Hepatitis C Seroconversion Remains High among Patients with Regular Hemodialysis: Study of Associated Risk Factors

Methods

An analytical cross-sectional study involving patients from 2 dialysis units (1 referral hospital and 1 private dialysis unit) in Denpasar, Bali, Indonesia, from January 2020 to December 2021. We evaluated age, gender, duration of hemodialysis, vascular access, history of transfusion, history of surgery, diabetes mellitus, hepatitis B, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection, and type of dialyzer as possible risk factors of hepatitis C seroconversion among hemodialysis patients.

Results

A total of 338 hemodialysis patients were enrolled in this study. We found hepatitis C seroconversion in 94 patients (27.8%), all of which occurred after regular dialysis was started. Vascular access type (OR 42.07, 95% CI 5.757-307.472) and dialyzer reuse (OR 8.324, 95% CI 4.319-16.044) were showing a statistically significant association with hepatitis C seroconversion. A separate analysis on each dialysis unit found common evidence that the duration of dialysis was significantly associated with hepatitis C infection among hemodialysis patients.

Conclusion

Hepatitis C seroconversion among dialysis patients remains high. Factors related to the dialysis procedure itself played a major role in transmitting the virus.

Micro-elimination of hepatitis C in patients with chronic kidney disease: an Egyptian single-center study

Background and aims

Micro-elimination of hepatitis C in renal patients is crucial. This study aims to assess the efficacy and safety of directly acting antivirals in chronic kidney disease patients and the effect of treatment on kidney functions.

Results

This prospective cohort study included 77 chronic HCV-infected patients with chronic kidney disease. Patients were consented and treated for 12 weeks with either sofosbuvir and daclatasvir ± ribavirin if glomerular filtration rate was > 30 mL/min per 1.73m2 or ritonavir-boosted paritaprevir-ombitasvir-ribavirin if it was < 30 mL/min per 1.73m2. Patients were divided into two categories (responders versus non-responders). Predictors of response to treatment were statistically analyzed through logistic regression analysis. Sixty-two patients received ritonavir-boosted paritaprevir-ombitasvir-ribavirin, 3 received sofosbuvir and daclatasvir, and 12 received sofosbuvir and daclatasvir plus ribavirin. Most patients were on hemodialysis (n = 36) while 31 were stage 3 kidney disease. All patients completed their treatment course; ribavirin doses were adjusted or stopped in patients who developed anemia (40%). Seventy-two patients (93.5%) achieved sustained virological response 12 weeks following end-of-treatment. Five patients (6.5%) were non-responders, 4 of whom were on hemodialysis (p = 0.179). All non-responders were on ritonavir-boosted paritaprevir-ombitasvir-ribavirin. The mean serum creatinine level at weeks 4 and 8 of treatment demonstrated significant improvement compared to pretreatment values (p < 0.001) in patients on conservative therapy.

Conclusion

Treatment of chronic kidney disease patients for chronic hepatitis C with directly acting antivirals is safe, efficacious with high response rates and likely to improve renal functions if started early in the course of kidney disease.

Updated Evidence on the Epidemiology of Hepatitis C Virus in Hemodialysis

Prevalence rates of HCV infection are decreasing in hemodialysis units of most developed countries; however, nosocomial transmission of HCV continues to occur in the hemodialysis setting, not only in the emerging world. According to the Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (DOPPS, 2012–2015), the prevalence of HCV among patients on regular hemodialysis was 9.9%; in incident patients, the frequency of HCV was approximately 5%. Outbreaks of HCV have been investigated by epidemiologic and phylogenetic data obtained by sequencing of the HCV genome; no single factor was retrieved as being associated with nosocomial transmission of HCV within hemodialysis units. Transmission of HCV within HD units can be prevented successfully by full compliance with infection control practices; also, antiviral treatment and serologic screening for anti-HCV can be useful in achieving this aim. Infection control practices in hemodialysis units include barrier precautions to prevent exposure to blood-borne pathogens and other procedures specific to the hemodialysis environment. Isolating HCV-infected hemodialysis patients or using dedicated dialysis machines for HCV-infected patients are not currently recommended; reuse of dialyzers of HCV-infected patients should be made, according to recent guidelines. Randomized controlled trials regarding the impact of isolation on the risk of transmission of HCV to hemodialysis patients have not been published to date. At least two studies showed complete elimination of de novo HCV within HD units by implementation of strict infection control practices without isolation practices. De novo HCV within hemodialysis units has been independently associated with facility HCV prevalence, dialysis vintage, and low staff-to-patient ratio. Antiviral treatment of HCV-infected patients on hemodialysis should not replace the implementation of barrier precautions and other routine hemodialysis unit procedures.

Prevalence of hepatitis C among haemodialysis patients in a tertiary care hospital in south India

Background and Objectives:

Hepatitis C is the most common hepatotropic viral infection that affects patients on maintenance hemodialysis. Most of the laboratories in India depend on HCV antibody detection by ELISA. PCR based studies on detection of HCV RNA among haemodialysis patients are very scanty in India. The current study was undertaken to find the prevalence of HCV among haemodialysis patients by ELISA and PCR.

Materials and Methods:

This prospective study was conducted from January to May 2018 in a total of 100 samples. Patients more than 18 years of age, who had undergone at least 15 sessions of dialysis were enrolled in the study. All samples were screened for HCV antibody by ELISA and HCV RNA by PCR. Data regarding age and gender of the patients, history of blood transfusion, duration of hemodialysis, total bilirubin levels were collected from medical records.

Results:

Among the 100 samples, only one was positive for HCV antibody by ELISA. Eight samples were positive for HCV RNA by PCR. In this study 62.5% of the HCV positives had a previous history of blood transfusion. Duration of dialysis was more among the HCV positive group but there was no statistical significance.

Conclusion:

This is the first study from the southern state of Kerala in India showing the prevalence of HCV among hemodialysis patients by PCR. Our study showed an overall HCV prevalence of 8% by PCR. All the PCR positive samples were negative by 3rd generation ELISA which is an alarming finding and further justifies the need for PCR for detecting HCV.

Clinical practice guideline management of blood borne viruses within the haemodialysis unit

Some people who are receiving dialysis treatment have virus infection such as hepatitis B, hepatitis C and/or HIV that is present in their blood. These infections can be transmitted to other patients if blood is contaminated by the blood of another with a viral infection. Haemodialysis is performed by passing blood from a patient through a dialysis machine, and multiple patients receive dialysis within a dialysis unit. Therefore, there is a risk that these viruses may be transmitted around the dialysis session. This documents sets out recommendations for minimising this risk.There are sections describing how machines and equipment should be cleaned between patients. There are also recommendations for dialysing patients with hepatitis B away from patients who do not have hepatitis B. Patients should be immunised against hepatitis B, ideally before starting dialysis if this is possible. There are guidelines on how and when to do this, for checking whether immunisation is effective, and for administering booster doses of vaccine. Finally there is a section on the measures that should be taken if a patient receiving dialysis is identified as having a new infection of hepatitis B, hepatitis C or HIV.

South Asian Health: Inflammation, Infection, Exposure, and the Human Microbiome

This paper presents the results of the literature review conducted for the working group topic on inflammation, infection, exposure, and the human microbiome. Infection and chronic inflammation can elevate risk for cardiovascular disease and cancer. Environmental exposures common among South Asian (SA) subgroups, such as arsenic exposure among Bangladeshis and particulate matter air pollution among taxi drivers, also pose risks. This review explores the effects of exposure to arsenic and particulate matter, as well as other infections common among SAs, including human papillomavirus (HPV) and hepatitis B/C infection. Emerging research on the human microbiome, and the effect of microbiome changes on obesity and diabetes risk among SAs are also explored.

Hepatitis C virus infection and chronic renal disease: A review

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) is a parenterally-transmitted hepatotropic virus that often causes chronic infection, which can progress to cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma. Development of highly effective direct-acting anti-viral agents (DAAs) has led to a paradigm change in the treatment of HCV infection over the last 4-5 years. Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) are at a higher risk of acquiring HCV infection. In these patients, diagnosis of HCV infection, assessment of the consequent liver disease and management of HCV infection pose some specific problems. This article reviews the available recent information on HCV infection and CKD, including the association between these conditions and their effect on each other, and prevention, evaluation, and management of HCV infection in persons with CKD. This review looks at this issue particularly from the perspective of readers in Asia, especially India, since the epidemiology of HCV-CKD association and the repertoire of anti-HCV drugs available in this region differ from those elsewhere.

Isolation as a strategy for controlling the transmission of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in haemodialysis units

BACKGROUND

The hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection affects about 2% of the world's population and can cause chronic liver infection and persistent long-term sequelae such as cirrhosis and liver cancer.The prevalence of HCV infection among people on haemodialysis is often higher than the general population. The virus is easily transmitted parenterally, and blood transfusions have previously played a significant role in transmission; however, erythropoietin therapy has reduced the need for transfusions, and coupled with improved screening of donated blood, has significantly decreased transmission by transfusion. Although control of hospital-acquired infection has improved with the advent of biosafety measures, stopping HCV transmission in haemodialysis units remains challenging.Isolating people infected with HCV involves physical separation from others to limit direct or indirect transmission and includes a number of strategies during dialysis. The evidence for isolating people infected with HCV during haemodialysis is sparse with some inconsistencies.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of isolation of HCV-infected patients during haemodialysis on the transmission of HCV to other patients.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Specialised Register to 26 November 2015 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. We also searched the Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature Database (LILACS) (1982 to 2015), Web of Science Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science (CPCI-S, 1990 to 2015), ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Database (1990 to 2015), and Open Grey (1990 to 2015).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs and cluster RCTs evaluating the clinical benefits and harms of isolating HCV-infected patients during haemodialysis on the transmission of HCV to other patients. We considered incidence of dialysis-acquired HCV infection, all-cause mortality, and adverse effects associated with isolation as the primary outcomes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Summary estimates of effect were obtained using a random-effects model, and results were expressed as risk ratios (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous outcomes, and mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) and 95% CI for continuous outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

Only one study, which included 12 centres was identified: four centres used dedicated haemodialysis machines for HCV-infected patients and eight centres used non-dedicated machines. The total number of patients enrolled was 593. One centre was excluded after randomisation. Random sequence generation was not described and allocation concealment was not performed. Participants and personnel were not blinded and blinding of outcome assessors was not reported. Only 74.5% of the patients were followed for 9 months; and 47.3% were followed for an additional 9 months. The authors only reported one outcome, measuring the difference in the incidence of HCV in both groups. The authors did not consider the exposure time, to determine the adjusted rate of seroconversion risk/patient-year. The study reported that the incidence of HCV infection during the first follow-up period (9 months) was 1.6% in the dedicated group, and 4.7% in the non-dedicated one (446 patients analysed out of 593 randomised; RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.11 to 1.07). During the second follow-up period (18 months) the incidence was 1.3% in the dedicated group and 5.8% in the control (281 patients analysed out of 593 randomised; RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.05 to 1.02). Therefore, we found no differences in terms of the number of participants developing HCV infection when comparing the dedicated group with the usual care. Moreover, the evidence was of very low quality, which means that we have very little confidence in the effect estimate.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The benefits and harms of isolation of HCV-infected patients during haemodialysis on the transmission of HCV to other patients are uncertain. Evidence from one short-duration cluster-randomised study with a high risk of bias did not find differences in terms of the number of participants developing HCV infection when comparing the use of dedicated haemodialysis machines for HCV infected patients with the use of non-dedicated machines.

An investigation of an outbreak of hepatitis C virus infections in a low-resourced hemodialysis unit in Vietnam

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) is a risk for all hemodialysis patients. Over a 2-month period in 2013, there were 11 HCV seroconversions at a satellite hemodialysis unit in Vietnam. We report the epidemiologic investigation of the transmission mode in the absence of unavailable phylogenetic analysis.

METHODS

The outbreak occurred during a 2-year dynamic cohort study. All patients were tested every 2 months, and staff was tested annually for hepatitis B virus surface antigen and HCV core antigen. Cases were tested for viral genotypes to examine the genetic relationship. Direct observation of the patient care environment was performed, and infection control policy was reviewed for potential breaches. Data obtained during the cohort study were used to assess lifestyle and treatment-related risk factors for the incidence of HCV infection.

RESULTS

All patients reused dialyzers and shared hemodialysis machines. One reprocessing system was used to rinse used dialyzers. The preparation area for parenteral medication and clean supplies was adjacent to the blood sample handling area and storage of reused dialyzers. HCV transmission through a shared machine was the likely mode of transmission in 1 of the 11 cases. Indirect contact transmission was the likely mode of HCV transmission for the remaining 10 cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Sharing hemodialysis machines was not the main risk factor for the outbreak, which was most likely caused by environmental contamination associated with infection control breaches. The outbreak highlights the importance of providing dedicated dialyzer reprocessing systems and strict adherence to infection control precautions to prevent HCV cross-contamination.

Serum hyaluronic acid in chronic viral hepatitis B and C: a biomarker for assessing liver fibrosis in chronic hemodialysis patients

PURPOSE

Serum hyaluronic acid (sHA) is studied as a noninvasive marker of liver fibrosis (F) in chronic B and C viral hepatitis in general population but less in end-stage renal disease patients undergoing hemodialysis.

METHODS

We evaluated sHA as a noninvasive biomarker of F in a multicenter prospective, transversal, and observational study which included 52 end-stage renal disease patients with chronic B (14) and C (38) viral hepatitis (age 55.57 ± 14.46 years, dialysis vintage 132.59 ± 86.02 months).

RESULTS

Of the noninvasive tests analyzed, only sHA, APRI, and FIB4 index were able to differentiate patients with F1 (sHA p = 0.006; APRI p = 0.031; FIB4 p = 0.016). No statistically significant differences were found between sHA and APRI, ASAT/ALAT ratio, and FIB4 index in detecting F1 a (p > 0.02). sHA seemed to be more efficient than APRI, ASAT/ALAT ratio, and FIB4 index, having the highest estimated AUC value. The sHA threshold value for F1 was equal to 33.46 ng/mL, with the following estimated values of the performance indicators: Se 88.46 % and Sp 50 %. sHA was the only noninvasive test of the studied tests that could determine F2 (p = 0.002), with a threshold value of 80.24 ng/mL (Se 63 %, Sp 88 %), and F3 (p = 0.008), with a threshold value of 88.54 ng/mL (Se 60 %, Sp 84 %). None of the studied noninvasive tests could determine F4.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with chronic B and C viral hepatitis undergoing hemodialysis, sHA may be a useful biomarker for the liver fibrosis grades: F1-mild, F2-moderate, and F3-severe, but it does not differentiate between chronic hepatitis (F1-F3) and liver cirrhosis (F4).

Peginterferon alfa-2a with or without low-dose ribavirin for treatment-naive patients with hepatitis C virus genotype 2 receiving haemodialysis: a randomised trial

OBJECTIVE

Data comparing the efficacy and safety of combination therapy with peginterferon plus low-dose ribavirin and peginterferon monotherapy in treatment-naive haemodialysis patients with hepatitis C virus genotype 2 (HCV-2) infection are limited.

DESIGN

In this randomised trial, 172 patients received 24 weeks of peginterferon alfa-2a 135 μg/week plus ribavirin 200 mg/day (n=86) or peginterferon alfa-2a 135 μg/week (n=86). The efficacy and safety endpoints were sustained virological response (SVR) rate and adverse event (AE)-related withdrawal rate.

RESULTS

Compared with monotherapy, combination therapy had a greater SVR rate (74% vs 44%, relative risk (RR): 1.68 [95% CI 1.29 to 2.20]; p<0.001). The beneficial effect of combination therapy was more pronounced in patients with baseline viral load ≥800,000 IU/mL than those with baseline viral load <800,000 IU/mL (RR: 3.08 [95% CI 1.80 to 5.29] vs. RR: 1.11 [95% CI 0.83 to 1.45]; interaction p=0.001). Patients receiving combination therapy were more likely to have a haemoglobin level of <8.5 g/dL (70% vs. 8%, risk difference (RD): 62% [95% CI 50% to 73%]; p<0.001) and required a higher dosage [mean: 13,417 vs. 6667 IU/week, p=0.027] of epoetin β to manage anaemia than those receiving monotherapy. The AE-related withdrawal rates were 6% and 3% in combination therapy and monotherapy groups, respectively (RD: 2% [95% CI -4% to 9%]).

CONCLUSIONS

In treatment-naive haemodialysis patients with HCV-2 infection, combination therapy with peginterferon plus low-dose ribavirin achieved a greater SVR rate than peginterferon monotherapy. Most haemodialysis patients can tolerate combination therapy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrial.gov number, NCT00491244.

Epidemiology of hepatitis C in Europe

The advent of potent and safe direct-acting antivirals against the hepatitis C virus has the potential of fulfilling the dream of eliminating this infection and its impact on global public health. However, even if effective drugs are at hand, most patients remain unaware of their infection, which may be recognized only in late stages when dire complications have occurred. Europe is not spared by this scourge, with its estimated 19,000,000 persons infected, and knowledge of the epidemiology of HCV and its drivers is a critical tool in fighting this virus. A thorough review is provided on the extent of the HCV epidemic across Europe, with a discussion of the most important subgroups affected, and of the risk factors of infection, both traditional and new.

Prevalence of hepatitis C virus genotypes in risk groups in the Republic of Macedonia: a 5 years survey

The prevalence of hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotypes depends on geographical location. HCV genotyping is important for epidemiological investigations and treatment management. The aim of this study was to determine the HCV genotype prevalence in the most prominent risk groups in the Republic of Macedonia in the last 5 years and to evaluate its association with patient's age, gender, and mode of transmission. A total of 1,167 HCV positive patients, divided into three risk groups (intravenous drug use, chronic hemodialysis, and other risk factor), were genotyped using an in-house ASO hybridization method with genotype-specific oligonucleotide probes. The genotypes 1, 2, and 3 were present with 52.2%, 0.6%, and 47.0%, respectively. Genotype 1 was most prevalent in hemodialysis (89.0%) and other risk factor group (53.8%). It was found associated independently with hemodialysis, age >40 and female gender. Genotype 3 predominated in intravenous drug users (64.0%) and was associated significantly also with age ≤40 and male gender. Multivariable logistic regression analysis pointed out hemodialysis (P < 0.0001, Exp (B) = 12.0) as a positive predictor factor for genotype 1 and age ≤40 (P = 0.021, Exp (B) = 1.8) and intravenous drug use (P < 0.0001, Exp (B) = 8.4) as a positive predictor factors for genotype 3. In conclusion, the main transmission route of HCV infection in the Republic of Macedonia is intravenous drug use, followed by hemodialysis. HCV genotypes 1 and 3 dominate in these two most prominent risk groups in the Republic of Macedonia.

Healthcare workers and prevention of hepatitis C virus transmission: exploring knowledge, attitudes and evidence-based practices in hemodialysis units in Italy

BACKGROUND

Evidence exists regarding the full prevention of HCV transmission to hemodialysis patients by implementing universal precaution. However, little information is available regarding the frequency with which hospitals have adopted evidence-based practices for preventing HCV infection among hemodialysis patients. A cross-sectional survey has been conducted among nurses in Calabria region (Italy) in order to acquire information about the level of knowledge, the attitudes and the frequencies of evidence-based practices that prevent hospital transmission of HCV.

METHODS

All 37 hemodialysis units (HDU) of Calabria were included in the study and all nurses were invited to participate in the study and to fill in a self-administered questionnaire.

RESULTS

90% of the nurses working in HDU participated in the study. Correct answers about HCV pattern of transmission ranged from 73.7% to 99.3% and were significantly higher in respondents who knew that isolation of HCV-infected patients is not recommended and among those who knew that previous bloodstream infections should be included in medical record and among nurses with fewer years of practice. Most correctly thought that evidence-based infection control measures provide adequate protection against transmission of bloodborne pathogens among healthcare workers. Positive attitude was significantly higher among more knowledgeable nurses. Self-reporting of appropriate handwashing procedures were significantly more likely in nurses who were aware that transmission of bloodborne pathogens among healthcare workers may be prevented through adoption of evidence-based practices and with a correct knowledge about HCV transmission patterns.

CONCLUSIONS

Behavior changes should be aimed at abandoning outdated practices and adopting and maintaining evidence-based practices. Initiatives focused at enabling and reinforcing adherence to effective prevention practices among nurses in HDU are strongly needed.

Epidemiology and molecular investigation of hepatitis C infection following holiday haemodialysis

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis C virus infection (HCV) is not infrequent among haemodialysis patients. Most published reports suggest that patient-to-patient spread, either directly or indirectly, is the most common mode of transmission in renal units.

AIM

To investigate the source of an outbreak, and the route of transmission, of acute HCV infection in two Scottish patients occurring within eight weeks of receiving haemodialysis in the same unit while on holiday in Majorca.

METHODS

This was an international epidemiological and molecular investigation of HCV infection among a cohort of haemodialysis patients from nine countries.

FINDINGS

No further HCV-positive infections were observed among residents and holidaymakers receiving haemodialysis at the unit in Majorca. Molecular investigations confirmed that a Spanish healthcare worker (HCW) was the source of infection for the two Scottish patients. The investigators were unable to determine the route of transmission.

CONCLUSIONS

This outbreak is the first reported case of HCW-to-patient transmission of HCV in a renal unit, and the third reported case of transmission involving a HCW who had not performed invasive procedures. The issue of whether renal units are an exceptional case with regards to the risk of transmission associated with non-invasive procedures should be considered, in conjunction with the need to improve surveillance of blood-borne virus transmissions in renal units in the UK and abroad.

Acute hepatitis C in Brazil: results of a national survey

The incidence of acute hepatitis C has decreased in the world. However, new cases are still reported. The objective of this study was to obtain data of acute hepatitis C in Brazil and to identify risk factors of transmission, diagnostic criteria, clinical presentation, evolution, and treatment. A questionnaire was sent to all members of the Brazilian Society of Hepatology. Sixteen centers participated with a total of 170 cases between 2000 and 2008. Among them, 37 had chronic renal failure on hemodialysis and were evaluated separately. The main diagnostic criterion in non-uremic patients was ALT (alanine aminotransferase) elevation associated with risk factors. In patients with chronic renal failure, anti-hepatitis C virus (HCV) seroconversion was the most frequent criterion. Among the 133 non-uremic patients the main risk factors were hospital procedures, whereas in hemodialysis patients, dialysis was the single risk factor in 95% of the cases. Jaundice was more frequent in non-uremic patients (82% vs. 13%; P < 0.001) and ALT levels were higher in these individuals (P < 0.001). Spontaneous clearance was more frequent in non-uremic patients (51% vs. 3%; P < 0.001). Sixty-five patients were treated: 39 non-uremic patients and 26 on dialysis. Sustained virological response rates were 60% for non-uremic and 58% for uremic patients (P = 0.98). There was no association of these rates with the study variables. These findings show that cases of acute hepatitis C are still occurring and have been related predominantly to hospital procedures. Measures to prevent nosocomial transmission should be adopted rigorously and followed to minimize this important source of infection observed in this survey.

Dialyzer reuse and mortality risk in patients with end-stage renal disease: a systematic review

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Robust evidence about dialyzer reuse effects on mortality is not available. Our aim was to summarize the evidence for the effectiveness of dialyzer reuse compared to single use in patients with end-stage renal disease.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, SciELO, LILACS, USRDS ADR, universities' theses databases and annals of congress from major nephrology societies. Reviewers performed the study selection and data extraction independently. We used the GRADE approach to assess the quality of the evidence. Mortality was the primary outcome.

RESULTS

A total of 1,190 studies were retrieved, and 14 were included in the review (n = 956,807 patients). The disinfectants used on dialyzer reprocessing were hypochlorite, formaldehyde, glutaraldehyde, and peracetic acid. The evidence available from the studies was of very low quality. Most studies found no differences between groups. In studies with statistically significant differences, these differences were not observed in all groups and they varied by the type of disinfectant, time of observation and treatment unit.

CONCLUSIONS

No significant differences were identified for the superiority or inferiority of dialyzer reuse versus single use when assessing the mortality of patients with end-stage renal disease. Studies of higher quality, including randomized clinical trials, are required to provide conclusive evidence regarding the effectiveness and safety of dialyzer reuse.

Patient-care practices associated with an increased prevalence of hepatitis C virus infection among chronic hemodialysis patients

OBJECTIVE

To identify patient-care practices related to an increased prevalence of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection among chronic hemodialysis patients.

DESIGN

Survey.

SETTING

Chronic hemodialysis facilities in the United States.

PARTICIPANTS

Equal-probability 2-stage cluster sampling was used to select 87 facilities from all Medicare-approved providers treating 30-150 patients; 53 facilities and 2,933 of 3,680 eligible patients agreed to participate.

METHODS

Patients were tested for HCV antibody and HCV RNA. Data on patient-care practices were collected using direct observation.

RESULTS

The overall prevalence of HCV infection was 9.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 8.2%-11.6%); only 2 of 294 HCV-positive patients were detected solely by HCV RNA testing. After adjusting for non-dialysis-related HCV risk factors, patient-care practices independently associated with a higher prevalence of HCV infection included reusing priming receptacles without disinfection (odds ratio [OR], 2.3 [95% CI, 1.4-3.9]), handling blood specimens adjacent to medications and clean supplies (OR, 2.2 [95% CI, 1.3-3.6]), and using mobile carts to deliver injectable medications (OR, 1.7 [95% CI, 1.0-2.8]). Independently related facility covariates were at least 10% patient HCV infection prevalence (OR, 3.0 [95% CI, 1.8-5.2]), patient-to-staff ratio of at least 7 : 1 (OR, 2.4 [95% CI, 1.4-4.1]), and treatment duration of at least 2 years (OR, 2.4 [95% CI, 1.3-4.4]).

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides the first epidemiologic evidence of associations between specific patient-care practices and higher HCV infection prevalence among hemodialysis patients. Staff should review practices to ensure that hemodialysis-specific infection control practices are being implemented, especially handling clean and contaminated items in separate areas, reusing items only if disinfected, and prohibiting mobile medication and clean supply carts within treatment areas.

Treatment of hepatitis C virus infection in patients with end-stage renal disease

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is a major health problem in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). The incidence of acute HCV infection during maintenance dialysis is much higher than that in the general population because of the risk of nosocomial transmission. Following acute HCV infection, most patients develop chronic HCV infection, and a significant proportion develop chronic hepatitis, cirrhosis, and even hepatocellular carcinoma. Overall, chronic hepatitis C patients on hemodialysis bear an increased risk of liver-related morbidity and mortality, either during dialysis or after renal transplantation. Interferon (IFN) therapy is modestly effective for the treatment of HCV infection in ESRD patients. Conventional or pegylated IFN monotherapy has been used to treat acute hepatitis C in ESRD patients with excellent safety and efficacy. Regarding chronic hepatitis C, approximately one-third of patients can achieve a sustained virological response (SVR) after conventional or pegylated IFN monotherapy. The combination of low-dose ribavirin and conventional or pegylated IFN has further improved the SVR rate in treatment-naïve or retreated ESRD patients in clinical trials. Similar to the treatment of patients with normal renal function, baseline and on-treatment HCV virokinetics are useful to guide optimized therapy in ESRD patients. Of particular note, IFN-based therapy is not recommended at the post-renal transplantation stage because of the low SVR rate and risk of acute graft rejection. In conclusion, ESRD patients with HCV infection should be encouraged to receive antiviral therapy, and those who achieve an SVR usually have long-term, durable, virological, biochemical, and histological responses.

Health care-associated transmission of hepatitis B and C viruses in hemodialysis units

Liver disease is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in patients receiving long-term dialysis. This article summarizes the most recent information on epidemiology, clinical significance, and management of infection by hepatitis B and C viruses in this population.