The effect of coronary angiography on residual renal function in patients on peritoneal dialysis

A Review of Residual Kidney Function in Peritoneal Dialysis Patients

Residual kidney function (RKF) has been associated with better survival, less morbidity, and improved quality of life in peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients. Since higher peritoneal clearance does not lead to better outcomes, more emphasis should be put on preserving kidney function. Many other benefits have been reported, including better volume and blood pressure control, better nutritional status, lower rates of PD peritonitis, preserved erythropoietin and vitamin D production, middle molecule clearance, lower Left Ventricular Hypertrophy, and better serum phosphate level. The most practical method of assessing RKF is the mean of 24-h urinary urea and creatinine clearance. Incremental PD prescription is an ideal option to supplement RKF in PD patients, which also offers more flexibility to the patient and, possibly, improved adherence. Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers should be used when possible in PD patients to preserve RKF. Loop diuretics are underutilized in PD patients despite providing an additional means of maintaining fluid balance and reducing the need for higher glucose-containing PD solutions. In this paper, we outline the importance of RKF in PD patients and the different strategies for its preservation.

Revised Swedish guidelines on intravenous iodine contrast medium-induced acute kidney injury 2022: A summary

The Swedish Society of Uroradiology has revised their computed tomography (CT) guidelines regarding iodine contrast media-induced acute kidney injury (CI-AKI). They are more cautious compared to the European Society of Urogenital Radiology and the American College of Radiology since the actual risk of CI-AKI remains uncertain in patients with moderate to severe kidney damage due to a lack of prospective controlled studies and mainly based on retrospective propensity score-matched studies with low-grade evidence. Another source of uncertainty is the imprecision of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) estimating equations. However, randomized hydration studies indictae an upper limit risk of CI-AKI of about 5% for outpatients with a GFR in the range of 30-44 or 45-59 mL/min/1.73m² combined with multiple risk factors. Apart from GFR limits, the guideline also includes limits for systemic contrast medium exposure expressed in gram-iodine/GFR ratio.

[ESUR recommendations on the use of contrast media: Practice survey, review and commentary by CJN, FIRN and SFNDT]

Contrast media administration is classically considered to cause or worsen kidney failure. Recent data may moderate this assertion. The European Society of Urogenital Radiology recently published guidelines re-evaluating the precautions before administering contrast media. The present work evaluates the practice of French nephrologists, and provides a commentary on these recommendations based on an updated review of the literature. We conducted survey among French nephrologists, using an electronic questionnaire distributed by the Société Francophone de Néphrologie, Dialyse et Transplantation, the French Intensive care Renal Network and the Club des Jeunes Néphrologues. 266 responses were collected. The European Society of Urogenital Radiology guidelines are poorly known among the panel of nephrologists. Their practices differ from the guidelines by the more frequent and earlier implementation of measures to prevent renal failure post contrast media. In accordance with the guidelines, hydration is prescribed as a first-line preventive measure, mainly with saline and bicarbonate. Inhibitors of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system are frequently discontinued before an injection of contrast media, contrary to what is recommended. In conclusion, the European Society of Urogenital Radiology guidelines, which the working group endorses, but which are still too little known and applied in clinical nephrology in France, prompt nephrologists to lift some of the restrictions on the use of PCI as well as on the continuation of ARS inhibitors before injecting PCI.

Kidney and contrast media: Common viewpoint of the French Nephrology societies (SFNDT, FIRN, CJN) and the French Radiological Society (SFR) following ESUR guidelines

Contrast medium administration is classically considered to cause or worsen kidney failure, but recent data may moderate this assertion. The European Society of Urogenital Radiology recently published guidelines re-evaluating the precautions before administering contrast media. Kidney injury does not constitute a contra-indication to the administration of iodinated contrast medium, as long as the benefit-risk ratio justifies it. Intravenous hydration with 0.9% NaCl or 1.4% sodium bicarbonate is the only validated measure for the prevention of post-iodine contrast nephropathy. This is necessary for intravenous or intra-arterial administration of iodinated contrast agent without first renal pass when the glomerular filtration rate is less than 30mL/min/1.73m², for intra-arterial administration of iodinated contrast agent with first renal passage when the glomerular filtration rate is less than 45mL/min/1.73m², or in patients with acute renal failure. The use of iodinated contrast medium should allow the carrying out of relevant examinations based on an analysis of the benefit-risk ratio and the implementation of measures to prevent toxicity when necessary.

Current comments on contrast media administration in patients with renal insufficiency

Contrast media administration has been associated with complications such as nephropathy, cardiovascular morbidity, and neurovascular events, particularly in patients with renal insufficiency. This association has been questioned in recent studies. This review was performed to summarize the most current evidence on contrast induced nephropathy (CIN), contributing factors, and considerations in patients with renal insufficiency. The risk of CIN was over-estimated by the previous studies, due to a lack of control groups or presence of non-randomized control groups, which led to a selection bias. However, the thresholds associated with an increased risk of CIN are controversial and require risk-benefit analysis on an individual basis. Regarding the administration of contrast media (CM) in the emergency setting, the majority of studies suggested that CM exposure does not meaningfully increase the risk of acute kidney injury in critically ill patients (including trauma patients). Several strategies have been suggested to reduce the risk of CIN, including volume expansion to increase renal blood flow, sodium bicarbonate or N-acetylcysteine administration, and use of low-osmolal contrast media in end-stage renal disease.

Residual Urine Output and Mortality in a Prospective Hemodialysis Cohort

Introduction

Although residual urine output (UOP) is associated with better survival and quality of life in dialysis patients, frequent measurement by 24-hour urine collection is burdensome. We thus sought to examine the association of patients’ self-reported residual UOP, as an alternative proxy of measured residual UOP, with mortality risk in a prospective hemodialysis cohort study.

Methods

Among 670 hemodialysis patients from the prospective multicenter Malnutrition, Diet, and Racial Disparities in Kidney Disease study, we examined associations of residual UOP, ascertained by patient self-report, with all-cause mortality. Patients underwent protocolized surveys assessing presence and frequency of UOP (absent, every 1–3 days, >1 time per day) every 6 months from 2011 to 2015. We examined associations of baseline and time-varying UOP with mortality using Cox regression.

Results

In analyses of baseline UOP, absence of UOP was associated with higher mortality in expanded case-mix adjusted Cox models (ref: presence of UOP): hazard ratio (HR), 1.78 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.16–2.72). In analyses examining baseline frequency of UOP, point estimates suggested a graded association between lower frequency of UOP and higher mortality, although estimates for UOP every 1 to 3 days did not reach statistical significance (reference: UOP >1 time per day): HR, 1.29 (95% CI, 0.82–2.05) and HR, 1.97 (95% CI, 1.24–3.12) for UOP every 1 to 3 days and absence of UOP, respectively. Similar findings were observed in analyses of time-varying UOP.

Conclusion

In hemodialysis patients, there is a graded association between lower frequency of self-reported UOP and higher mortality. Further studies are needed to determine the clinical impact of more frequent assessment of residual UOP using self-reported methods.

Prescribing high-quality peritoneal dialysis: The role of preserving residual kidney function

Maintenance of residual kidney function (RKF) is independently associated with increased survival in patients with end-stage renal disease. Presence of RKF is also associated with improved volume status, better nutritional status, reduced erythropoietin requirement, and decreased rate of peritonitis in patients on peritoneal dialysis (PD). Thus, the preservation of RKF is an important therapeutic end point in the management of patients on PD. Measurement of RKF in PD patients should be based on the mean of 24-h urinary creatinine and urea clearances, and ideally, this should be done quarterly. Compared to those started on hemodialysis, patients initiated on PD appear to have slower decline in RKF. The choice of PD modality should be based on patient preference, as there is no clear evidence to date showing one modality is superior than the other in preserving RKF. Peritoneal dialysates with neutral pH and low glucose degradation products seem to have a favorable effect on RKF. An angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker should be used whenever possible to preserve RKF and reduce cardiac mortality. Both loop diuretics and icodextrin can be utilized to maintain fluid balance in PD patients. However, caution should be taken to avoid volume depletion which could accelerate RKF decline. Short-term use of aminoglycosides does not have a detrimental impact on RKF, but prolonged use (>3 weeks) should be avoided to minimize the risk of ototoxicity. Lastly, potential nephrotoxic agents such as intravenous contrast should be used judiciously.

Post-contrast acute kidney injury. Part 2: risk stratification, role of hydration and other prophylactic measures, patients taking metformin and chronic dialysis patients : Recommendations for updated ESUR Contrast Medium Safety Committee guidelines

OBJECTIVES

The Contrast Media Safety Committee (CMSC) of the European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR) has updated its 2011 guidelines on the prevention of post-contrast acute kidney injury (PC-AKI). The results of the literature review and the recommendations based on it, which were used to prepare the new guidelines, are presented in two papers. AREAS COVERED IN PART 2: Topics reviewed include stratification of PC-AKI risk, the need to withdraw nephrotoxic medication, PC-AKI prophylaxis with hydration or drugs, the use of metformin in diabetic patients receiving contrast medium and the need to alter dialysis schedules in patients receiving contrast medium.

KEY POINTS

• In CKD, hydration reduces the PC-AKI risk • Intravenous normal saline and intravenous sodium bicarbonate provide equally effective prophylaxis • No drugs have been consistently shown to reduce the risk of PC-AKI • Stop metformin from the time of contrast medium administration if eGFR < 30 ml/min/1.73 m 2 • Dialysis schedules need not change when intravascular contrast medium is given.

Advances in Understanding and Management of Residual Renal Function in Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease

BACKGROUND

Residual renal function (RRF), defined as the ability of native kidneys to eliminate water and uremic toxins, is closely correlated with mortality and morbidity rates among patients receiving either peritoneal dialysis (PD) or hemodialysis (HD) via continuous clearance of middle-sized molecules and protein-bound solutes. Therefore, preserving RRF is considered to be one of the primary goals in managing patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD).

SUMMARY AND KEY MESSAGES

In this article, we provide a review on the understanding and management of RRF in patients on dialysis. RRF may be estimated and measured by calculating the mean 24-hour urine creatinine level and urea clearance. Currently, several middle-sized molecules are reported but rarely used in practice. Many risk factors such as original renal diseases, dietary intake, and nephrotoxic agents impair RRF. Targeting such factors may halt the decline in RRF and offer better outcomes for patients on PD or HD. Except for in PD patients, RRF is a powerful predictor of survival in HD patients. RRF requires more clinical and research attention in the care of patients with ESRD on dialysis.

The Association between Nutritional Markers and Biochemical Parameters and Residual Renal Function in Peritoneal Dialysis Patients

Residual renal function (RRF) is an important prognostic factor for peritoneal dialysis patients as it influences the quality of life and mortality. This study was conducted to explore the potential factors correlated with RRF. A cross-sectional study was conducted by recruiting 155 patients with residual GFR more than 1mL/min per 1.73m2 at the initiation of peritoneal dialysis. We collected the demographic characteristics, nutritional markers and biochemical parameters of all participants, and analyzed the correlation between these variables and residual GFR as well. The odds ratio of RRF loss associated with each of the nutritional markers and biochemical parameters were estimated by logistic regression model. The residual GFR was negatively correlated with serum phosphate (ORQ3 = 2.67, 95%CI: 1.03-6.92; ORQ4 = 3.45, 95%CI: 1.35-9.04), magnesium (ORQ4 = 3.77, 95%CI: 1.48-3.63), and creatinine (ORQ3 = 2.93, 95%CI: 1.09-7.88; ORQ4 = 8.64 95%CI: 2.79-26.78), while positively associated with normalized protein catabolic rate (ORQ3 = 0.24, 95%CI: 0.09-0.65; ORQ4 = 0.11, 95%CI: 0.03-0.35), 24 hours urine volume(ORQ1 = 22.87, 95%CI: 2.76-189.24; ORQ3 = 0.08, 95%CI: 0.02-0.28) and serum chlorine concentrations (ORQ1 = 5.34, 95%CI: 1.94-14.68; ORQ4 = 0.28, 95%CI: 0.09-0.85), respectively. Our study suggested that the nutritional markers and biochemical parameters, though not all, but at least in part were closely correlated with RRF in peritoneal dialysis patients.

Strategies for preserving residual renal function in peritoneal dialysis patients

Although there have been many advancements in the treatment of patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) over the last 50 years, in terms of reducing cardiovascular risk, mortality remains unacceptably high, particularly for those patients who progress to stage 5 CKD and initiate dialysis (CKD5d). As mortality risk increases exponentially with progressive CKD stage, the question arises as to whether preservation of residual renal function once dialysis has been initiated can reduce mortality risk. Observational studies to date have reported an association between even small amounts of residual renal function and improved patient survival and quality of life. Dialysis therapies predominantly provide clearance for small water-soluble solutes, volume and acid-base control, but cannot reproduce the metabolic functions of the kidney. As such, protein-bound solutes, advanced glycosylation end-products, middle molecules and other azotaemic toxins accumulate over time in the anuric CKD5d patient. Apart from avoiding potential nephrotoxic insults, observational and interventional trials have suggested that a number of interventions and treatments may potentially reduce the progression of earlier stages of CKD, including targeted blood pressure control, reducing proteinuria and dietary intervention using combinations of protein restriction with keto acid supplementation. However, many interventions which have been proven to be effective in the general population have not been equally effective in the CKD5d patient, and so the question arises as to whether these treatment options are equally applicable to CKD5d patients. As strategies to help preserve residual renal function in CKD5d patients are not well established, we have reviewed the evidence for preserving or losing residual renal function in peritoneal dialysis patients, as urine collections are routinely collected, whereas few centres regularly collect urine from haemodialysis patients, and haemodialysis dialysis patients are at risk of sudden intravascular volume shifts associated with dialysis treatments. On the other hand, peritoneal dialysis patients are exposed to a variety of hypertonic dialysates and episodes of peritonitis. Whereas blood pressure control, using an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB), and low-protein diets along with keto acid supplementation have been shown to reduce the rate of progression in patients with earlier stages of CKD, the strategies to preserve residual renal function (RRF) in dialysis patients are not well established. For peritoneal dialysis patients, there are additional technical factors that might aggravate the rate of loss of residual renal function including peritoneal dialysis prescriptions and modality, bio-incompatible dialysis fluid and over ultrafiltration of fluid causing dehydration. In this review, we aim to evaluate the evidence of interventions and treatments, which may sustain residual renal function in peritoneal dialysis patients.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria(®) on renal failure

Imaging plays a role in the management of patients with acute kidney injury or chronic kidney disease. However, clinical circumstances strongly impact the appropriateness of imaging use. In patients with newly detected renal dysfunction, ultrasonography can assess for reversible causes, assess renal size and echogenicity, and thus, establish the chronicity of disease. Urinary obstruction can be detected, but imaging is most useful in high-risk groups or in patients in whom there is a strong clinical suspicion for obstruction. Computed tomography, computed tomography or magnetic resonance arteriography, and percutaneous ultrasound-guided renal biopsy are valuable in other clinical situations. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 3 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment.

The use of iodinated contrast media in patients with end-stage renal disease

Iodinated contrast agents are well tolerated in ESRD patients. Certain types of ICM, i.e., LOCM and the nonionic agents are associated with better safety profiles. Current available evidence, although not optimal, does not support the need for additional hemodialysis for ICM removal to preserve residual renal function or to treat other potential toxicities of ICM. However, limiting exposure to ICM is a prudent measure in ESRD patients given ICM’s potential toxicity; close monitoring of patients with poor cardiac function is also recommended in subjects receiving higher doses of ICM, especially those receiving HOCM.

Definition and risk factors of rapidly declining residual renal function in peritoneal dialysis: an observational study

BACKGROUND

It is critical to preserve residual renal function (RRF) in peritoneal dialysis (PD), as RRF is associated with lower morbidity and mortality. There is no uniform definition of RRF, and rapidly declining RRF has rarely been studied and predominately limited to single factor analysis and not corrected for lead-time bias.

METHODS

An observational study in 71 incident PD patients. RRF was defined as urine output (UO) ≥500 ml/day and renal glomerular filtration rate (rGFR) ≥2 ml/min/1.73 m(2), rapid declining RRF as UO <500 ml/day and rGFR <2 ml/min/1.73 m(2) occurring within 6 months which were separately evaluated. Independent risk factors associated with rapid RRF decline were identified while correcting for lead-time bias.

RESULTS

RRF declined rapidly by both definitions in 65% patients 2.5 years after PD start. Both definitions of RRF decline were consistent in 96%. Nephrotoxic drugs, renal transplant failure and absent angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARB) were independent risk factors associated with rapidly declining RRF defined both by definitions, intravascular radiocontrast additionally for UO decline.

CONCLUSIONS

Most PD patients demonstrated rapid RRF decline, independent of its definition. Both definitions are highly consistent and interchangeable. Nephrotoxic drugs and radiocontrast were identified as risk factors of acute, absent ACEI or ARB, and renal transplant failure of chronic renal injury.

Should we screen for coronary artery disease in asymptomatic chronic dialysis patients?

The hemodialysis population is characterized by a high prevalence of 'asymptomatic' coronary artery disease (CAD), which should be interpreted differently from asymptomatic disease in the general population. A hemodynamically significant stenosis may not become clinically apparent owing to impaired exercise tolerance and autonomic neuropathy. The continuous presence of silent ischemia may cause heart failure, arrhythmias, and sudden death. Whether revascularization of an asymptomatic dialysis patient improves outcome remains a moot point, although several observational studies and one small RCT suggest a benefit. It can therefore be defended to screen asymptomatic dialysis patients for CAD. A number of noninvasive screening tests are available, but none has proved equally practical and reliable in the dialysis population as in the general population. Myocardial perfusion scintigraphy (MPS) before and after a pharmacological stress such as dipyridamole can reveal both ischemia and myocardial scarring. When compared with coronary angiography, low sensitivities were reported and attributed to impaired vasodilation to dipyridamole in dialysis patients. A more likely explanation is that not every anatomical stenosis will lead to impaired coronary blood flow on MPS. Numerous studies have shown an incremental prognostic value of dipyridamole-MPS over clinical data for prediction of adverse cardiac events, in some studies even over coronary angiography. Pending the availability of high-quality evidence, in our opinion asymptomatic dialysis patients could undergo dipyridamole-MPS, followed by coronary angiography in case of an abnormal scan. This combined physiological and anatomical evaluation of the coronary circulation allows us to determine which coronary stenosis is clinically relevant and therefore should be revascularized.

Coronary risk assessment and management options in chronic kidney disease patients prior to kidney transplantation

Cardiovascular disease remains the most important cause of morbidity and mortality among kidney transplant recipients. Nearly half the deaths in transplanted patients are attributed to cardiac causes and almost 5% of these deaths occur within the first year after transplantation. The ideal strategies to screen for coronary artery disease (CAD) in chronic kidney disease patients who are evaluated for kidney transplantation (KT) remain controversial. The American Society of Transplantation recommends that patients with diabetes, prior history of ischemic heart disease or an abnormal ECG, or age ≥50 years should be considered as high-risk for CAD and referred for a cardiac stress test and only those with a positive stress test, for coronary angiography. Despite these recommendations, vast variations exist in the way these patients are screened for CAD at different transplant centers. The sensitivity and specificity of noninvasive cardiac tests in CKD patients is much lower than that in the general population. This has prompted the use of direct diagnostic cardiac catheterization in high-risk patients in several transplant centers despite the risks associated with this invasive procedure. No large randomized controlled trials exist to date that address these issues. In this article, we review the existing literature with regards to the available data on cardiovascular risk screening and management options in CKD patients presenting for kidney transplantation and outline a strategy for approach to these patients.

An Official ATS/ERS/ESICM/SCCM/SRLF Statement: Prevention and Management of Acute Renal Failure in the ICU Patient: an international consensus conference in intensive care medicine

OBJECTIVES

To address the issues of Prevention and Management of Acute Renal Failure in the ICU Patient, using the format of an International Consensus Conference.

METHODS AND QUESTIONS

Five main questions formulated by scientific advisors were addressed by experts during a 2-day symposium and a Jury summarized the available evidence: (1) Identification and definition of acute kidney insufficiency (AKI), this terminology being selected by the Jury; (2) Prevention of AKI during routine ICU Care; (3) Prevention in specific diseases, including liver failure, lung Injury, cardiac surgery, tumor lysis syndrome, rhabdomyolysis and elevated intraabdominal pressure; (4) Management of AKI, including nutrition, anticoagulation, and dialysate composition; (5) Impact of renal replacement therapy on mortality and recovery.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

The Jury recommended the use of newly described definitions. AKI significantly contributes to the morbidity and mortality of critically ill patients, and adequate volume repletion is of major importance for its prevention, though correction of fluid deficit will not always prevent renal failure. Fluid resuscitation with crystalloids is effective and safe, and hyperoncotic solutions are not recommended because of their renal risk. Renal replacement therapy is a life-sustaining intervention that can provide a bridge to renal recovery; no method has proven to be superior, but careful management is essential for improving outcome.

Clinical benefit of preserving residual renal function in dialysis patients: an update for clinicians

Residual renal function (RRF) remains important even after beginning of dialysis. RRF contributes significantly to the overall health and well-being of patients on dialysis. It plays an important role in maintaining fluid balance, phosphorus control, nutrition, and removal of middle molecular uremic toxins and shows inverse relationships with valvular calcification and cardiac hypertrophy in patients on dialysis. RRF may allow for a reduction in the duration of hemodialysis sessions and the need for dietary and fluid restrictions in both patients on peritoneal dialysis and hemodialysis. More importantly, the loss of RRF is a powerful predictor of mortality. This article will review the evidence supporting the importance of RRF on outcome and outline potential strategies that may better preserve RRF in patients on dialysis.