Center-Effect of Incident Hemodialysis Vascular Access Use: Analysis of a Bi-national Registry

Vascular access route venture of the chronic hemodialysis patient: A prospective cohort study

ObjectivesThis study aimed to collect evidence to improve the arteriovenous fistula practice by investigating vascular access routes and by identifying the factors influencing the preferred types of vascular access routes for the first-time hemodialysis in our center.MethodsWe performed an epidemiological, prospective, cohort study. The study included 308 patients, who underwent hemodialysis for the first time between March 2023 and August 2023 in our hemodialysis center. We evaluated biochemical parameters, preferred vascular access routes for the first-time hemodialysis, planned/emergency hemodialysis status, the qualifications of the healthcare provider, who inserted the central venous catheter, if applicable, the presence of hypervolemia, anticoagulant use, nephrology follow-up findings, and in-hospital mortality in all patients and in those, who continued with chronic hemodialysis.ResultsThe number of patients, who continued with chronic hemodialysis, was 167 (54.2%) and a temporary internal jugular central venous catheter was the most commonly preferred vascular access route for the first-time hemodialysis (47.3%). A central venous catheter was most commonly inserted by a nephrologist (53.7%) in chronic hemodialysis patients. Of the patients continuing with chronic hemodialysis, 45.5% were followed up in the nephrology outpatient clinic, 9.6% initiated hemodialysis on a planned basis, and 8.4% initiated hemodialysis with an arteriovenous fistula. A temporary internal jugular central venous catheter was commonly preferred when patients were followed up in the nephrology clinic and when the insertion was performed by a nephrologist; a transient femoral central venous catheter was commonly preferred in case of hypervolemia (p < .001, p < .001, and p = .028, respectively). Age, gender, etiology, anticoagulant use, or biochemical test results did not act on the selection of the access site for the insertion of central venous catheter at the time of the first hemodialysis treatment. The access site for central venous catheter was not associated with in-hospital mortality (p = .644). In the overall patient group, the in-hospital mortality was significantly low in patients followed up in the nephrology clinic (p = .014).ConclusionThe use of pre-emptive arteriovenous fistula for the first hemodialysis treatment occurs much less commonly than expected. Hemodialysis initiation rates with pre-emptive arteriovenous fistula lag behind nephrology outpatient follow-up rates.

Epidemiology of haemodialysis outcomes

Haemodialysis (HD) is the commonest form of kidney replacement therapy in the world, accounting for approximately 69% of all kidney replacement therapy and 89% of all dialysis. Over the last six decades since the inception of HD, dialysis technology and patient access to the therapy have advanced considerably, particularly in high-income countries. However, HD availability, accessibility, cost and outcomes vary widely across the world and, overall, the rates of impaired quality of life, morbidity and mortality are high. Cardiovascular disease affects more than two-thirds of people receiving HD, is the major cause of morbidity and accounts for almost 50% of mortality. In addition, patients on HD have high symptom loads and are often under considerable financial strain. Despite the many advances in HD technology and delivery systems that have been achieved since the treatment was first developed, poor outcomes among patients receiving HD remain a major public health concern. Understanding the epidemiology of HD outcomes, why they might vary across different populations and how they might be improved is therefore crucial, although this goal is hampered by the considerable heterogeneity in the monitoring and reporting of these outcomes across settings.

This Review examines the epidemiology of haemodialysis outcomes — clinical, patient-reported and surrogate outcomes — across world regions and populations, including vulnerable individuals. The authors also discuss the current status of monitoring and reporting of haemodialysis outcomes and potential strategies for improvement.

Nearly 4 million people in the world are living on kidney replacement therapy (KRT), and haemodialysis (HD) remains the commonest form of KRT, accounting for approximately 69% of all KRT and 89% of all dialysis.

Dialysis technology and patient access to KRT have advanced substantially since the 1960s, particularly in high-income countries. However, HD availability, accessibility, cost and outcomes continue to vary widely across countries, particularly among disadvantaged populations (including Indigenous peoples, women and people at the extremes of age).

Cardiovascular disease affects over two-thirds of people receiving HD, is the major cause of morbidity and accounts for almost 50% of mortality; mortality among patients on HD is significantly higher than that of their counterparts in the general population, and treated kidney failure has a higher mortality than many types of cancer. Patients on HD also experience high burdens of symptoms, poor quality of life and financial difficulties.

Careful monitoring of the outcomes of patients on HD is essential to develop effective strategies for risk reduction. Outcome measures are highly variable across regions, countries, centres and segments of the population. Establishing kidney registries that collect a variety of clinical and patient-reported outcomes using harmonized definitions is therefore crucial.

Evaluation of HD outcomes should include the impact on family and friends, and personal finances, and should examine inequities in disadvantaged populations, who comprise a large proportion of the HD population.