Fractures and Osteomalacia in a Patient Treated With Frequent Home Hemodialysis

Evaluating Osteoporosis in Chronic Kidney Disease: Both Bone Quantity and Quality Matter

Bone strength is determined not only by bone quantity [bone mineral density (BMD)] but also by bone quality, including matrix composition, collagen fiber arrangement, microarchitecture, geometry, mineralization, and bone turnover, among others. These aspects influence elasticity, the load-bearing and repair capacity of bone, and microcrack propagation and are thus key to fractures and their avoidance. In chronic kidney disease (CKD)-associated osteoporosis, factors traditionally associated with a lower bone mass (advanced age or hypogonadism) often coexist with non-traditional factors specific to CKD (uremic toxins or renal osteodystrophy, among others), which will have an impact on bone quality. The gold standard for measuring BMD is dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, which is widely accepted in the general population and is also capable of predicting fracture risk in CKD. Nevertheless, a significant number of fractures occur in the absence of densitometric World Health Organization (WHO) criteria for osteoporosis, suggesting that methods that also evaluate bone quality need to be considered in order to achieve a comprehensive assessment of fracture risk. The techniques for measuring bone quality are limited by their high cost or invasive nature, which has prevented their implementation in clinical practice. A bone biopsy, high-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography, and impact microindentation are some of the methods established to assess bone quality. Herein, we review the current evidence in the literature with the aim of exploring the factors that affect both bone quality and bone quantity in CKD and describing available techniques to assess them.

Kidney transplant outcomes among recipients with post-transplant hip or knee joint replacement surgery

Patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) are at a higher risk of needing hip or knee replacement (joint replacement) surgery due to the high prevalence of degenerative joint disease and other conditions. However, there remains a large debate about the timing of joint replacement surgery and whether it should be pre- vs post-transplant. We conducted a retrospective study analyzing all adult kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) at our university hospital who had undergone subsequent joint replacement between 2001 and 2017. Transplant-specific outcomes of acute rejection, death censored graft failure (DCGF), and patient death post-joint replacement surgery were outcomes of interest. Controls were selected at a 1:3 ratio based on the incidence density sampling of post-transplant interval. There were 101 KTRs in the joint replacement group and were compared with 281 controls. In the multivariate analysis, the need for joint replacement was not associated with acute rejection (HR: 1.59; 95% CI: 0.77-3.29; p = 0.21); DCGF (HR: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.49-1.60; p = 0.70) or patient death (HR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.55-1.38, p = 0.42). In selected KTRs, joint replacement surgery was not associated with detrimental transplant-specific outcomes. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Factors associated with hip pain in end-stage renal disease patients on prevalent hemodialysis: a cross-sectional study

Background

Hemodialysis (HD) patients suffer from musculoskeletal disorders. The most reported musculoskeletal problem is arthralgia. Hip arthralgia has been commonly reported in patients undergoing HD. Hip pain can lead to a decrease in levels of physical activity, limitation in joint range of motion, and consequently difficulties in performing activities of daily living (ADL) and impair the quality of life (QoL). The aim of the study is to reveal the prevalence of hip pain and related factors in HD patients. This cross-sectional study included 73 patients on prevalent HD whose ages ranged from 25 to 65 years and who were on HD for more than 6 months. Physical examination and radiological imaging were done to every patient. Visual analog scale, Barthel Index, and Short Form-36 were used to evaluate pain, ADL, and QoL, respectively.

Results

Hip arthralgia was detected in 32 patients. Around 43% of which were diagnosed hip osteoarthritis, 34% greater trochanteric pain syndrome, 15% femoroacetabular impingement, and 6% soft tissue calcifications. Diabetes mellitus and hemodialysis duration were found to be significantly different between the groups of hip pain and without hip pain. Diabetes mellitus was identified as an independent risk factor for hip pain in hemodialysis patients. ADL and QoL were significantly lower in patients with hip pain compared to those without (p < 0.01; p < 0.05, respectively).

Conclusions

The results of our research show that HD patients should be screened for the presence of hip pain and other musculoskeletal disorders and that this is an area which requires further consideration and medical research.

End-stage renal disease increases risk of postoperative complications after lower extremity fracture

INTRODUCTION

End-stage renal disease (ESRD) leads to multiple systemic effects and patients suffer from multiple comorbidities including fractures. While previous studies have examined complications following hip fracture surgery in ESRD patients, there are no studies evaluating other lower extremity fractures. This study aimed to identify postoperative complication risk in patients with ESRD who had lower extremity fractures.

METHODS

Using our database from 2000 to 2015 at two level-one trauma centres, we collected data on patients over age 40, who had lower extremity fractures and surgical fixation. Diagnosis of ESRD was made before the injury. Each ESRD patient was matched by two non-ESRD patients regarding age, gender, American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) score, and AO/OTA fracture classification. Postoperative outcomes were non-union, mechanical failure, and infection. The number of outcome events was compared between the ESRD and non-ESRD cohorts.

RESULTS

A total of 195 patients (65 ESRD patients matched to 130 non-ESRD patients) were identified. Median follow-up was 31 months (12-141 months). Patients with ESRD were 3.6 time more likely to have at least one postoperative complication (mechanical failure, non-union, or infection) compared to non-ESRD patients (9/65 vs. 5/130, p = 0.02). In particular, mechanical failure was eight times higher among ESRD patients compared to non-ESRD patients (8/65 vs. 2/130, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

ESRD was associated with higher rates of complications, especially mechanical failure, after lower extremity fracture surgeries.

Traditional and Non-traditional Risk Factors for Osteoporosis in CKD

Osteoporosis is a state of bone fragility with reduced skeletal resistance to trauma, and consequently increased risk of fracture. A wide range of conditions, including traditional risk factors, lifestyle choices, diseases and their treatments may contribute to bone fragility. It is therefore not surprising that the multi-morbid patient with chronic kidney disease (CKD) is at a particularly high risk. CKD is associated with reduced bone quantity, as well as impaired bone quality. Bone fragility in CKD is a composite of primary osteoporosis, accumulation of traditional and uremia-related risk factors, assaults brought on by systemic disease, and detrimental effects of drugs. Some risk factors are modifiable and represent potential targets for intervention. This review provides an overview of the heterogeneity of bone fragility in CKD.

Bone evaluation in paediatric chronic kidney disease: clinical practice points from the European Society for Paediatric Nephrology CKD-MBD and Dialysis working groups and CKD-MBD working group of the ERA-EDTA

Mineral and bone disorder (MBD) is widely prevalent in children with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and is associated with significant morbidity. CKD may cause disturbances in bone remodelling/modelling, which are more pronounced in the growing skeleton, manifesting as short stature, bone pain and deformities, fractures, slipped epiphyses and ectopic calcifications. Although assessment of bone health is a key element in the clinical care of children with CKD, it remains a major challenge for physicians. On the one hand, bone biopsy with histomorphometry is the gold standard for assessing bone health, but it is expensive, invasive and requires expertise in the interpretation of bone histology. On the other hand, currently available non-invasive measures, including dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry and biomarkers of bone formation/resorption, are affected by growth and pubertal status and have limited sensitivity and specificity in predicting changes in bone turnover and mineralization. In the absence of high-quality evidence, there are wide variations in clinical practice in the diagnosis and management of CKD-MBD in childhood. We present clinical practice points (CPPs) on the assessment of bone disease in children with CKD Stages 2-5 and on dialysis based on the best available evidence and consensus of experts from the CKD-MBD and Dialysis working groups of the European Society for Paediatric Nephrology and the CKD-MBD working group of the European Renal Association-European Dialysis and Transplant Association. These CPPs should be carefully considered by treating physicians and adapted to individual patients' needs as appropriate. Further areas for research are suggested.

Osteomalacia and Vitamin D Status: A Clinical Update 2020

Historically, rickets and osteomalacia have been synonymous with vitamin D deficiency dating back to the 17th century. The term osteomalacia, which literally means soft bone, was traditionally applied to characteristic radiologically or histologically documented skeletal disease and not just to clinical or biochemical abnormalities. Osteomalacia results from impaired mineralization of bone that can manifest in several types, which differ from one another by the relationships of osteoid (ie, unmineralized bone matrix) thickness both with osteoid surface and mineral apposition rate. Osteomalacia related to vitamin D deficiency evolves in three stages. The initial stage is characterized by normal serum levels of calcium and phosphate and elevated alkaline phosphatase, PTH, and 1,25‐dihydroxyvitamin D [1,25(OH)₂D]—the latter a consequence of increased PTH. In the second stage, serum calcium and often phosphate levels usually decline, and both serum PTH and alkaline phosphatase values increase further. However, serum 1,25(OH)₂D returns to normal or low values depending on the concentration of its substrate, 25‐hydroxyvitamin D (25OHD; the best available index of vitamin D nutrition) and the degree of PTH elevation. In the final stage, hypocalcemia and hypophosphatemia are invariably low with further exacerbation of secondary hyperparathyroidism. The exact,or even an approximate, prevalence of osteomalacia caused by vitamin D deficiency is difficult to estimate, most likely it is underrecognized or misdiagnosed as osteoporosis. Signs and symptoms include diffuse bone, muscle weakness, and characteristic fracture pattern, often referred to as pseudofractures, involving ribs, scapulae, pubic rami, proximal femurs, and codfish‐type vertebrae. The goal of therapy of vitamin D‐deficiency osteomalacia is to alleviate symptoms, promote fracture healing, restore bone strength, and improve quality of life while correcting biochemical abnormalities. There is a need for better understanding of the epidemiology of osteomalacia. Simplified tools validated by concurrent bone histology should be developed to help clinicians promptly diagnose osteomalacia. © 2020 The Authors. JBMR Plus published by Wiley Periodicals LLC. on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Renal Association Clinical Practice Guideline on Haemodialysis

This guideline is written primarily for doctors and nurses working in dialysis units and related areas of medicine in the UK, and is an update of a previous version written in 2009. It aims to provide guidance on how to look after patients and how to run dialysis units, and provides standards which units should in general aim to achieve. We would not advise patients to interpret the guideline as a rulebook, but perhaps to answer the question: "what does good quality haemodialysis look like?"The guideline is split into sections: each begins with a few statements which are graded by strength (1 is a firm recommendation, 2 is more like a sensible suggestion), and the type of research available to back up the statement, ranging from A (good quality trials so we are pretty sure this is right) to D (more like the opinion of experts than known for sure). After the statements there is a short summary explaining why we think this, often including a discussion of some of the most helpful research. There is then a list of the most important medical articles so that you can read further if you want to - most of this is freely available online, at least in summary form.A few notes on the individual sections: 1. This section is about how much dialysis a patient should have. The effectiveness of dialysis varies between patients because of differences in body size and age etc., so different people need different amounts, and this section gives guidance on what defines "enough" dialysis and how to make sure each person is getting that. Quite a bit of this section is very technical, for example, the term "eKt/V" is often used: this is a calculation based on blood tests before and after dialysis, which measures the effectiveness of a single dialysis session in a particular patient. 2. This section deals with "non-standard" dialysis, which basically means anything other than 3 times per week. For example, a few people need 4 or more sessions per week to keep healthy, and some people are fine with only 2 sessions per week - this is usually people who are older, or those who have only just started dialysis. Special considerations for children and pregnant patients are also covered here. 3. This section deals with membranes (the type of "filter" used in the dialysis machine) and "HDF" (haemodiafiltration) which is a more complex kind of dialysis which some doctors think is better. Studies are still being done, but at the moment we think it's as good as but not better than regular dialysis. 4. This section deals with fluid removal during dialysis sessions: how to remove enough fluid without causing cramps and low blood pressure. Amongst other recommendations we advise close collaboration with patients over this. 5. This section deals with dialysate, which is the fluid used to "pull" toxins out of the blood (it is sometimes called the "bath"). The level of things like potassium in the dialysate is important, otherwise too much or too little may be removed. There is a section on dialysate buffer (bicarbonate) and also a section on phosphate, which occasionally needs to be added into the dialysate. 6. This section is about anticoagulation (blood thinning) which is needed to stop the circuit from clotting, but sometimes causes side effects. 7. This section is about certain safety aspects of dialysis, not seeking to replace well-established local protocols, but focussing on just a few where we thought some national-level guidance would be useful. 8. This section draws together a few aspects of dialysis which don't easily fit elsewhere, and which impact on how dialysis feels to patients, rather than the medical outcome, though of course these are linked. This is where home haemodialysis and exercise are covered. There is an appendix at the end which covers a few aspects in more detail, especially the mathematical ideas. Several aspects of dialysis are not included in this guideline since they are covered elsewhere, often because they are aspects which affect non-dialysis patients too. This includes: anaemia, calcium and bone health, high blood pressure, nutrition, infection control, vascular access, transplant planning, and when dialysis should be started.

Hemodialysis Product and Hip Fracture in Hemodialysis Patients: A Nationwide Cohort Study in Japan

Some have raised concerns that longer and more frequent hemodialysis (HD) would be associated with bone fractures due to excess phosphate removal. We examined the effects of hemodialysis product (HDP) on hip fracture incidence among Japanese HD patients using registry data of the Japanese Society for Dialysis Therapy. During a 1-year study period, 1411 hip fractures occurred among 135 984 patients. After adjusting for demographic and clinical factors, patients with a high HDP did not show a significant risk of hip fracture. Interestingly, patients with polycystic kidney disease had a lower risk of hip fracture. Our findings did not support the hypothesis that patients undergoing longer and more frequent HD would face a higher risk of hip fracture than those undergoing shorter and less frequent HD. Polycystic kidney disease was identified as a new significant factor for hip fracture; relative to glomerulonephritis, this condition was associated with a lower risk of hip fracture.

Comparison of clinical, biochemical and histomorphometric analysis of bone biopsies in dialysis patients with and without fractures

Chronic kidney disease-mineral bone disorders (CKD-MBD) are associated with increased risk of fracture. Studies report about 3% of fractures in CKD patients, and these occur earlier than in the general population, namely 16 and 13 years earlier for men and women, respectively. Better understanding of the pathophysiology of fractures would probably contribute to new therapeutic approaches. This study aimed to evaluate report of long bone fractures from a bone biopsies bank from patients on hemodialysis and compare clinical and biochemical characteristics, as well as the results of the histomorphometric analysis of trabecular and cortical bone of these patients with a control group (without fractures), paired for age, gender, and time on hemodialysis. Bone proteins (SOST, DMP1 and MEPE) were evaluated by immunohistochemistry. Seventeen patients with fracture and controls were studied. Fracture prevalence was 0.82/1000 patients/year. Serum phosphorus levels were significantly lower in the fracture group. Histomorphometric analysis revealed that all the patients had high turnover disease, and the fracture group had smaller volume and trabecular thickness, greater osteoid surface, smaller eroded surface, smaller mineralizing surface, formation rate and longer mineralization lag time when compared to controls; the DMP1 expression in the cortical bone was smaller and the SOST in the trabecular bone was higher in fractured patients. As conclusion, we found low prevalence of fractures. Both groups had high turnover disease, but the fractured ones presented more impaired bone microarchitecture, as well as lower formation and greater mineralization defect. Bone proteins expression correlated with parameters involved in bone remodeling.