Prevention of Intradialytic Hypotension in Hemodialysis Patients: Current Challenges and Future Prospects

Intradialytic hypotension, defined as rapid decrease in systolic blood pressure of greater than or equal to 20 mmHg or in mean arterial pressure of greater than or equal to 10 mmHg that results in end-organ ischemia and requires countermeasures such as ultrafiltration reduction or saline infusion to increase blood pressure to improve patient's symptoms, is a known complication of hemodialysis and is associated with several potential adverse outcomes. Its pathogenesis is complex and involves both patient-related factors such as age and comorbidities, as well as factors related to the dialysis prescription itself. Key factors include the need for volume removal during hemodialysis and a suboptimal vascular response which compromises the ability to compensate for acute intravascular volume loss. Inadequate vascular refill, incorrect assessment or unaccounted changes of target weight, acute illnesses and medication interference are further potential contributors. Intradialytic hypotension can lead to compromised tissue perfusion and end-organ damage, both acutely and over time, resulting in repetitive injuries. To address these problems, a careful assessment of subjective symptoms, minimizing interdialytic weight gains, individualizing dialysis prescription and adjusting the dialysis procedure based on patients' risk factors can mitigate negative outcomes.

Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate in Chronic Kidney Disease: A Critical Review of Estimate-Based Predictions of Individual Outcomes in Kidney Disease

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is generally regarded as a final common pathway of several renal diseases, often leading to end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) and a need for renal replacement therapy. Estimated GFR (eGFR) has been used to predict this outcome recognizing its robust association with renal disease progression and the eventual need for dialysis in large, mainly cross-sectional epidemiological studies. However, GFR is implicitly limited as follows: (1) GFR reflects only one of the many physiological functions of the kidney; (2) it is dependent on several non-renal factors; (3) it has intrinsic variability that is a function of dietary intake, fluid and cardiovascular status, and blood pressure especially with impaired autoregulation or medication use; (4) it has been shown to change with age with a unique non-linear pattern; and (5) eGFR may not correlate with GFR in certain conditions and disease states. Yet, many clinicians, especially our non-nephrologist colleagues, tend to regard eGFR obtained from a simple laboratory test as both a valid reflection of renal function and a reliable diagnostic tool in establishing the diagnosis of CKD. What is the validity of these beliefs? This review will critically reassess the limitations of such single-focused attention, with a particular focus on inter-individual variability. What does science actually tell us about the usefulness of eGFR in diagnosing CKD?

ABO incompatibility in renal transplantation

ABO blood group incompatibility (ABO-I) was historically considered an absolute contraindication to kidney transplantation due to the significant risk of acute antibody-mediated rejection and early graft loss. Nevertheless, the urge to minimize the gap between the candidates’ number on the waitlist for kidney transplants and the available kidney donors encourage investigation into finding ways to use organs from ABO-I kidney donors, especially in the era of using more potent immunosuppression therapies. This review aims to discuss a general overview of ABO-I kidney transplantation and the different protocols adopted by some transplant centers to meaningfully overcome this barrier.

Liver transplantation during global COVID-19 pandemic

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory disease respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 has significantly impacted the health care systems globally. Liver transplantation (LT) has faced an unequivocal challenge during this unprecedented time. This targeted review aims to cover most of the clinical issues, challenges and concerns about LT during the COVID-19 pandemic and discuss the most updated literature on this rapidly emerging subject.

Hypertension and obesity in living kidney donors

Over the past few decades, the shortage in the kidney donor pool as compared to the increasing number of candidates on the kidney transplant waitlist led to loosening of kidney donors’ acceptance criteria. Hypertension and obesity represent risk factors for chronic kidney disease, both in native kidneys and those in kidney transplant recipients. While great progress has been made in kidney transplantation from living donors to benefit the recipient survival and quality of life, progress has been slow to fully risk-characterize the donors. This review critically reassesses the current state of understanding regarding the risk of end-stage kidney disease in those donors with obesity, hypertension or both. Accurate risk assessment tools need to be developed urgently to fully understand the risk glomerular filtration rate compensation failure in the remaining kidney of the donors.

Correction to: Therapeutic hypernatremia management during continuous renal replacement therapy with elevated intracranial pressures and respiratory failure

The authors would like to report an error in the formula describing the correction factor for the protein content in the serum/plasma.

Therapeutic hypernatremia management during continuous renal replacement therapy with elevated intracranial pressures and respiratory failure

Cerebral edema and elevated intracranial pressure (ICP) are common complications of acute brain injury. Hypertonic solutions are routinely used in acute brain injury as effective osmotic agents to lower ICP by increasing the extracellular fluid tonicity. Acute kidney injury in a patient with traumatic brain injury and elevated ICP requiring renal replacement therapy represents a significant therapeutic challenge due to an increased risk of cerebral edema associated with intermittent conventional hemodialysis. Therefore, continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) has emerged as the preferred modality of therapy in this patient population. We present our current treatment approach, with demonstrative case vignette illustrations, utilizing hypertonic saline protocols (3% sodium-chloride or, with coexisting severe combined metabolic and respiratory acidosis, with 4.2% sodium-bicarbonate) in conjunction with the CRRT platform, to induce controlled hypernatremia of approximately 155 mEq/L in hemodynamically unstable patients with acute kidney injury and elevated ICP due to acute brain injury. Rationale, mechanism of activation, benefits and potential pitfalls of the therapy are reviewed. The impact of hypertonic citrate solution during regional citrate anticoagulation is specifically discussed. Maintaining plasma hypertonicity in the setting of increased ICP and acute kidney injury could prevent the worsening of ICP during renal replacement therapy by minimizing the osmotic gradient across the blood-brain barrier and maximizing cardiovascular stability.

Balanced Crystalloids versus Saline in Critically Ill Adults

BACKGROUND:

Both balanced crystalloids and saline are used for intravenous fluid administration among critically ill adults. Which results in better clinical outcomes remains unknown.

METHODS:

In a pragmatic, cluster-randomized, multiple-crossover trial in five intensive care units at an academic center, we assigned 15,802 adults to receive saline (0.9% sodium chloride) or balanced crystalloids (lactated Ringer’s solution or Plasma-Lyte A®), according to the randomization of the unit to which they were admitted. The primary outcome was Major Adverse Kidney Events within 30 days (MAKE30), i.e., the composite of death, new renal replacement therapy, or persistent creatinine elevation ≥ 200% of baseline – all censored at the first of hospital discharge or 30 days.

RESULTS:

In the balanced crystalloid group, 1,139 patients (14.3%) experienced MAKE30, compared to 1,211 patients (15.4%) in the saline group (marginal odds ratio, 0.91; 95% confidence interval, 0.84–0.99; conditional odds ratio, 0.90; 95% confidence interval, 0.82–0.99; P=0.04). Thirty-day in-hospital mortality was 10.3% in the balanced crystalloid group and 11.1% in the saline group (P=0.06). The incidence of new renal replacement therapy was 2.5% and 2.9% respectively (P=0.08), and the incidence of persistent creatinine elevation was 6.4% and 6.6% respectively (P=0.60).

CONCLUSIONS:

Among critically ill adults, the use of balanced crystalloids for intravenous fluid administration appeared to reduce the composite outcome of in-hospital mortality, new renal replacement therapy, and persistent renal dysfunction compared with the use of saline. (SMART-MED and SMART-SURG ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT02444988 and NCT02547779.)

Successful Practice Transitioning Between Hemodialysis and Hemodiafiltration in Outpatient Units: Ten Key Issues for Physicians to Remember

Hemodiafiltration (HDF) during chronic renal replacement therapy (RRT) is a relatively new practice phenomenon, emerging over the last two decades. While the technological platforms utilized during chronic RRT are in many cases similar or effectively identical to conventional hemodialysis (HD), significant differences may emerge in daily practice. Several authors of this review moved practice site between the United States and the European Union and transitioned from an HD-based practice to predominantly HDF-practicing networks. In doing so, we became keenly aware of the potential pitfalls nephrologists may be facing during such transitions. This brief review is intended to provide a succinct overview of several practical concerns and complications nephrologists may encounter in daily practice of end-stage renal disease care, including but not limited to management of electrolytes, renal anemia and treatment goals and settings during HDF.

Peritoneal dialysis: The unique features by compartmental delivery of renal replacement therapy

Despite decades of research, the clinical efficacy of peritoneal dialysis (PD) remains enigmatic. We may wonder why the modality fail in some patients but perhaps the more proper question would be, why it works in so many? We know that the contribution of residual renal function (RRF), more so than in hemodialysis, is critically important to the well-being of many of the patients. Unique features of the modality include the relatively low volume of dialysate fluid needed to provide effective uremic control and the disproportionate tendency for both hypokalemia and hypoalbuminemia, when compared to hemodialysis. It is currently believed that most uremic toxins are generated on the interface of human and bacterial structures in the gastrointestinal tract, the intestinal biota. PD offers disproportionate removal of these toxins upon "first-pass", i.e., via PD fluid exchanges before reaching the systemic circulation beyond the gastrointestinal compartment. Studies examining the net removal gradient of protein-bound uremic toxins during PD are scarce, whereas RRF receives considerably more attention without effective interventions being developed to preserve it. We propose an alternative view on PD, emphasizing the modality's compartmental nature, both for its benefits and the limitations.

Volume-related weight gain as an independent indication for renal replacement therapy in the intensive care units

Attempts to identify specific therapies to reverse acute kidney injury (AKI) have been unsuccessful in the past; only modifying risk profile or addressing the underlying disease processes leading to AKI proved efficacious. The current thinking on recognizing AKI is compromised by a "kidney function percent-centered" viewpoint, a paradigm further reinforced by the emergence of serum creatinine-based automated glomerular filtration reporting over the last two decades. Such thinking is, however, grossly corrupted for AKI and poorly applicable in critically ill patients in general. Conventional indications for renal replacement therapy (RRT) may have limited applicability in critically ill patients and there has been a relative lack of progress on RRT modalities in these patients. AKI in critically ill patients is a highly complex syndrome and it may be counterproductive to produce complex clinical practice guidelines, which are labor and resource-intensive to maintain, difficult to memorize or may not be immediately available in all settings all over the world. Additionally, despite attempts to develop reliable and reproducible biomarkers to replace serum creatinine as a guide to therapy such biomarkers failed to materialize. Under such circumstances, there is an ongoing need to reassess the practical value of simple measures, such as volume-related weight gain (VRWG) and urine output, both for prognostic markers and clinical indicators for the need for RRT. This current paper reviews the practical utility of VRWG as an independent indication for RRT in face of reduced urine output and hemodynamic instability.

Clinical Utility of Potassium-Sparing Diuretics to Maintain Normal Serum Potassium in Peritoneal Dialysis Patients

♦ BACKGROUND: Hypokalemia is a vexing problem in end-stage renal disease patients on peritoneal dialysis (PD), and oral potassium supplements (OPS) have limited palatability. Potassium-sparing diuretics (KSD) (spironolactone, amiloride) may be effective in these patients. ♦ METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional review of 75 current or past (vintage > 6 months) PD patients with regard to serum potassium (K+), OPS, and KSD utilization. We reviewed charts for multiple clinical and laboratory variables, including dialysis adequacy, residual renal function, nutritional status and co-existing medical therapy. ♦ RESULTS: The cohort was middle-aged with a mean age of 49.2 years (standard deviation [SD] = 14.7) and overweight with a body mass index of 29.5 (6.7) kg/m². Of all the participants, 57.3% were female, 73.3% African-American, and 48% diabetic with an overall PD vintage of 28.2 (24.3) months at the time of enrollment. Weekly Kt/V was 2.12 (0.43), creatinine clearance was 73.5 (33.6) L/week/1.73 m² with total daily exchange volume of 10.8 (2.7) L. Residual urine output (RUO) measured at 440 (494) mL (anuric 30.6%). Three-month averaged serum K⁺ measured at 4 (0.5) mmol/L with 36% of the participants receiving K⁺ supplements (median: 20 [0;20] mmol/day) and 41.3% KSD (spironolactone dose: 25 - 200 mg/day; amiloride dose: 5 - 10 mg/day). Serum K⁺ correlated positively with weekly Kt/V (r = 0.239; p = 0.039), PD vintage (r = 0.272; p = 0.018) but not with PD modality, daily exchange volume, RUO, or KSD use. However, KSD use was associated with decreased use of OPS (r = -0.646; p < 0.0001). ♦ CONCLUSIONS: Potassium-sparing diuretics were effective in this cohort of PD patients and decreased the need for OPS utilization.

Minimization vs tailoring: Where do we stand with personalized immunosuppression during renal transplantation in 2015?

The introduction of novel immunosuppressive agents over the last two decades and the improvement of our diagnostic tools for early detection of antibody-mediated injury offer us an opportunity, if not a mandate, to better match the immunosuppression needs of the individual patients with side effects of the therapy. However, immunosuppressive regimens in the majority of programs remain mostly protocol-driven, with relatively little inter-program heterogeneity in certain areas of the world. Emerging data showing different outcomes with a particular immunosuppressive strategy in populations with varying immunological risks underscore a real potential for “personalized medicine” in renal transplantation. Studies demonstrating marked differences in the adverse-effect profiles of individual drugs including the risk for viral infections, malignancy and renal toxicity call for a paradigm shift away from a “one size fits all” approach to an individually tailored immunosuppressive therapy for renal transplant recipients, assisted by both screening for predictors of graft loss and paying close attention to dose or class-related adverse effects. Our paper explores some of the opportunities during the care of these patients. Potential areas of improvements may include: (1) a thorough assessment of immunological and metabolic risk profile of each renal transplant recipient; (2) screening for predictors of graft loss and early signs of antibody-mediated rejection with donor-specific antibodies, protocol biopsies and proteinuria (including close follow up of adverse effects with dose adjustments or conversions as necessary); and (3) increased awareness of the possible link between poor tolerance of a given drug at a given dose and non-adherence with the prescribed regimen. Altogether, these considerations may enable the most effective use of the drugs we already have.