Towards a better uptake of home dialysis in Europe: understanding the present and looking to the future

Use of peritoneal dialysis and home haemodialysis remains low in Europe, with the highest use in Scandinavian countries and the lowest in Eastern and Central Europe despite the advantages for people on dialysis and economic advantages for healthcare systems. This is partly due to the impact of the haemodialysis industry resulting in proliferation of haemodialysis units and nephrologist reimbursement related to use of haemodialysis. Equally important is the bias against home dialysis at both clinician and healthcare system levels. The underlying causes of this bias are discussed in relation to a mechanistic view of the human body, lack of compassion, failure to adjust dialysis provision for older age and frailty, proliferation of small dialysis centres, and complexity of decision-making and clinical care. For home dialysis to flourish, we need to foster a change in attitude to and vision of the aims of healthcare so that enabling meaningful activities of people requiring dialysis, as explored in the Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology initiative, rather than achieving biological numbers become the focus of care delivery.

Personalized peritoneal dialysis prescription-beyond clinical or analytical values

Traditionally, dialysis adequacy has been assessed primarily by determining the clearance of a single small solute, urea. Nevertheless, it has become increasingly evident that numerous other factors play a crucial role in the overall well-being, outcomes and quality of life of dialysis patients. Consequently, in recent years, there has been a notable paradigm shift in guidelines and recommendations regarding dialysis adequacy. This shift represents a departure from a narrow focus only on the removal of specific toxins, embracing a more holistic, person-centered approach. This new perspective underscores the critical importance of improving the well-being of individuals undergoing dialysis while simultaneously minimizing the overall treatment burden. It is based on a double focus on both clinical outcomes and a comprehensive patient experience. To achieve this, a person-centered approach must be embraced when devising care strategies for each individual. This requires a close collaboration between the healthcare team and the patient, facilitating an in-depth understanding of the patient's unique goals, priorities and preferences while striving for the highest quality of care during treatment. The aim of this publication is to address the existing evidence on this all-encompassing approach to treatment care for patients undergoing peritoneal dialysis and provide a concise overview to promote a deeper understanding of this person-centered approach.

Delivering Person-Centered Peritoneal Dialysis

Peritoneal dialysis (PD) enables people to have a home-based therapy, permitting greater autonomy for individuals along with enhanced treatment satisfaction compared with in-center dialysis care. The burden of treatment on PD, however, remains considerable and underpins the need for person-centered care. This reflects the need to address the patient as a person with needs and preferences beyond just the medical perspective. Shared decision making is central to the recent International Society for Peritoneal Dialysis recommendations for prescribing PD, balancing the potential benefits of PD on patient well-being with the burden associated with treatment. This review considers the role of high-quality goal-directed prescribing, incremental dialysis, and remote patient monitoring in reducing the burden of dialysis, including an approach to implementing incremental PD. Although patient-related outcomes are important in assessing the response to treatment and, particularly life participation, the corollary of dialysis burden, there are no clear routes to the clinical implementation of patient-related outcome measures. Delivering person-centered care is dependent on treating people both as individuals and as equal partners in their care.

Historical overview and current practice of peritoneal dialysis in Japan

In the early days of peritoneal dialysis (PD) therapy, its limited duration and peritoneal deterioration were argued to be its disadvantages. Biocompatible solutions and hybrid therapy have been used in Japan to overcome these issues, which resulted in a decrease in encapsulating peritoneal sclerosis (EPS) incidence and an extension of PD continuation; these results have been disseminated worldwide. Peritoneal dialysis outcomes and practice patterns study (PDOPPS), a prospective observational study, has begun to confirm the outcomes of PD therapy, and sufficient evidence has been published, which has influenced the preparation of PD guidelines. Current thinking about PD emphasizes the need to maintain quality of life and life goals as care goals for patients and to provide high-quality care. However, we must conduct basic research on the prevention of peritoneal deterioration.

Is peritoneal dialysis suitable technique CKD patients over 65 years? A prospective multicenter study

BACKGROUND

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is increasing in patients older than 65 years and is related to morbidity, frailty, and dependence. Peritoneal dialysis (PD) has classically been associated with young patients with an active life.

HYPOTHESIS

PD should be offered to patients over 65 years. We search for any unfavorable results that may advice not to recommend PD therapy for this group.

OBJECTIVE

To describe PD treatment and outcomes in patients > 65 years, to compare their results with patients < 65 years and to identify areas with room for improvement in a real-life study.

STUDY

Prospective, observational, and multicenter study performed in incident PD patients, from January 2003 until January 2018.

RESULTS

We included 2,435 PD patients, 31.9% were older than 65 years; there was a difference of 25 years between both groups. Median follow up was 2.1 years. Older than 65 years group had more comorbidity: Diabetes (29.5% vs 17.2%; p < 0.001), previous CV events 34.5% vs 14.0%; p < 0.001), Charlson index (3.8 vs 3.0; p < 0.001). We did not find differences in efficacy and PD adequacy objectives fulfillment, anaemia management or blood pressure during follow-up. Peritonitis rate was higher in older 65 years group (0.65 vs 0.45 episodes/patient/year; p < 0.001), but there was not differences in germs, admission rate and follow up. Mortality was higher in older 65 years group (28.4% vs 9.4%) as expected. PD permanence probability was similar (2.1 years). The main cause of PD withdrawal was transplant in group < 65 years (48.3%) and transfer to HD in group > 65 years. The main reason was caregiver or patient fatigue (20.2%), and not technique failure (7.3%). Multivariate Cox regression analysis showed a relation (HR [95%CI]) between mortality and age > 65 years 2.4 [1.9-3.0]; DM 1.6 [1.3-2.1]; CV events 2.1 [1.7-2.7]. Multivariate Cox regression analysis identify a relation between technique failure and age > 65 years 1.5 [1.3-1.9]; DM 1.6 [1.3-1.9] and previous transplant 1.5 [1.2-2.0].

CONCLUSION

Patients older than 65 years fulfilled PD adequacy criteria during the follow up. We believe PD is a valid option for patients older 65 years. It is necessary to try to prevent infections and patient/caregiver fatigue, to avoid HD transfer for reasons not related to technique failure.

Trends in Peritoneal Dialysis Technique Survival, Death, and Transfer to Hemodialysis: A Decade of Data from the RDPLF

INTRODUCTION

There is limited information on the trends of peritoneal dialysis (PD) technique survival over time. This study aimed to estimate the effect of calendar time on technique survival, transfer to hemodialysis (HD) (and the individual causes of transfer), and patient survival.

METHODS

This retrospective, multicenter study, based on data from the French Language Peritoneal Dialysis Registry, analyzed 14,673 patients who initiated PD in France between January 1, 2005, and December 31, 2016. Adjusted Cox regressions with robust variance were used to examine the probability of a composite end point of either death or transfer to HD, death, and transfer to HD, accounting for the nonlinear impact of PD start time.

RESULTS

There were 10,201 (69.5%) cases of PD cessation over the study period: 5,495 (37.4%) deaths and 4,706 (32.1%) transfers to HD. The rate of PD cessation due to death or transfer to HD decreased over time (PR 0.96, 95% CI: 0.95-0.97). Compared to 2009-2010, starting PD between 2005 and 2008 or 2011 and 2016 was strongly associated with a lower rate of transfer to HD (PR 0.88, 95% CI: 0.81-0.96, and PR 0.91, 95% CI: 0.84-0.99, respectively), mostly due to a decline in the rate of infection-related transfers to HD (PR 0.96, 95% CI: 0.94-0.98).

CONCLUSIONS

Rates of the composite end point of either death or transfer to HD, death, and transfer to HD have decreased in recent decades. The decline in transfers to HD rates, observed since 2011, is mainly the result of a significant decline in infection-related transfers.

Is peritoneal dialysis suitable technique CKD patients over 65 years? A prospective multicenter study

BACKGROUND

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is increasing in patients older than 65years and is related to morbidity, frailty, and dependence. Peritoneal dialysis (PD) has classically been associated with young patients with an active life.

HYPOTHESIS

PD should be offered to patients over 65years. We search for any unfavorable results that may advice not to recommend PD therapy for this group.

OBJECTIVE

To describe PD treatment and outcomes in patients >65years, to compare their results with patients <65years and to identify areas with room for improvement in a real-life study.

STUDY

Prospective, observational, and multicenter study performed in incident PD patients, from January 2003 until January 2018.

RESULTS

We included 2,435 PD patients, 31.9% were older than 65years; there was a difference of 25years between both groups. Median follow up was 2.1years. Older than 65years group had more comorbidity: Diabetes (29.5% vs 17.2%; p<0.001), previous CV events 34.5% vs 14.0%; p<0.001), Charlson index (3.8 vs 3.0; p<0.001). We did not find differences in efficacy and PD adequacy objectives fulfillment, anaemia management or blood pressure during follow-up. Peritonitis rate was higher in older 65years group (0.65 vs 0.45 episodes/patient/year; p<0.001), but there was not differences in germs, admission rate and follow up. Mortality was higher in older 65years group (28.4% vs 9.4%) as expected. PD permanence probability was similar (2.1years). The main cause of PD withdrawal was transplant in group <65years (48.3%) and transfer to HD in group >65years. The main reason was caregiver or patient fatigue (20.2%), and not technique failure (7.3%). Multivariate Cox regression analysis showed a relation (HR [95%CI]) between mortality and age>65years 2.4 [1.9-3.0]; DM 1.6 [1.3-2.1]; CV events 2.1 [1.7-2.7]. Multivariate Cox regression analysis identify a relation between technique failure and age>65years 1.5 [1.3-1.9]; DM 1.6 [1.3-1.9] and previous transplant 1.5 [1.2-2.0].

CONCLUSION

Patients older than 65years fulfilled PD adequacy criteria during the follow up. We believe PD is a valid option for patients older 65years. It is necessary to try to prevent infections and patient/caregiver fatigue, to avoid HD transfer for reasons not related to technique failure.

KDOQI US Commentary on the 2020 ISPD Practice Recommendations for Prescribing High-Quality Goal-Directed Peritoneal Dialysis

The recently published 2020 International Society for Peritoneal Dialysis (ISPD) practice recommendations regarding prescription of high-quality goal-directed peritoneal dialysis differ fundamentally from previous guidelines that focused on "adequacy" of dialysis. The new ISPD publication emphasizes the need for a person-centered approach with shared decision making between the individual performing peritoneal dialysis and the clinical care team while taking a broader view of the various issues faced by that individual. Cognizant of the lack of strong evidence for the recommendations made, they are labeled as "practice points" rather than being graded numerically. This commentary presents the views of a work group convened by the National Kidney Foundation's Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (KDOQI) to assess these recommendations and assist clinical providers in the United States in interpreting and implementing them. This will require changes to the current clinical paradigm, including greater resource allocation to allow for enhanced services that provide a more holistic and person-centered assessment of the quality of dialysis delivered.

Person-centered peritoneal dialysis prescription and the role of shared decision-making

Person-centered care has become a dominant paradigm in modern health care. It needs to be applied to people with end-stage kidney disease considering the initiation of dialysis and to peritoneal dialysis (PD) prescription and care delivery. It is relevant to their decisions about goals of care, transplantation, palliative care, and discontinuation of dialysis. It is also relevant to decisions about how PD is delivered, including options such as incremental PD. Shared decision-making is the essence of this process and needs to become a standard principle of care. It requires engagement, education, and empowerment of patients. Patient-reported outcomes and patient-reported experience are also central to person-centered care in PD.