What is the Role of Bone Biopsy in the Management of Adult Dialysis Patients?

Is Adynamic Bone Always a Disease? Lessons from Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease

Renal osteodystrophy (ROD) is a common complication of end-stage kidney disease that often starts early with loss of kidney function, and it is considered an integral part in management of patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Adynamic bone (ADB) is characterized by suppressed bone formation, low cellularity, and thin osteoid seams. There is accumulating evidence supporting increasing prevalence of ADB, particularly in early CKD. Contemporarily, it is not very clear whether it represents a true disease, an adaptive mechanism to prevent bone resorption, or just a transitional stage. Several co-players are incriminated in its pathogenesis, such as age, diabetes mellitus, malnutrition, uremic milieu, and iatrogenic factors. In the present review, we will discuss the up-to-date knowledge of the ADB and focus on its impact on bone health, fracture risk, vascular calcification, and long-term survival. Moreover, we will emphasize the proper preventive and management strategies of ADB that are pivotal issues in managing patients with CKD. It is still unclear whether ADB is always a pathologic condition or whether it can represent an adaptive process to suppress bone resorption and further bone loss. In this article, we tried to discuss this hard topic based on the available limited information in patients with CKD. More studies are needed to be able to clearly address this frequent ROD finding.

PTH assays in dialysis patients: Practical considerations

Parathyroid hormone (PTH) 1-84 is the main biologically active hormone produced by the parathyroid cells. Circulating PTH molecules include the whole PTH 1-84 along with amino (N) and carboxyl (C) terminal fragments. While PTH is the best available noninvasive biomarker to assess bone turnover in dialysis patients, the biological roles of individual circulating PTH fragments are still not completely known. The understanding that there is an enormous variation in the target specificity of currently available PTH assays for different circulating forms of PTH has led to the evolution of assays from first to second then third generation. With a reduction in kidney function, there is a preferential increase in circulating C fragments and non-PTH 1-84 forms, resulting in a decrease in the ratio of PTH 1-84/non-PTH 1-84. However, there are also substantial differences in between-assay measurements, with several fold variations in results. Targets based on multiples of the upper limit of normal (ULN) should be used rather than PTH ranges using absolute iPTH values. To date, the second-generation PTH remains the most widely used assay. Current guidelines recommend following iPTH trends rather than absolute values. Herein, we highlight problems and challenges in PTH assays/measurements and their interpretations in dialysis patients.