team-based approach to creation, maintenance, and troubleshooting of vascular access can facilitate removing barriers to cannulation at home related to fear of pain and bleeding associated with large bore needles. Frequent cannulation of HD access is associated with more frequent access complications, especially infections. Thus, proper cannulation of arteriovenous access requires careful training of rope ladder and buttonhole techniques to avoid infectious and traumatic complications that can lead to dire consequences. Development of better methods of creating buttonholes and single needles for dialysis can facilitate HHD. A culture of self-cannulation at dialysis centers can also promote HHD.

COVID-19 pandemic era: is it time to promote home dialysis and peritoneal dialysis?

The novel coronavirus, called severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), was declared a pandemic in March 2020 by the World Health Organization. Older individuals and patients with comorbid conditions such as hypertension, heart disease, diabetes, lung disease, chronic kidney disease (CKD) and immunologic diseases are at higher risk of contracting this severe infection. In particular, patients with advanced CKD constitute a vulnerable population and a challenge in the prevention and control of the disease. Home-based renal replacement therapies offer an opportunity to manage patients remotely, thus reducing the likelihood of infection due to direct human interaction. Patients are seen less frequently, limiting the close interaction between patients and healthcare workers who may contract and spread the disease. However, while home dialysis is a reasonable choice at this time due to the advantage of isolation of patients, measures must be assured to implement the program. Despite its logistical benefits, outpatient haemodialysis also presents certain challenges during times of crises such as the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and potentially future ones.

Complications and challenges of home hemodialysis: A historical review

Home hemodialysis (HHD) has evolved as a preferred and safe kidney replacement modality over the past six decades. Despite advances in technological aspects of HHD, potential complications still pose a challenge to health care givers, patients, and their families. In this narrative review, we describe vascular access and cannulation, anticoagulation, nutritional, residual kidney function, psychosocial, technique failure, and machine/procedural-related complications. Addressing these problems is essential for favorable patient outcomes.

Patients' Experiences of Community House Hemodialysis: A Qualitative Study

Rationale & Objective

Community house hemodialysis is a submodality of home hemodialysis that enables patients to perform hemodialysis independent of nursing or medical supervision in a shared house. This study describes the perspectives and experiences of patients using community house hemodialysis in New Zealand to explore ways this dialysis modality may support the wider delivery of independent hemodialysis care.

Study Design

Qualitative semi-structured in-depth interview study.

Setting & Participants

25 patients who had experienced community house hemodialysis. Participants were asked about why they chose community house hemodialysis and their experiences and perspectives of this.

Analytical Approach

Thematic analysis using an inductive approach.

Results

25 patients were interviewed (14 men and 11 women, aged 31-65 years). Most were of Māori or Pacific ethnicity and in part- or full-time employment. More than two-thirds dialyzed for 20 hours a week or more. We identified 4 themes that described patients’ experiences and perspectives of choosing and using community house hemodialysis: reducing burden on family (when home is not an option, minimizing family exposure to dialysis, maintaining privacy and self-identity, reducing the costs of home hemodialysis, and gaining a reprieve from home), offering flexibility and freedom (having a normal life, maintaining employment, and facilitating travel), control of my health (building independence and self-efficacy, a place of wellness, avoiding institutionalization, and creating a culture of extended-hour dialysis), and community support (building social inclusion and supporting peers).

Limitations

Non-Māori and non-Pacific patient experiences of community house hemodialysis could not be explored.

Conclusions

Community house hemodialysis is a dialysis modality that overcomes many of the socioeconomic barriers to home hemodialysis, is socially and culturally acceptable to Māori and Pacific people, and supports extended-hour hemodialysis and thereby promotes more equitable access to best practice services. It is therefore a significant addition to independent hemodialysis options available for patients.

No evidence of a legacy effect on survival following randomization to extended hours dialysis in the ACTIVE Dialysis trial

AIM

Extended hours haemodialysis is associated with superior survival to standard hours. However, residual confounding limits the interpretation of this observation. We aimed to determine the effect of a period of extended hours dialysis on long-term survival among participants in the ACTIVE Dialysis trial.

METHODS

Two-hundred maintenance haemodialysis recipients were randomized to extended hours dialysis (median 24 h/wk) or standard hours dialysis (median 12 h/wk) for 12 months. Further pre-specified observational follow up occurred at 24, 36 and 60 months. Vital status and modality of renal replacement therapy were ascertained.

RESULTS

Over the 5 years, 38 participants died, 30 received a renal transplant, and 6 were lost to follow up. Total weekly dialysis hours did not differ between standard and extended groups during the follow-up period (14.1 hours [95%CI 13.4-14.8] vs 14.8 hours [95%CI 14.1-15.6]; P = .16). There was no difference in all-cause mortality (hazard ratio for extended hours 0.91 [95%CI 0.48-1.72]; P = .77). Similar results were obtained after censoring participants at transplantation, and after adjusting for potential confounding variables. Subgroup analysis did not reveal differences in treatment effect by region, dialysis setting or vintage (P-interaction .51, .54, .12, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Twelve months of extended hours dialysis did not improve long-term survival nor affect dialysis hours after the intervention period. An urgent need remains to further define the optimal dialysis intensity across the broad range of dialysis recipients.

Benefits and risks of frequent or longer haemodialysis: weighing the evidence

Although the ability of individuals with end-stage renal disease to maintain body homoeostasis is equally impaired during all weekdays, conventional haemodialysis (HD) treatment is scheduled thrice weekly, containing two short and one long interdialytic interval. This intermittent nature of HD and the consequent fluctuations in volume, metabolic parameters and electrolytes have long been hypothesized to predispose to complications. Large observational studies link the first weekday with an increased risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Several schemes of frequent and/or longer, home or in-centre HD have been introduced, aiming to alleviate the above risks by both increasing total dialysis duration and reducing the duration of interdialytic intervals. Observational studies in this field have non-uniform results, showing that enhanced frequency in home (but not in-centre) HD is associated with reduced mortality. Evidence from the randomized Daily and Nocturnal Trials of the Frequent HD Network suggest the opposite, showing mortality benefits with in-centre daily but not with home nocturnal dialysis. Secondary analyses of these trials indicate that daily and nocturnal schedules do not have equal effects on intermediate outcomes. Alternative schemes, such as thrice weekly in-centre nocturnal HD or every-other-day HD, seem to also offer improvements in several intermediate endpoints, but need further testing with randomized trials. This review summarizes the effects of frequent and/or longer HD methods on hard and intermediate outcomes, attempting to provide a balanced overview of the field.

Nocturnal home hemodialysis with low-flow dialysate: Retrospective analysis of the first European patients

INTRODUCTION

Despite mounting evidence that increased frequency and duration of hemodialysis (HD) improves outcomes, less than 1% of HD patients worldwide receive nocturnal hemodialysis (NHD). Many perceived barriers exist to providing NHD and increasing its provision.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of nocturnal therapy using a low-flow dialysate system in 4 European centers for a minimum of 12 months, with data collected on patient demographics, training times, safety features, medications, and biochemical parameters at baseline and at 6 and 12 months.

FINDINGS

Data were collected on 21 patients, with 12-month analysis available for 20 patients. Mean dialysis duration was 28 hours per week, with most dialysis on an alternate night regimen using 50-60 L of dialysate per session. All vascular access types were represented, and low molecular weight heparin was used as a bolus. All biochemical parameters met European standards, with a trend for improvement in standardized Kt/V, phosphate, hemoglobin, and albumin. There was a significant reduction in phosphate binder usage and a reduction in blood pressure medication. Training time was 9.6 sessions for independence at home, with 2 additional sessions to transition to NHD. Additional safety features included an alarmed drip tray under the cycler and moisture sensors under the venous needle (all patients used dual-cannulation technique). No patient safety events were reported.

DISCUSSION

These data support the use of a low-flow dialysate system for provision of NHD at home. Biochemical parameters were good, medication burden was reduced at 12 months, and all patients received more than double the duration of HD provided in standard in-center units. While patient numbers were small, low-flow dialysis in this cohort was both effective and safe. Use of this alternative HD system could reduce some of the barriers to NHD, increasing the uptake of therapy in Europe, and improving long-term patient outcomes.

Managing Kidney Failure with Home Hemodialysis

There is a resurgence in clinical adoption of home hemodialysis globally driven by several demonstrated clinical and economic advantages. Yet, the overall adoption of home hemodialysis remains under-represented in most countries. The practicality of managing ESKD with home hemodialysis is a common concern among practicing nephrologists in the United States. The primary objective of this invited feature is to deliver a practical guide to managing ESKD with home hemodialysis. We have included common clinical scenarios, clinical and infrastructure management problems, and approaches to the day-to-day management of patients undergoing home hemodialysis.

Independent effect of haemodialysis session frequency and duration on survival in non-indigenous Australians on haemodialysis

BACKGROUND

End-stage kidney disease patients have increased mortality compared to the general population. Haemodialysis (HD) of more frequent and of longer duration has been proposed to improve survival but it remains unclear if this is attributed to increased frequency, duration, or both. We aimed to examine the independent effects of session frequency and duration on mortality in incident HD patients.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was performed using data from the Australian and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry examining non-Indigenous patients aged ≥18 years who initiated HD of ≥3 sessions/week in Australia from 2001 to 2015. Initial dialysis prescription was categorized as session duration >5 h/session compared to ≤5 h/session and session frequency as >3 sessions/week compared to 3 sessions/week. Survival analysis was performed using Cox regression analysis, with multivariable analysis controlling for available covariates.

RESULTS

We examined 16 944 patients of whom 757 (4.5%) received >3 sessions/week and 518 (3.1%) received >5 h/session. After controlling for frequency, patients initiated on HD sessions >5 h had a significantly reduced risk of mortality compared with patients with HD session ≤5 h (adjusted hazard ratio (HR) = 0.57; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.44-0.74). In contrast, patients initiated on >3 sessions/week of HD had a similar risk of death when compared with patients on 3 sessions/week of HD (adjusted HR = 0.97; 95% CI = 0.84-1.13), after controlling for duration. Limitations include potential residual confounding and changes in exposure over time.

CONCLUSION

Longer duration rather than increased frequency of treatment appears to reduce mortality in HD patients. This has implications for management and requires further study.

A comparison of technique survival in Canadian peritoneal dialysis and home hemodialysis patients

Background

High discontinuation rates remain a challenge for home hemodialysis (HHD) and peritoneal dialysis (PD). We compared technique failure risks among Canadian patients receiving HHD and PD.

Methods

Using the Canadian Organ Replacement Register, we studied adult patients who initiated HHD or PD within 1 year of beginning dialysis between 2000 and 2012, with follow-up until 31 December 2013. Technique failure was defined as a transfer to any alternative modality for a period of ≥60 days. Technique survival between HHD and PD was compared using a Fine and Gray competing risk model. We also examined the time dependence of technique survival, the association of patient characteristics with technique failure and causes of technique failure.

Results

Between 2000 and 2012, 15 314 patients were treated with a home dialysis modality within 1 year of dialysis initiation: 14 461 on PD and 853 on HHD. Crude technique failure rates were highest during the first year of therapy for both home modalities. During the entire period of follow-up, technique failure was lower with HHD compared with PD (adjusted hazard ratio = 0.79; 95% confidence interval 0.69–0.90). However, the relative technique failure risk was not proportional over time and the beneficial association with HHD was only apparent after the first year of dialysis. Comparisons also varied among subgroups and the superior technique survival associated with HHD relative to PD was less pronounced in more recent years and among older patients. Predictors of technique failure also differed between modalities. While obesity, smoking and small facility size were associated with higher technique failure in both PD and HHD, the association with age and gender differed. Furthermore, the majority of discontinuation occurred for medical reasons in PD (38%), while the majority of HHD patients experienced technique failure due to social reasons or inadequate resources (50%).

Conclusions

In this Canadian study of home dialysis patients, HHD was associated with better technique survival compared with PD. However, patterns of technique failure differed significantly among these modalities. Strategies to improve patient retention across all home dialysis modalities are needed.

Chronic Kidney Disease and Pulse Wave Velocity: A Narrative Review

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is associated with excess cardiovascular mortality, resulting from both traditional and nontraditional, CKD-specific, cardiovascular risk factors. Nontraditional risk factors include the entity Chronic Kidney Disease–Mineral and Bone Disorder (CKD-MBD) which is characterised by disorders of bone and mineral metabolism, including biochemical abnormalities of hyperphosphatemia and hyperparathyroidism, renal osteodystrophy, and vascular calcification. Increased arterial stiffness in the CKD population can be attributed amongst other influences to progression of vascular calcification, with significant resultant contribution to the cardiovascular disease burden. Pulse wave velocity (PWV) measured over the carotid-femoral arterial segments is the noninvasive gold-standard technique for measurement of aortic stiffness and has been suggested as a surrogate cardiovascular end-point. A PWV value of 10 m/s or greater has been recommended as a suitable cut-off for an increased risk of cardiovascular mortality. CKD is a risk factor for an excessive rate of increase in aortic stiffness, reflected by increases in PWV, and increased aortic PWV in CKD shows faster progression than for individuals with normal kidney function. Patients with varying stages of CKD, as well as those on dialysis or with a kidney transplant, have different biological milieu which influence aortic stiffness and associated changes in PWV. This review discusses the pathophysiology of arterial stiffness with CKD and outlines the literature on PWV across the spectrum of CKD, highlighting that determination of arterial stiffness using aortic PWV can be a useful diagnostic and prognostic tool for assessing cardiovascular disease in the CKD population.

Relative risk of home hemodialysis attrition in patients using a telehealth platform

INTRODUCTION

Home hemodialysis (HHD) facilitates increased treatment frequency, which may improve patient outcomes. However, attrition due to technique failure limits the clinical effectiveness of the modality. Nx2me Connected Health is a telehealth platform that enables ongoing assessment of HHD patients using NxStage equipment, and that may reduce patient burden. We aimed to assess whether use of Nx2me was associated with risk of HHD attrition.

METHODS

We compared risks of all-cause attrition, dialysis cessation (i.e., death or transplant), and technique failure in Nx2me users and matched control patients, using a retrospective cohort study. We also compared the likelihood of HHD training graduation in patients who initiated use of Nx2me during training with the likelihood in matched control patients. Matching factors included date of HHD initiation, NxStage treatment duration at initiation of follow-up, and prescribed treatment frequency. We used stratified Fine-Gray and Cox regression to compare risks, with adjustment for demographic factors and vascular access modality, and stratification by matched cluster.

FINDINGS

We identified 606 Nx2me users; 49.5% initiated use of Nx2me in <3 months after initiation of HHD with NxStage equipment. Adjusted hazard ratios (AHRs) of all-cause attrition, dialysis cessation, and technique failure were 0.80 (95% confidence interval, 0.68-0.95), 1.10 (0.86-1.41), and 0.71 (0.57-0.87), respectively, for Nx2me users vs. matched controls. AHRs were similar in patients who initiated use of Nx2me in <3 months after initiation of HHD. The AHR of HHD training graduation was 1.61 (1.10-2.36) in patients who initiated use of Nx2me within 2 weeks of training initiation vs. matched controls.

DISCUSSION

Use of Nx2me was associated with lower risk of all-cause attrition, lower risk of technique failure, and higher likelihood of HHD training graduation. Further studies are needed to identify the mechanisms by which use of a telehealth platform may improve clinical outcomes and reduce patient burden.

Increasing Haemodialytic Clearances as Residual Renal Function Declines: An Incremental Approach

Many patients with chronic kidney disease start undergoing thrice-weekly haemodialysis (HD), aiming for an HD sessional dialyzer urea clearance target, irrespective of whether they have residual renal function (RRF). While increasing sessional dialyzer urea clearance above a target of 1.2 has not been shown to improve patient survival, it has been shown that the preservation of RRF improves patient self-reported outcomes and survival. Observational studies have suggested that initiating twice-weekly HD schedules leads to greater preservation of RRF. This has led to the concept of following an incremental approach to initiating HD, steadily increasing the amount of weekly dialyzer clearance as RRF decreases. Incremental dialysis practice requires the regular assessment of RRF to prevent inadequate delivery of dialysis treatment. Once RRF is lost, then the dialysis schedule and modality need to be adjusted to try to increase the middle-sized solute clearance and protein-bound toxins.

A Trial of Extending Hemodialysis Hours and Quality of Life

The relationship between increased hemodialysis hours and patient outcomes remains unclear. We randomized (1:1) 200 adult recipients of standard maintenance hemodialysis from in-center and home-based hemodialysis programs to extended weekly (≥24 hours) or standard (target 12-15 hours, maximum 18 hours) hemodialysis hours for 12 months. The primary outcome was change in quality of life from baseline assessed by the EuroQol 5 dimension instrument (3 level) (EQ-5D). Secondary outcomes included medication usage, clinical laboratory values, vascular access events, and change in left ventricular mass index. At 12 months, median weekly hemodialysis hours were 24.0 (interquartile range, 23.6-24.0) and 12.0 (interquartile range, 12.0-16.0) in the extended and standard groups, respectively. Change in EQ-5D score at study end did not differ between groups (mean difference, 0.04 [95% confidence interval, -0.03 to 0.11]; P=0.29). Extended hours were associated with lower phosphate and potassium levels and higher hemoglobin levels. Blood pressure (BP) did not differ between groups at study end. Extended hours were associated with fewer BP-lowering agents and phosphate-binding medications, but were not associated with erythropoietin dosing. In a substudy with 95 patients, we detected no difference between groups in left ventricular mass index (mean difference, -6.0 [95% confidence interval, -14.8 to 2.7] g/m²; P=0.18). Five deaths occurred in the extended group and two in the standard group (P=0.44); two participants in each group withdrew consent. Similar numbers of patients experienced vascular access events in the two groups. Thus, extending weekly hemodialysis hours did not alter overall EQ-5D quality of life score, but was associated with improvement in some laboratory parameters and reductions in medication burden. (Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT00649298).

Intensive Hemodialysis and Potential Risks With Increasing Treatment

Although intensive hemodialysis (HD) can address important clinical problems, increasing treatment also introduces risks. In this review, we assess risks pertaining to 6 domains: vascular access complications, infection, mortality, loss of residual kidney function, solute balance, and patient and care partner burden. In the Frequent Hemodialysis Network (FHN) trials, short daily and nocturnal schedules increased the incidence of access complications, although the incidence of access loss was not statistically higher. Observational studies indicate that infection-related hospitalization is an ongoing challenge with short daily HD. Excess risk may be catalyzed by poor infection control practices in the home setting in which intensive HD is typically delivered, but with fixed probability of bacterial contamination per cannulation, greater treatment frequency necessarily increases the risk for infectious complications. Buttonhole cannulation may increase the risk for metastatic infections. However, intensive HD in the home setting is associated with lower risk for infection than peritoneal dialysis. Data regarding mortality are equivocal. With extended follow-up of individuals in the FHN trials, short daily HD was associated with lower risk relative to the usual schedule, whereas nocturnal HD was associated with higher risk. In many, but not all, observational studies, short daily HD has been associated with lower risk than both in-center HD and peritoneal dialysis; however, observational studies are subject to unmeasured confounding. Intensive HD can accelerate the loss of residual kidney function in new dialysis patients with substantial urine output and can deplete solutes (eg, phosphorus) to the extent that supplementation is necessary. Finally, intensive HD may increase burden on patients and caregivers, possibly leading to technique failure. Some of these problems might be addressed with careful monitoring, so that relevant interventions (eg, antibiotics, retraining, and respite care) can be delivered. Ultimately, intensive HD is not a panacea for end-stage renal disease. Potential benefits and risks of treatment should be jointly considered.

Clinical, patient-related, and economic outcomes of home-based high-dose hemodialysis versus conventional in-center hemodialysis

Despite technological advances in renal replacement therapy, the preservation of health and quality of life for individuals on dialysis still remains a challenge. The high morbidity and mortality in dialysis warrant further research and insight into the clinical domains of the technique and practice of this therapy. In the last 20 years, the focus of development in the field of hemodialysis (HD) has centered around adequate removal of urea and other associated toxins. High-dose HD offers an opportunity to improve mortality, morbidity, and quality of life of patients with end-stage kidney disease. However, the uptake of this modality is low, and the risk associated with the therapy is not fully understood. Recent studies have highlighted the evidence base and improved our understanding of this technique of dialysis. This article provides a review of high-dose and home HD, its clinical impact on patient outcome, and the controversies that exist.

Design and participant baseline characteristics of 'A Clinical Trial of IntensiVE Dialysis': the ACTIVE Dialysis Study

AIMS

Observational reports suggest extended dialysis hours are associated with improved outcomes. These findings are confounded by better prognostic characteristics among people practising extended hours. The aim of this article is to provide an overview of the methods and baseline characteristics for ACTIVE Dialysis Study participants.

METHODS

This multicentre, randomized, open-label, blinded endpoint-assessment trial randomized participants receiving maintenance haemodialysis therapy to either extended (≥24 h) or standard (12-18 h) weekly haemodialysis for 12 months. A web-based randomization system used minimization to ensure balanced allocation across regions, dialysis setting and dialysis vintage. The primary outcome is the change in quality of life over 12 months of study treatment assessed by EQ-5D. Secondary outcomes include change in left ventricular mass index assessed by magnetic resonance imaging and safety outcomes including dialysis access events.

RESULTS

A total of 200 participants were recruited between 2009 and 2013 from Australia (29.0%), China (62.0%), Canada (5.5%) and New Zealand (3.5%). Participants had a mean age of 52 (± 12) years and 11.5% were dialysing at home, with a mean duration of 13.9 h per week over a median of three sessions. At baseline, 32.5% had a history of cardiovascular disease and 36.5% had diabetes.

CONCLUSION

The ACTIVE Dialysis Study has met its planned recruitment target. The participant population are drawn from a range of health service settings in a global context. The study will contribute important evidence on the benefits and harms of extending weekly dialysis hours. The trial is registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT00649298).

Predictors of Transfer to Home Hemodialysis after Peritoneal Dialysis Completion

♦

BACKGROUND

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the predictors of transfer to home hemodialysis (HHD) after peritoneal dialysis (PD) completion. ♦

METHODS

All Australian and New Zealand patients treated with PD on day 90 after initiation of renal replacement therapy between 2000 and 2012 were included. Completion of PD was defined by death, transplantation, or hemodialysis (HD) for 180 days or more. Patients were categorized as "transferred to HHD" if they initiated HHD fewer than 180 days after PD had ended. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate predictors of transfer to HHD in a restricted cohort experiencing PD technique failure; a competing-risks analysis was used in the unrestricted cohort. ♦

RESULTS

Of 10 710 incident PD patients, 3752 died, 1549 underwent transplantation, and 2915 transferred to HD, among whom 156 (5.4%) started HHD. The positive predictors of transfer to HHD in the restricted cohort were male sex [odds ratio (OR): 2.81], obesity (OR: 2.20), and PD therapy duration (OR: 1.10 per year). Negative predictors included age (OR: 0.95 per year), infectious cause of technique failure (OR: 0.48), underweight (OR: 0.50), kidney disease resulting from hypertension (OR: 0.38) or diabetes (OR: 0.32), race being Maori (OR: 0.65) or Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (OR: 0.30). Comparable results were obtained with a competing-risks model. ♦

CONCLUSIONS

Transfer to HHD after completion of PD is rare and predicted by patient characteristics at baseline and at the time of PD end. Transition to HHD should be considered more often in patients using PD, especially when they fulfill the identified characteristics.

The use of vascular access audit and infections in home hemodialysis

Vascular access-related infection is an important adverse event in home hemodialysis (HHD). We hypothesize that errors in self-cannulation or manipulation of dialysis vascular access are associated with increased incidence of access-related infection. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of all prevalent HHD patients at the University Health Network. All vascular access-related infections were recorded from 2006 to 2013. Errors in dialysis access were ascertained by nurse-administered vascular access checklist. Ninety-two patients had completed at least one vascular access audit. Median HHD vintage was 2.3 (0.9-5.0) years in patients with appropriate vascular access technique and 5.8 (1.5-9.4) years in patients with erroneous vascular access technique. The overall rate of infection between patients with and without appropriate vascular access technique was similar (0.27 and 0.28 infections per year, P = 0.166). Among patients who were identified with errors in dialysis access manipulation, patients with five or more errors were associated with higher rate of access-related infection (mean of 0.47 vs. 0.16 infection per patient-year, P < 0.001). The use of vascular access audit is a feasible strategy, which can identify errors in vascular access technique. Patients with a longer median HHD vintage are associated with higher risk of inappropriate vascular access technique. Patients with multiple errors in vascular access technique are associated with a higher risk of dialysis access-related infection. Prospective evaluation of the impact of vascular access audit on adverse vascular access events is warranted.

Control of hypertension and survival in haemodialysis patients

Hypertension is common in approximately 80% to 90% of patients at the start of dialysis therapy and is an established risk factor for cardiovascular disease. Therefore, it should be controlled, even in the chronic dialysis population. Observational studies indicate a U-shaped phenomenon, as the mortality rate is high among those with hypertension as well as those with hypotension. Among chronic dialysis patients, randomized controlled trials on the effect of anti-hypertensive treatment are not conclusive, at least not as demonstrated by studies with a large sample size. Similar to other potentially effective drug therapies such as erythropoietin stimulating agent, statins, and uraemic toxin adsorbents, the benefit of anti-hypertensive treatment remains to be demonstrated in dialysis patients. The blood pressure target level, however, is difficult to determine as evidence for the level of appropriate target is lacking. Currently, it should be determined individually, as the priority is to perform haemodialysis as prescribed. The target levels of blood pressure for chronic haemodialysis patients are not stated except in the Guidelines in the Japanese Society for Dialysis Therapy. In this guideline, systolic blood pressure between 140 to 159 mmHg is preferable among elderly patients with comorbid conditions. Rapid ultrafiltration, such as >600 mL/h, is to be avoided. Intra-dialysis hypotension, muscle cramps, and other complaints during HD are preventable. Moreover, the nutritional status should be maintained within the normal range with adequate intake of protein and calories, but with salt restriction. Further studies are necessary for better management of hypertension in the dialysis population.

Patient and caregiver values, beliefs and experiences when considering home dialysis as a treatment option: a semi-structured interview study

BACKGROUND

Home dialysis can offer improved quality of life and economic benefits compared with facility dialysis. Yet the uptake of home dialysis remains low around the world, which may be partly due to patients' lack of knowledge and barriers to shared and informed decision-making. We aimed to describe patient and caregiver values, beliefs and experiences when considering home dialysis, to inform strategies to align policy and practice with patients' needs.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews with adult patients with chronic kidney disease Stage 4-5D (on dialysis <1 year) and their caregivers, recruited from three nephrology centres in New Zealand. Transcripts were analysed thematically.

RESULTS

In total, 43 patients [pre-dialysis (n = 18), peritoneal dialysis (n = 13), home haemodialysis (n = 4) and facility haemodialysis (n = 9)] and 9 caregivers participated. We identified five themes related to home dialysis: lacking decisional power (complexity of information, limited exposure to home dialysis, feeling disempowered, deprived of choice, pressure to choose), sustaining relationships (maintaining cultural involvement, family influence, trusting clinicians, minimizing social isolation), reducing lifestyle disruption (sustaining employment, avoiding relocation, considering additional expenses, seeking flexible schedules, creating free time), gaining confidence in choice (guarantee of safety, depending on professional certainty, reassurance from peers, overcoming fears) and maximizing survival.

CONCLUSIONS

To engage and empower patients and caregivers to consider home dialysis, a stronger emphasis on the development of patient-focused educational programmes and resources is suggested. Pre-dialysis and home dialysis programmes that address health literacy and focus on cultural and social values may reduce fears and build confidence around decisions to undertake home dialysis. Financial burdens may be minimized through provision of reimbursement programmes, employment support and additional assistance for patients, particularly those residing in remote areas.

An Incident Cohort Study Comparing Survival on Home Hemodialysis and Peritoneal Dialysis (Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplantation Registry)

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Home dialysis is often recognized as a first-choice therapy for patients initiating dialysis. However, studies comparing clinical outcomes between peritoneal dialysis and home hemodialysis have been very limited.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

This Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplantation Registry study assessed all Australian and New Zealand adult patients receiving home dialysis on day 90 after initiation of RRT between 2000 and 2012. The primary outcome was overall survival. The secondary outcomes were on-treatment survival, patient and technique survival, and death-censored technique survival. All results were adjusted with three prespecified models: multivariable Cox proportional hazards model (main model), propensity score quintile-stratified model, and propensity score-matched model.

RESULTS

The study included 10,710 patients on incident peritoneal dialysis and 706 patients on incident home hemodialysis. Treatment with home hemodialysis was associated with better patient survival than treatment with peritoneal dialysis (5-year survival: 85% versus 44%, respectively; log-rank P<0.001). Using multivariable Cox proportional hazards analysis, home hemodialysis was associated with superior patient survival (hazard ratio for overall death, 0.47; 95% confidence interval, 0.38 to 0.59) as well as better on-treatment survival (hazard ratio for on-treatment death, 0.34; 95% confidence interval, 0.26 to 0.45), composite patient and technique survival (hazard ratio for death or technique failure, 0.34; 95% confidence interval, 0.29 to 0.40), and death-censored technique survival (hazard ratio for technique failure, 0.34; 95% confidence interval, 0.28 to 0.41). Similar results were obtained with the propensity score models as well as sensitivity analyses using competing risks models and different definitions for technique failure and lag period after modality switch, during which events were attributed to the initial modality.

CONCLUSIONS

Home hemodialysis was associated with superior patient and technique survival compared with peritoneal dialysis.

Outcomes of integrated home dialysis care: a multi-centre, multi-national registry study

BACKGROUND

The 'integrated home dialysis' model involving initiation of peritoneal dialysis (PD) first followed by home haemodialysis (HHD) has previously been proposed as an optimal form of dialysis that maximizes the advantages of both modalities. While this model has great potential, its clinical outcomes, especially compared with direct HHD initiation, remain uncertain.

METHODS

All incident home dialysis patients from the Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant (ANZDATA) registry between 2000 and 2012 were included. Propensity score matching was performed to evaluate patients initially treated with PD followed by HHD ('PD + HHD'), PD without subsequent transition to HHD ('PD only') and HHD without subsequent transition to PD ('HHD only'). The composite primary outcome was death and home dialysis technique failure (defined as transfer to facility haemodialysis for 90 days). Groups were compared using a Cox proportional hazards model.

RESULTS

The 2:1 matched cohort included 84 patients in the 'PD + HHD' group, 168 patients in the 'HHD only' group and 168 patients in the 'PD only' group. Compared with the 'PD + HHD' group, death and home dialysis technique failure was similar for patients treated with 'HHD only' [hazard ratio (HR) 0.92, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.52-1.62; P = 0.77] and higher for those treated with 'PD only' (HR 3.22, 95% CI 1.97-5.25; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Patients treated with PD first followed by HHD had a risk of death and home dialysis technique failure that was comparable to those treated with HHD as the only home dialysis modality and inferior to those treated with PD as the only home dialysis modality. These results support the 'integrated home dialysis model' in patients who initiate dialysis with PD.

Con: Frequent haemodialysis for all chronic haemodialysis patients

Frequent haemodialysis (HD) regimens have been proposed with the aim to improve survival and other important patient outcomes. They indeed avoid the long interdialytic interval and have been associated with some proven benefits, i.e. an improvement in blood pressure and phosphataemia control, a reduction in left ventricular mass and lower ultrafiltration rates. However, the actual impact of frequent HD regimens on survival is, at best, inconclusive and, at worse, harmful, and remains uncertain regarding nutritional status and anaemia control. Moreover, the higher rates of vascular access complications and more rapid development of anuria with frequent HD regimens are worrying. Frequent HD also considerably increases the burden for patients and their caregivers, logistics and costs, especially with in-centre frequent schedules. In our opinion, before increasing HD frequency, a number of underused strategies summarized in our review and able to improve patient tolerance and/or HD dose should be tested first, taking into account patient's characteristics and life expectancy. Frequent HD schedules should be reserved for selected cases, only after all other available options have failed.

Debate: Should dialysis at home be mandatory for all suitable ESRD patients?: home-based dialysis therapies are the second choice after transplantation

Since their inception in the 1960s, home-based dialysis therapies have been viable alternatives to conventional thrice weekly in center hemodialysis. In spite of this, uptake of these therapies has been steadily declining over past decades with utilization varying globally; dependent on training support, funding models, and prevailing Nephrologist beliefs. In the Australian context, home dialysis (predominantly peritoneal dialysis and extended hours nocturnal hemodialysis) is now again increasing in popularity--with enthusiasm driven not only by evidence of an array of physiological and psychological patient benefit but also significant economic advantage: critical in the current climate where dialysis therapies in Australia take approximately $1 billion dollars per year from the healthcare budget. When assessing the significant advantages of home-based therapies, it is important to consider not only the increasing body of evidence around improved survival but also that for dramatically better health-related quality of life, decreased economic burden and the overall benefits of undertaking treatment in the home. With patient-centered care an increasingly important aspect of our decision making paradigm, home-based dialysis should be considered as the default option in all patients transitioning to renal replacement therapy.

Inpatient and emergent resource use of patients on dialysis at an academic medical center

BACKGROUND/AIM

End-stage renal disease patients require resources for emergent and inpatient care in addition to ambulatory dialysis. There are two dialysis modalities and settings which patients switch between. Our aim was to characterize the patterns and reasons for switching, as well as the emergent and inpatient utilization of these patients at the University Health Network.

METHODS

Patients who received chronic dialysis between March 1, 2006, and April 30, 2011, were identified. Utilization was measured by emergency department (ED) visits, inpatient hospitalizations, and bed-days occupied per year.

RESULTS

Out of 576 patients identified, 18.6% switched modality and/or setting. The majority of switches occurred during the first year of dialysis. Patients who switched had increased utilization compared to those on a continuous modality/setting. Overall, patients had a median rate of 0.91 ED visits per patient-year, compared to 1.56 for patients who switched modality and setting. Median inpatient bed resource requirement was 4.46 bed-days/patient-year overall, compared to 8.91 for patients who switched modality and setting.

CONCLUSIONS

Emergent and inpatient utilization is related to the setting and modality of dialysis, although differences are partly explained by comorbidities. Patients who switch modalities use more resources and may be a prime population for interventions.

Buttonhole cannulation and clinical outcomes in a home hemodialysis cohort and systematic review

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The relative merits of buttonhole (or blunt needle) versus rope ladder (or sharp needle) cannulation for hemodialysis vascular access are unclear.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

Clinical outcomes by cannulation method were reviewed in 90 consecutive home hemodialysis patients. Initially, patients were trained in rope ladder cannulation. From 2004 on, all incident patients were started on buttonhole cannulation, and prevalent patients were converted to this cannulation method. Coprimary outcomes were arteriovenous fistula-attributable systemic infections and a composite of arteriovenous fistula loss or requirement for surgical intervention. Secondary outcomes were total arteriovenous fistula-related infections and staff time requirements. Additionally, a systematic review evaluating infections by cannulation method was performed.

RESULTS

Seventeen systemic arteriovenous fistula-attributable infections were documented in 90 patients who were followed for 3765 arteriovenous fistula-months. Compared with rope ladder, buttonhole was not associated with a significantly higher rate of systemic arteriovenous fistula-attributable infections (incidence rate ratio, 2.71; 95% confidence interval, 0.66 to 11.09; P=0.17). However, use of buttonhole was associated with a significantly higher rate of total arteriovenous fistula infections (incidence rate ratio, 3.85; 95% confidence interval, 1.66 to 12.77; P=0.03). Initial and ongoing staff time requirements were significantly higher with buttonhole cannulation. Arteriovenous fistula loss or requirement for surgical intervention was not different between cannulation methods. A systematic review found increased arteriovenous fistula-related infections with buttonhole compared with rope ladder in four randomized trials (relative risk, 3.34; 95% confidence interval, 0.91 to 12.20), seven observational studies comparing before with after changes (relative risk, 3.15; 95% confidence interval, 1.90 to 5.21), and three observational studies comparing units with different cannulation methods (relative risk, 3.27; 95% confidence interval, 1.44 to 7.43).

CONCLUSION

Buttonhole cannulation was associated with higher rates of infectious events, increased staff support requirements, and no reduction in surgical arteriovenous fistula interventions compared with rope ladder in home hemodialysis patients. A systematic review of the published literature found that buttonhole is associated with higher risk of arteriovenous fistula-related infections.

Risk of sudden cardiac death in chronic kidney disease

The review discusses the epidemiology and the possible underlying mechanisms of sudden cardiac death (SCD) in chronic kidney disease (CKD), and highlights the unmet clinical need for noninvasive risk stratification strategies in these patients. Although renal dysfunction shares common risk factors and often coexists with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, the presence of renal impairment increases the risk of arrhythmic complications to an extent that cannot be explained by the severity of the atherosclerotic process. Renal impairment is an independent risk factor for SCD from the early stages of CKD; the risk increases as renal function declines and reaches very high levels in patients with end-stage renal disease on dialysis. Autonomic imbalance, uremic cardiomyopathy, and electrolyte disturbances likely play a role in increasing the arrhythmic risk and can be potential targets for treatment. Cardioverter defibrillator treatment could be offered as lifesaving treatment in selected patients, although selection strategies for this treatment mode are presently problematic in dialyzed patients. The review also examines the current experience with risk stratification tools in renal patients and suggests that noninvasive electrophysiological testing during dialysis may be of clinical value as it provides the necessary standardized environment for reproducible measurements for risk stratification purposes.

Frequent hemodialysis: a critical review

Conventional, thrice-weekly hemodialysis (CHD) is the most commonly prescribed dialysis regimen. Despite widespread acceptance of CHD, long-term analyses of registry data have revealed an increased risk for mortality during the long 2-day interdialytic interval of thrice-weekly therapies. High mortality rates during this period suggest that there may be a role for more frequent HD in improving patient outcomes and survival through elimination of the long interdialytic period. Several regimens have been investigated including: short, daily HD, frequent nocturnal HD, and alternate-day HD. In this review, we provide an in-depth summary of current data comparing the effects of frequent and CHD modalities on survival, hospitalizations, vascular access complications, burden of therapy, quality of life, residual renal function, cardiovascular parameters, bone mineral metabolism, and anemia. Limitations of the data as well as the role of frequent dialysis in clinical practice are also discussed.