Changes in extracellular water and left ventricular mass in peritoneal dialysis patients

Home Dialysis in Patients with Cardiovascular Diseases

Kidney failure with replacement therapy and cardiovascular disease are frequently comorbid. In patients with kidney failure with replacement therapy, cardiovascular disease is a major contributor to morbidity and mortality. Conventional thrice-weekly in-center dialysis confers risk factors for cardiovascular disease, including acute hemodynamic fluctuations and rapid shifts in volume and solute concentration. Home hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis (PD) may offer benefits in attenuation of cardiovascular disease risk factors primarily through improved volume and BP control, reduction (or slowing progression) of left ventricular mass, decreased myocardial stunning, and improved bone and mineral metabolism. Importantly, although trial data are available for several of these risk factors for home hemodialysis, evidence for PD is limited. Among patients with prevalent cardiovascular disease, home hemodialysis and PD may also have potential benefits. PD may offer particular advantages in heart failure given it removes volume directly from the splanchnic circulation, thus offering an efficient method of relieving intravascular congestion. PD also avoids the risk of blood stream infections in patients with cardiac devices or venous wires. We recognize that both home hemodialysis and PD are also associated with potential risks, and these are described in more detail. We conclude with a discussion of barriers to home dialysis and the critical importance of interdisciplinary care models as one component of advancing health equity with respect to home dialysis.

Diagnosis and treatment of hypertension in dialysis patients: a systematic review

In patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) undergoing dialysis, hypertension is common but often inadequately controlled. The prevalence of hypertension varies widely among studies because of differences in the definition of hypertension and the methods of used to measure blood pressure (BP), i.e., peri-dialysis or ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM). Recently, ABPM has become the gold standard for diagnosing hypertension in dialysis patients. Home BP monitoring can also be a good alternative to ABPM, emphasizing BP measurement outside the hemodialysis (HD) unit. One thing for sure is pre- and post-dialysis BP measurements should not be used alone to diagnose and manage hypertension in dialysis patients. The exact target of BP and the relationship between BP and all-cause mortality or cause-specific mortality are unclear in this population. Many observational studies with HD cohorts have almost universally reported a U-shaped or even an L-shaped association between BP and all-cause mortality, but most of these data are based on the BP measured in HD units. Some data with ABPM have shown a linear association between BP and mortality even in HD patients, similar to the general population. Supporting this, the results of meta-analysis have shown a clear benefit of BP reduction in HD patients. Therefore, further research is needed to determine the optimal target BP in the dialysis population, and for now, an individualized approach is appropriate, with particular emphasis on avoiding excessively low BP. Maintaining euvolemia is of paramount importance for BP control in dialysis patients. Patient heterogeneity and the lack of comparative evidence preclude the recommendation of one class of medication over another for all patients. Recently, however, β-blockers could be considered as a first-line therapy in dialysis patients, as they can reduce sympathetic overactivity and left ventricular hypertrophy, which contribute to the high incidence of arrhythmias and sudden cardiac death. Several studies with mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists have also reported promising results in reducing mortality in dialysis patients. However, safety issues such as hyperkalemia or hypotension should be further evaluated before their use.

Why is Intradialytic Hypotension the Commonest Complication of Outpatient Dialysis Treatments?

Intradialytic hypotension (IDH) is the most frequent complication of hemodialysis (HD) treatments with a frequency of 10% to 12% for patients with chronic kidney disease attending for outpatient treatments and is associated with both temporary ischemic stress to vital organs, including the heart and brain, and increased patient mortality. Although there have been many different definitions of IDH over the years, an absolute nadir systolic blood pressure (SBP) has the strongest association with patient outcomes. The unifying pathophysiology is one of reduced effective blood volume, resulting in lower plasma tonicity, and if this cannot be adequately compensated for by activation of neurohumeral systems, then arteriolar tone and blood pressure fall. The risk factors for developing IDH are numerous, ranging from patient-related factors, including age and comorbidity with reduced cardiac reserve, to patient compliance with dietary and lifestyle advice, to reactions with the extracorporeal circuit and medications, choice of dialysate composition and temperature, setting of postdialysis target weight, ultrafiltration rate, and profiling. Advances in dialysis machine technology by providing real time estimates of the effective circulating volume and adjusting dialysate composition to maintain vascular tonicity are being developed, but currently require more sophisticated biofeedback loops to be clinically effective in preventing IDH. While awaiting advances in artificial intelligence, the clinician continues to rely on patient education to limit interdialytic weight gains, frequent assessment of the postdialysis target weight, adjusting dialysate composition and temperature, introducing convective therapies to increase thermal losses, and altering dialysis session duration and frequency to reduce ultrafiltration rate requirements.

A retrospective study of baseline peritoneal transport character and left ventricular hypertrophy in incident peritoneal dialysis patients: interrelationship and prognostic impacts

BACKGROUND

Left ventricular hypertrophy is associated with adverse outcomes among peritoneal dialysis patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prognostic impact of baseline left ventricular hypertrophy and its relationship with baseline peritoneal transfer characteristics in peritoneal dialysis patients.

METHODS

We enrolled 151 incident peritoneal dialysis patients to perform a multicentric retrospective cohort study since January 1, 2017 to January 31, 2021. Patients were grouped based on baseline dialysate-to-plasma creatinine ratio at 4 h as follows: low (<0.50), low average (0.5-0.64), high average (0.65-0.80) and high (≥0.81). Echocardiography and clinic data were recorded yearly. The Cox proportional hazards models and competing risk model were used to evaluate patients' survival. Generalized linear mixed models were performed to explore risk factors associated with left ventricular hypertrophy.

RESULTS

During a median follow-up period of 33 months (range, 16-48 months), 21 (13.9%) patients died, including 16 (10.60%) cardiovascular deaths. Controlling the competing risks of switching to hemodialysis, kidney transplantation and loss to follow-up, baseline left ventricular hypertrophy was an independent risk factor for all-cause mortality (subdistribution hazard ratio, 2.645; 95% confidence interval, 1.156-6.056; p = 0.021). Baseline high and high average transport status were positively related to left ventricular mass index and left atrium diameter 2 years after PD initiation.

CONCLUSION

Baseline fast peritoneal solute transport rate may be an effect factor for aggravating left ventricular hypertrophy which predicted poor outcomes for peritoneal dialysis patients. The findings offered important ideas for further prospective intervention study.

A randomized clinical trial to evaluate the effects of icodextrin on left ventricular mass index in peritoneal dialysis

Left ventricular hypertrophy is a risk factor for cardiovascular mortality in patients on peritoneal dialysis (PD). Because icodextrin has a greater ultrafiltration power compared with glucose-based solutions for long dwell, it could improve left ventricular mass by reducing fluid overload. This was a randomized clinical trial that included patients on PD recruited from 2 teaching hospitals, in Sao Paulo—Brazil. Patients were allocated to the control glucose group (GLU) or the intervention icodextrin (ICO) group. Clinical and cardiac magnetic resonance image (MRI) parameters were evaluated at baseline and 6 months after randomization. The primary outcome was the change in left ventricular mass adjusted by surface area (ΔLVMI), measured by cardiac MRI. A total of 22 patients completed the study (GLU, N = 12 and ICO, N = 10). Baseline characteristics such as age, sex, underlying disease, and time on dialysis were similar in both groups. At baseline, 17 patients (77.3%) presented with left ventricular hypertrophy with no difference between groups (p = 0.748). According to the total body water (TBW)/extracellular water (ECW) ratio, 36.8% and 80% of patients from GLU and ICO groups, respectively, were considered hypervolemic (p = 0.044). During follow-up, ΔLVMI was 3.9 g/m (− 10.7, 2.2) in GLU and 5.2 (− 26.8, 16.8) in ICO group (p = 0.651). ΔLVMI correlated with change in brain natriuretic peptide (r = 0.566, p = 0.044), which remained significant in a multiple regression analysis. The use of the icodextrin-based solution in prevalent patients on PD compared with a glucose-based solution was not able to improve LMV. A larger randomized trial with a longer follow-up period may be needed to show changes in LVM in this patient population.

Trial registration: this study has been registered at ReBEC (Registro Brasileiro de Ensaios Clinicos) under the identification #RBR-2mzhmj2, available at: https://ensaiosclinicos.gov.br/pesquisador.

Multifrequency bioimpedance by spectroscopy vs. routine methods in the management of hydration status in peritoneal dialysis patients: A randomized control trial

Background

Overhydration (OH) is common in peritoneal dialysis (PD) and increases the cardiovascular risk. Multifrequency bioimpedance spectroscopy (BIS) has been proposed to estimate the hydration in dialysis. Our objective was to evaluate if BIS is superior than control based on clinical assessment plus single-frequency bioimpedance (SF-BIA) on the fluid control and intermediate cardiovascular outcomes.

Methods

Randomized controlled study in adult PD patients, with a 9-month follow-up, allocated into two groups: control and BIS. Data were collected from medical records. SF-BIA and BIS, laboratory exams, ambulatory blood pressure monitoring, echocardiography (ECHO), and pulse wave velocity (PWV) were evaluated. The BIS data were available to the medical team only in BIS group.

Results

34 patients completed the study, 17 in each group. At the endpoint the BIS group had a significant (p < 0.05) greater proportion of patients with OH/extracellular water (OH/ECW%) ≤ 15% than the control (94.1% vs. 52.9%), and a lower OH mean (2.1 ± 1.6 vs. 0.9 ± 1.1 L). The control group has a significant increase in the tumor necrosis factor alpha median concentration from baseline to six [11.9 (6.0–24.1) vs. 44.7 (9.4–70.6) pg/ml] and 9 months [11.9 (6.0–24.1) vs. 39.4 (27.9–62.6) pg/ml], and in the N-terminal fragment of pro-B-type natriuretic peptide median [239 (171.5–360.5) vs. 356 (219–1,555) pg/ml]. For cardiovascular parameters, BIS group presented a significant reduction in radial PWV [7.7 (6.9–9.2) vs. 6.5 (5.5–8.4) m/s] at 9 month, while in the control presented a significant increase in mean central systolic blood pressure (BP) (106.8 ± 11.2 vs. 117.6 ± 16.5 mmHg) and in central diastolic BP (90.4 ± 9.8 vs. 103.3 ± 12.5 mmHg) at 9 months. The left ventricular mass (LVM)/body surface presented a significant reduction in the control (109.6 ± 30.8 vs. 101.2 ± 28.9 g/m²) and BIS group (107.7 ± 24.9 vs. 96.1 ± 27.0 g/m²) at 9 months.

Conclusion

The results suggest BIS is superior than the clinical evaluation plus SF-BIA for the fluid control of PD patients.

Clinical trial registration

[https://www.ClinicalTrials.gov], identifier [RBR-10k8j3bx].

Prognostic values of left ventricular mass index progression in incident peritoneal dialysis patients : a prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) is common among patients undergoing dialysis. However, the dynamic structural changes of LV are rarely discussed. The study aimed to investigate the prognostic significance of left ventricular mass index (LVMI)-progression in incident peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients, and explore risks factors for LVMI-progression.

METHODS

Incident PD patients between February 2008 and July 2018 were recruited. Echocardiography was performed yearly to collect LVMI and evaluate its changes. Participants were divided into three subgroups: group with LVMI-regression, group with LVMI stable and group with LVMI-progression. The end points include all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality and cardiovascular events. Cox regression models were performed to identify the associations between LVMI-progression and these endpoints. Multivariate logistic regression was conducted to identify risk factors for LVMI-progression.

RESULTS

A total of 216 PD patients (130 men,60.2%) with a mean age of 54.3 ± 16.8 years were recruited. LVMI-progression was identified in 72 patients (33.3%) after PD initiation. The cohort was followed for a median duration of 65.9 months. Multivariable Cox regression analysis revealed that LVMI-progression was an independent predictor of all-cause mortality (HR, 1.419; 95% CI, 1.016-1.982; p = 0.040), cardiovascular mortality (HR, 1.836; 95%CI, 1.084-3.108; p = 0.024), and cardiovascular events (HR, 1.494; 95%CI, 1.063-2.099; p = 0.021). Multivariable logistic regression showed that hemoglobin, ferritin, blood pressure and fibrinogen were significantly associated with LVMI-progression.

CONCLUSION

Early LVMI-progression was independently associated with all-cause mortality and cardiovascular outcomes in PD patients. The dynamic monitoring of LVMI might therefore help identify high-risk patients.

Peritoneal Dialysis for Potential Kidney Transplant Recipients: Pride or Prejudice?

Kidney transplantation (KT) is recognized as the gold-standard of treatment for patients with end-stage renal disease. Additionally, it has been demonstrated that receiving a pre-emptive KT ensures the best recipient and graft survivals. However, due to an overwhelming discrepancy between the organs available and the patients on the transplant waiting list, the vast majority of transplant candidates require prolonged periods of dialysis before being transplanted. For many years, peritoneal dialysis (PD) and hemodialysis (HD) have been considered competitive renal replacement therapies (RRT). This dualistic vision has recently been questioned by evidence suggesting that an individualized and flexible approach may be more appropriate. In fact, tailored and cleverly planned changes between different RRT modalities, according to the patient’s needs and characteristics, are often needed in order to achieve the best results. While home HD is still under scrutiny in this particular setting, current data seems to favor the use of PD over in-center HD in patients awaiting a KT. In this specific population, the demonstrated advantages of PD are superior quality of life, longer preservation of residual renal function, lower incidence of delayed graft function, better recipient survival, and reduced cost.