Temporal changes and risk factors for death from early withdrawal within 12 months of dialysis initiation-a cohort study

Associations between initial dialysis access types and death from dialysis withdrawal in incident patients with kidney failure

Background

Patients receiving haemodialysis via a central venous catheter (HD-CVC) have been shown to have an increased risk of all-cause mortality. It is unclear whether death from dialysis withdrawal is associated with the high mortality risk observed in patients initiated on HD-CVC.

Methods

Using the Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant (ANZDATA) Registry, we examined the association between initial dialysis access [HD-CVC, haemodialysis via arteriovenous fistula (HD-AVF), and peritoneal dialysis (PD) via PD catheter (PD-PDC)] and death from dialysis withdrawal in adult patients starting dialysis in Australia between 2005 and 2022, analysed by time-stratified adjusted Cox regression with propensity score-matched cohorts.

Results

Of 47 412 incident patients followed for a median of 2.65 years (interquartile range 1.19-4.87), 8170 (17%) died from dialysis withdrawal. Compared with patients initiated on HD-AVF, patients initiated on HD-CVC were more likely to experience death from dialysis withdrawal in the first 3 years after dialysis initiation, but not after 3 years [adjusted hazard ratios 2.43 (95% confidence interval 1.95-3.02), 2.06 (1.67-2.53), 1.57 (1.40-1.76), and 1.06 (0.97-1.15) for 0-6 months, >6-12 months, >1-3 years, and >3 years after dialysis initiation, respectively]. Comparison between patients initiated on HD-CVD and PD-PDC showed similar estimates. No difference in withdrawal risk was observed between patients initiated on HD-AVF and PD-PDC.

Conclusions

Patients initiated on HD-CVC were twice as likely to experience early death from dialysis withdrawal compared with patients who had initiated dialysis with HD-AVF or PD-PDC. The increased risks diminished over time and were not observed after 3 years on dialysis.

Prognostication After Dialysis Withdrawal

Introduction

Dialysis withdrawal represents an increasingly common cause of death in patients receiving kidney replacement therapy internationally. Prognostic information about stopping dialysis guides clinicians counseling patients and families regarding end-of-life care. However, few studies examine prognostication after withdrawal. We aimed to determine median survival time after withdrawal of dialysis, and to determine which patient and dialysis-related factors are significantly associated with prognosis.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study used registry data. We included all adult patients from the Western Renal Services who were receiving peritoneal dialysis (PD) or hemodialysis prior to death, whose cause of death was documented as "withdrawal from dialysis" and whose date of death was between January 1, 2016 and June 30, 2022. Demographic, clinical, and biochemical data was extracted. The primary outcome was time-to-death, defined as days from last dialysis session to date of death.

Results

Median survival time from last dialysis to death for the PD group (n = 53) was 4 days (interquartile range [IQR]: 3-10 days), not significantly different from the hemodialysis group which was 6 days (IQR: 2-11 days, P = 0.72). For PD, the only variable significantly associated with survival time was reason for withdrawing (P = 0.01). Median survival time was significantly longer for patients withdrawing for psychosocial reasons compared to those withdrawing for other reasons (P = 0.002). For hemodialysis (n = 186), variables significantly associated with survival time from last dialysis to death was reason for withdrawing (P = 0.001), urine production at the time of withdrawal (P = 0.005), serum sodium (P = 0.02) and smoking status (P = 0.009).

Conclusion

Median survival time was longer for withdrawals for psychosocial reasons compared to medical reasons. The data presented could inform withdrawal discussions regarding prognostication and end-of-life planning with patients and family.

Narrative Review: Clinical Implications and Assessment of Frailty in Patients With Advanced CKD

Frailty is a multidimensional clinical syndrome characterized by low physical activity, reduced strength, accumulation of multiorgan deficits, decreased physiological reserve, and vulnerability to stressors. Frailty has key social, psychological, and cognitive implications. Frailty is accelerated by uremia, leading to a high prevalence of frailty in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) and end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) as well as contributing to adverse outcomes in this patient population. Frailty assessment is not routine in patients with CKD; however, a number of validated clinical assessment tools can assist in prognostication. Frailty assessment in nephrology populations supports shared decision-making and advanced communication and should inform key medical transitions. Frailty screening and interventions in CKD or ESKD are a developing research priority with a rapidly expanding literature base.

Decisional Regret Surrounding Dialysis Initiation: A Comparative Analysis

Rationale & Objective

Dialysis comes with a substantial treatment burden, so patients must select care plans that align with their preferences. We aimed to deepen the understanding of decisional regret with dialysis choices.

Study Design

This study had a mixed-methods explanatory sequential design.

Setting & Participants

All patients from a single academic medical center prescribed maintenance in-center hemodialysis or presenting for home hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis check-up during 3 weeks were approached for survey. A total of 78 patients agreed to participate. Patients with the highest (15 patients) and lowest decisional regret (20 patients) were invited to semistructured interviews.

Predictors

Decisional regret scale and illness intrusiveness scale were used in this study.

Analytical Approach

Quantitatively, we examined correlations between the decision regret scale and illness intrusiveness scale and sorted patients into the highest and lowest decision regret scale quartiles for further interviews; then, we compared patient characteristics between those that consented to interview in high and low decisional regret. Qualitatively, we used an adapted grounded theory approach to examine differences between interviewed patients with high and low decisional regret.

Results

Of patients invited to participate in the interviews, 21 patients (8 high regret, 13 low regret) agreed. We observed that patients with high decisional regret displayed resignation toward dialysis, disruption of their sense of self and social roles, and self-blame, whereas patients with low decisional regret demonstrated positivity, integration of dialysis into their identity, and self-compassion.

Limitations

Patients with the highest levels of decisional regret may have already withdrawn from dialysis. Patients could complete interviews in any location (eg, home, dialysis unit, and clinical office), which may have influenced patient disclosure.

Conclusions

Although all patients experienced disruption after dialysis initiation, patients' approach to adversity differs between patients experiencing high versus low regret. This study identifies emotional responses to dialysis that may be modifiable through patient-support interventions.

Using Relative Survival to Estimate the Burden of Kidney Failure

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE

Estimates of mortality from kidney failure are misleading because the mortality from kidney failure is inseparable from the mortality attributed to comorbid conditions. We sought to develop an alternative method to reduce the bias in estimating mortality due to kidney failure using life table methods.

STUDY DESIGN

Longitudinal cohort study.

SETTING & PARTICIPANTS

Using data from the US Renal Data System and the Medicare 5% sample, we identified an incident cohort of patients, age 66+, who first had kidney failure in 2009 and a similar general population cohort without kidney failure.

EXPOSURE

Kidney failure.

OUTCOME

Death.

ANALYTICAL APPROACH

We created comorbidity, age, sex, race, and year-specific life tables to estimate relative survival of patients with incident kidney failure and to attain an estimate of excess kidney failure-related deaths. Estimates were compared with those based on standard life tables (not adjusted for comorbidity).

RESULTS

The analysis included 31,944 adults with kidney failure with a mean age of 77±7 years. The 5-year relative survival was 31% using standard life tables (adjusted for age, sex, race, and year) versus 36% using life tables also adjusted for comorbidities. Compared with other chronic diseases, patients with kidney failure have among the lowest relative survival. Patients with incident kidney failure ages 66-70 and 76-80 have a survival comparable to adults without kidney failure roughly 86-90 and 91-95 years old, respectively.

LIMITATIONS

Relative survival estimates can be improved by narrowing the specificity of the covariates collected (eg, disease severity and ethnicity).

CONCLUSIONS

Estimates of survival relative to a matched general population partition the mortality due to kidney failure from other causes of death. Results highlight the immense burden of kidney failure on mortality and the importance of disease prevention efforts among older adults.

PLAIN-LANGUAGE SUMMARY

Estimates of death due to kidney failure can be misleading because death information from kidney failure is intertwined with death due to aging and other chronic diseases. Life tables are an old method, commonly used by actuaries and demographers to describe the life expectancy of a population. We developed life tables specific to a patient's age, sex, year, race, and comorbidity. Survival is derived from the life tables as the percentage of patients who are still alive in a specified period. By comparing survival of patients with kidney failure to the survival of people from the general population, we estimate that patients with kidney failure have one-third the chance of survival in 5 years compared with people with similar demographics and comorbidity but without kidney failure. The importance of this measure is that it provides a quantifiable estimate of the immense mortality burden of kidney failure.

Association of Four Types of Vascular Access Including Arterial Superficialization with Mortality in Maintenance Hemodialysis Patients: A Nationwide Cohort Study in Japan

INTRODUCTION

Vascular access usage varies widely across countries. Previous studies have evaluated the association of clinical outcomes with the three types of vascular access, namely, arteriovenous fistula (AVF), arteriovenous graft (AVG), and tunneled and cuffed central venous catheter (TC-CVC). However, little is known regarding the association between arterial superficialization (AS) and the mortality of patients.

METHODS

A nationwide cohort study was conducted using data from the Japanese Society for Dialysis Therapy Renal Data Registry (2006-2007). We included patients aged ≥20 years undergoing hemodialysis with a dialysis vintage ≥6 months. The exposures of interest were the four types of vascular access: AVF, AVG, AS, and TC-CVC. Cox proportional hazard models were used to evaluate the associations of vascular access types with 1-year all-cause and cause-specific mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 183,490 maintenance hemodialysis patients were included: 90.7% with AVF, 6.9% with AVG, 2.0% with AS, and 0.4% with TC-CVC. During the 1-year follow-up period, 13,798 patients died. Compared to patients with AVF, those with AVG, AS, and TC-CVC had a significantly higher risk of all-cause mortality after adjustment for confounding factors: adjusted hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) - 1.30 (1.20-1.41), 1.56 (1.39-1.76), and 2.15 (1.77-2.61), respectively. Similar results were obtained for infection-related and cardiovascular mortality.

CONCLUSION

This nationwide cohort study conducted in Japan suggested that AVF usage may have the lowest risk of all-cause mortality. The study also suggested that the usage of AS may be associated with better survival rates compared to those of TC-CVC in patients who are not suitable for AVF or AVG.

Mapping Patients' Perceived Facilitators and Barriers to In-Center Hemodialysis Attendance to the Health Belief Model: Insights from a Qualitative Study

BACKGROUND

Previous research has shown that deliberate withdrawal, skipping, and/or shortening hemodialysis sessions has become a major health problem associated with poor clinical outcomes and early mortality in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). However, patients' experiences with this treatment remain largely unexplored. This study aimed to explore patients' perceived facilitators and barriers to in-center hemodialysis attendance and map these findings to the Health Belief Model.

METHODS

A qualitative exploratory study was conducted with a purposive sample. Semi-structured interviews were conducted and submitted to thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Twenty-four patients (66.2 ± 12.3 years old; length of time on hemodialysis: 35.2 ± 51.5 months) were interviewed. Five major facilitators (social support, perceived benefits, self-efficacy, time on dialysis, and risk/susceptibility perception) and two barriers (lack of knowledge about ESRD and hemodialysis, and psychosocial costs) were identified.

CONCLUSION

Adherence to the prescribed regimen of hemodialysis attendance is a complex and multidimensional phenomenon that involves an interaction between modifying factors (social support, disease and treatment knowledge, time on dialysis) and patients' perceived benefits, perceived risks, self-efficacy, and treatment costs. This study findings expand knowledge by suggesting that perceiving health benefits from the beginning of treatment, self-efficacy to deal with dialysis demands, and purpose in life are important facilitators of adherence to in-center hemodialysis sessions. Furthermore, it suggests that the impact of the hemodialysis regimen on the emotional well-being of family members is an important barrier. Future interventions should focus on skills training to promote self-efficacy and family coping with the demands of in-center hemodialysis, improve disease and treatment knowledge, and help balance perceived benefits with dialysis costs.

Mortality in elderly patients starting hemodialysis program

BACKGROUND

The incidence of older patients over 80 years old with chronic kidney disease who start hemodialysis (HD) program has been increasing in the last decade.

METHODS

We aimed to identify risk factors for morbidity and mortality in patients older than 80 years with end-stage renal disease who started HD. We conducted a retrospective observational study of the Catalan Renal registry (RMRC).

RESULTS

A total of 2833 patients equal or older than 80 years (of 15,137) who started HD between 2002 and 2019 from the RMRC were included in the study. In this group, the first dialysis was performed through an arteriovenous fistula in 44%, percutaneous catheter in 28.2%, and tunneled catheter in 26.6%. Conventional dialysis was used in 65.7% and online HD in 34.3%. The most frequent cause of death was cardiac disease (21.8%), followed by social problems (20.4%) and infections (15.9%). Overall survival in older HD during the first year was 84% versus 91% in younger than 80 years (p < 0.001). Cox regression analysis identified the start of HD in the period 2002-2010, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and the onset of HD through vascular graft depicted as risk factors for first-year mortality after dialysis initiation in patients older than 80 years with end-stage renal disease who started HD.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, patients older than 80 years who started HD program had higher mortality, especially those who presented exacerbation of kidney disease, those with COPD, and those who started with a vascular graft.

Changing landscape of dialysis withdrawal in patients with kidney failure: Implications for clinical practice

Dialysis withdrawal has become an accepted treatment option for patients with kidney failure and is one of the leading causes of death in patients receiving dialysis in high-income countries. Despite its increasing acceptance, dialysis withdrawal currently lacks a clear, consistent definition. The processes and outcomes of dialysis withdrawal have wide temporal and geographical variability, attributed to dialysis patient selection, influence from cultural, religious and spiritual beliefs, and availability of kidney replacement therapy and conservative kidney management. As a complex, evolving process, dialysis withdrawal poses an enormous challenge for clinicians and healthcare teams with various limitations precluding a peaceful and smooth transition between active dialysis and end-of-life care. In this review, we examine the current definitions of dialysis withdrawal, the temporal and geographical patterns of dialysis withdrawal, international barriers in the decision-making process (including dialysis withdrawal during the COVID-19 pandemic), and gaps in the current dialysis withdrawal recommendations for clinical consideration and future studies.