Can incremental haemodialysis reduce early mortality rates in patients starting maintenance haemodialysis?

Comparative effectiveness of an individualized model of hemodialysis vs conventional hemodialysis: a study protocol for a multicenter randomized controlled trial (the TwoPlus trial)

BACKGROUND

Most patients starting chronic in-center hemodialysis (HD) receive conventional hemodialysis (CHD) with three sessions per week targeting specific biochemical clearance. Observational studies suggest that patients with residual kidney function can safely be treated with incremental prescriptions of HD, starting with less frequent sessions and later adjusting to thrice-weekly HD. This trial aims to show objectively that clinically matched incremental HD (CMIHD) is non-inferior to CHD in eligible patients.

METHODS

An unblinded, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial will be conducted across diverse healthcare systems and dialysis organizations in the USA. Adult patients initiating chronic hemodialysis (HD) at participating centers will be screened. Eligibility criteria include receipt of fewer than 18 treatments of HD and residual kidney function defined as kidney urea clearance ≥3.5 mL/min/1.73 m2 and urine output ≥500 mL/24 h. The 1:1 randomization, stratified by site and dialysis vascular access type, assigns patients to either CMIHD (intervention group) or CHD (control group). The CMIHD group will be treated with twice-weekly HD and adjuvant pharmacologic therapy (i.e., oral loop diuretics, sodium bicarbonate, and potassium binders). The CHD group will receive thrice-weekly HD according to usual care. Throughout the study, patients undergo timed urine collection and fill out questionnaires. CMIHD will progress to thrice-weekly HD based on clinical manifestations or changes in residual kidney function. Caregivers of enrolled patients are invited to complete semi-annual questionnaires. The primary outcome is a composite of patients' all-cause death, hospitalizations, or emergency department visits at 2 years. Secondary outcomes include patient- and caregiver-reported outcomes. We aim to enroll 350 patients, which provides ≥85% power to detect an incidence rate ratio (IRR) of 0.9 between CMIHD and CHD with an IRR non-inferiority of 1.20 (α = 0.025, one-tailed test, 20% dropout rate, average of 2.06 years of HD per patient participant), and 150 caregiver participants (of enrolled patients).

DISCUSSION

Our proposal challenges the status quo of HD care delivery. Our overarching hypothesis posits that CMIHD is non-inferior to CHD. If successful, the results will positively impact one of the highest-burdened patient populations and their caregivers.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT05828823. Registered on 25 April 2023.

Predictors of quality of life in patients within the first year of commencing haemodialysis based on baseline data from the PIVOTAL trial and associations with the study outcomes

BACKGROUND

Impaired quality of life is common in patients with end-stage kidney disease. We report the baseline quality of life measures in participants from the PIVOTAL randomized controlled trial and the potential relationship with the primary outcome (all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, and heart failure hospitalisation), and associations with key baseline characteristics.

METHODS

This was a post hoc analysis of 2141 patients enrolled in the PIVOTAL trial. Quality of life was measured using EQ5D index, Visual Analogue Scale, and the KD-QoL [Physical Component Score and Mental Component Score].

RESULTS

Mean baseline EQ5D index and visual analogue scale scores were 0.68 and 60.7 and 33.7 (Physical Component Score) and 46.0 (Mental Component Score), respectively. Female sex, higher Body Mass Index, diabetes mellitus, history of myocardial infarction, stroke or heart failure were associated with significantly worse EQ5D index and visual analogue scale. Higher C-reactive protein levels and lower transferrin saturation were associated with worse quality of life. Haemoglobin was not an independent predictor of quality of life. A lower transferrin saturation was an independent predictor of worse physical component score. A higher C-reactive protein level was associated with most aspects of worse quality of life. Impaired functional status was associated with mortality.

CONCLUSION

Quality of life was impaired in patients starting haemodialysis. A higher C-reactive protein level level was a consistent independent predictor of the majority of worse quality of life. Transferrin saturation ≤ 20% was associated with worse physical component score of quality of life. Baseline quality of life was predictive of all-cause mortality and the primary outcome measure.

EUDRACT REGISTRATION NUMBER

2013-002267-25.

Choice of the Dialysis Modality: Practical Considerations

Chronic kidney disease and the need for kidney replacement therapy have increased dramatically in recent decades. Forecasts for the coming years predict an even greater increase, especially in low- and middle-income countries, due to the rise in metabolic and cardiovascular diseases and the aging population. Access to kidney replacement treatments may not be available to all patients, making it especially strategic to set up therapy programs that can ensure the best possible treatment for the greatest number of patients. The choice of the "ideal" kidney replacement therapy often conflicts with medical availability and the patient's tolerance. This paper discusses the pros and cons of various kidney replacement therapy options and their real-world applicability limits.

Patient-reported outcomes in a pilot clinical trial of twice-weekly hemodialysis start with adjuvant pharmacotherapy and transition to thrice-weekly hemodialysis vs conventional hemodialysis

Background

Physical and emotional symptoms are prevalent in patients with kidney-dysfunction requiring dialysis (KDRD) and the rigors of thrice-weekly hemodialysis (HD) may contribute to deteriorated health-related quality of life. Less intensive HD schedules might be associated with lower symptom and/or emotional burden.

Methods

The TWOPLUS Pilot study was an individually-randomized trial conducted at 14 dialysis units, with the primary goal to assess feasibility and safety. Patients with incident KDRD and residual kidney function were assigned to incremental HD start (twice-weekly HD for 6 weeks followed by thrice-weekly HD) vs conventional HD (thrice-weekly HD). In exploratory analyses, we compared the two treatment groups with respect to three patient-reported outcomes measures. We analyzed the change from baseline in the score on Dialysis Symptom Index (DSI, range 0–150), Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7, range 0–21), and Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9, range 0–27) at 6 (n = 20 in each treatment group) and 12 weeks (n = 21); with lower scores denoting lower symptom burden. Analyses were adjusted for age, race, gender, baseline urine volume, diabetes mellitus, and malignancy. Participants’ views on the intervention were sought using a Patient Feedback Questionnaire (n = 14 in incremental and n = 15 in conventional group).

Results

The change from baseline to week 6 in estimated mean score (standard error; P value) in the incremental and conventional group was − 9.7 (4.8; P = 0.05) and − 13.8 (5.0; P = 0.009) for DSI; − 1.9 (1.0; P = 0.07) and − 1.5 (1.4; P = 0.31) for GAD-7; and − 2.5 (1.1; P = 0.03) and − 3.5 (1.5; P = 0.02) for PHQ-9, respectively. Corresponding changes from week 6 to week 12 were − 3.1 (3.2; P = 0.34) and − 2.4 (5.5; P = 0.67) in DSI score; 0.5 (0.6; P = 0.46) and 0.1 (0.6; P = 0.87) in GAD-7 score; and − 0.3 (0.6; P = 0.70) and − 0.5 (0.6; P = 0.47) in PHQ-9 score, respectively. Majority of respondents felt their healthcare was not jeopardized and expressed their motivation for study participation was to help advance the care of patients with KDRD.

Conclusions

This study suggests a possible mitigating effect of twice-weekly HD start on symptoms of anxiety and depression at transition from pre-dialysis to KDRD. Larger clinical trials are required to rigorously test clinically-matched incrementally-prescribed HD across diverse organizations and patient populations.

Trial registration

Registered at ClinicalTrials.gov with study identifier NCT03740048, registration date 14/11/2018.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12882-022-02946-w.

Impact of incremental initiation of haemodialysis on mortality: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Incremental haemodialysis initiation entails lower sessional duration and/or frequency than the standard 4 h thrice-weekly approach. Dialysis dose is increased as residual kidney function (RKF) declines. This systematic review evaluates its safety, efficacy and cost-effectiveness.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and the Cochrane Library databases from inception to 27 February 2022. Eligible studies compared incremental haemodialysis (sessions either fewer than three times weekly or of duration <3.5 h) with standard treatment. The primary outcome was mortality. Secondary outcomes included treatment-emergent adverse events, loss of RKF, quality of life and cost effectiveness. The study protocol was prospectively registered. Risk of bias assessment used the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the revised Cochrane risk of bias tool, as appropriate. Meta-analyses were undertaken in Review Manager, Version 5.4.

RESULTS

A total of 644 records were identified. Twenty-six met the inclusion criteria, including 22 cohort studies and two randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Sample size ranged from 48 to 50 596 participants (total 101 476). We found no mortality differences (hazard ratio = 0.99; 95% CI 0.80-1.24). Cohort studies suggested similar hospitalization rates though the two small RCTs suggested less hospitalization after incremental initiation (relative risk = 0.31; 95% CI 0.18-0.54). Data on other treatment-emergent adverse events and quality of life was limited. Observational studies suggested reduced loss of RKF in incremental haemodialysis. This was not supported by RCT data. Four studies reported reduced costs of incremental treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

Incremental initiation of haemodialysis does not confer greater risk of mortality compared with standard treatment. Hospitalization may be reduced and costs are lower.

The prevalence and potential aetiological factors associated with restless legs syndrome in patients with chronic kidney disease: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

There is limited understanding of aetiological factors of and treatment options for restless leg syndrome (RLS) in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). This study aimed to estimate the prevalence of RLS in CKD patients and identify factors that may contribute to RLS.

METHODS

A questionnaire-based cross-sectional study of patients with CKD stage 4 (CKD 4), pre-dialysis stage 5 (CKD-5ND) and haemodialysis-dependent stage 5 (CKD-5D) was conducted. Eligible patients were enrolled from the local dialysis units and renal clinics. The International RLS Study Group rating scale was used to establish the diagnosis of RLS and quantify its severity.

RESULTS

212 patients with CKD 4 (n = 92), CKD-5ND (n = 14) and CKD-5D (n = 106) were included. The overall prevalence of RLS was 32.1%. Women had a significantly higher odds of having RLS despite adjustment for age, diabetes, cardiovascular disease and whether patients were on dialysis (odds ratio 2.8 [95% confidence intervals 1.5-5.2]). In pre-dialysis groups, patients with RLS had significantly higher serum ferritin (323.9 [SD 338.1] vs 177.5 [SD 178.5] µg/L, p = 0.020) compared to non-RLS patients. In dialysis patients (CKD-5D), those with RLS had significantly higher total white cell (8.0 [SD 3.5] vs 6.8 [SD 1.9] × 10⁹/L, p = 0.026) and neutrophil (6.4 [SD 3.9] vs 4.6 [SD1.7] × 10⁹/L, p = 0.002) counts compared to patients without RLS.

CONCLUSION

RLS remains a significant problem in patients with CKD and may be related to underlying inflammation. Targeting this pathway may be useful. Prevalence of RLS, diagnosed using validated measures, is higher than previous reports.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

N/A (the current study is not a trial).

A mixed-method feasibility study of a novel transitional regime of incremental haemodialysis: study design and protocol

Background

Incremental haemodialysis/haemodiafiltration (HD) may help reduce early mortality rates in patients starting HD. This mixed-method feasibility study aims to test the acceptability, tolerance and safety of a novel incremental HD regime, and to study its impact on parameters of patient wellbeing.

Method

We aim to enrol 20 patients who will commence HD twice-weekly with progressive increases in duration and frequency, achieving conventional treatment times over 15 weeks (incremental group). Participants will be followed-up for 6 months and will undergo regular tests including urine collections, bio-impedance analyses and quality-of-life questionnaires. Semi-structured interviews will be conducted to explore patients’ prior expectations from HD, their motivations for participation and experiences of receiving incremental HD. For comparison of safety and indicators of dialysis adequacy, a cohort of 40 matched patients who previously received conventional HD will be constructed from local dialysis records (historical controls).

Results

Data will be recorded on the numbers screened and proportions consented and completing the study (primary outcome). Incremental and conventional groups will be compared in terms of differences in blood pressure control, interdialytic weight changes, indicators of dialysis adequacy and differences in adverse and serious adverse events. In analyses restricted to incremental group, measurements of RRF, fluid load and quality-of-life during follow-up will be compared with baseline values. From patient interviews, a narrative description of key themes along with anonymised quotes will be presented.

Conclusion

Results from this study will address a significant knowledge gap in the prescription HD therapy and inform the development novel future therapy regimens.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10157-021-02072-1.

Age, Gender and Diabetes as Risk Factors for Early Mortality in Dialysis Patients: A Systematic Review

Objective: To study the impact of age, gender, and presence of diabetes (any type) on the risk of early deaths (180-day mortality) in patients starting long-term hemodialysis (HD) therapy.Design: Systematic review of the literature.Setting: Out-patient (non-hospitalized), community-based HD therapy world-wide.Participants: Patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) starting long-term HD treatment for end-stage renal disease (ESRD).Methods: Medline and EMBASE were searched for studies published between 1/1/1985 and 12/31/2017. Observational studies involving adult subjects commencing HD were included. Data extracted included population characteristics and settings. In addition, patient or treatment related factors studied with reference to their relationship with the risk of early mortality were documented. The Quality in Prognosis Studies tool was used to assess risk of bias in individual studies. Findings were summarized, and a narrative account was drawn.Results: Included were 26 studies (combined population 1,098,769; representing 287,085 person-years of observation for early mortality). There were 17 cohort and 9 case-control studies. Risk of bias was low in 13 and high in a further 13 studies. Patients who died in the early period were older than those who survived. Mortality rates increased with advancing age. Female gender was associated with slightly increased early mortality rates in larger and higher quality studies. The available data showed conflicting results in relation to the association of diabetes and risk of early mortality.Conclusions: This systematic review evaluated the impact of key demographic and co-morbid factors on risk of early mortality in patients starting maintenance HD. The information could help in delivering more tailored prognostic information and planning of future interventions.

Renal replacement treatment initiation with twice-weekly versus thrice-weekly haemodialysis in patients with incident dialysis-dependent kidney disease: rationale and design of the TWOPLUS pilot clinical trial

INTRODUCTION

The optimal haemodialysis (HD) prescription-frequency and dose-for patients with incident dialysis-dependent kidney disease (DDKD) and substantial residual kidney function (RKF)-that is, renal urea clearance ≥2 mL/min/1.73 m2 and urine volume ≥500 mL/day-is not known. The aim of the present study is to test the feasibility and safety of a simple, reliable prescription of incremental HD in patients with incident DDKD and RKF.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This parallel-group, open-label randomised pilot trial will enrol 50 patients from 14 outpatient dialysis units. Participants will be randomised (1:1) to receive twice-weekly HD with adjuvant pharmacological therapy for 6 weeks followed by thrice-weekly HD (incremental HD group) or outright thrice-weekly HD (standard HD group). Age ≥18 years, chronic kidney disease progressing to DDKD and urine output ≥500 mL/day are key inclusion criteria; patients with left ventricular ejection fraction <30% and acute kidney injury requiring dialysis will be excluded. Adjuvant pharmacological therapy (ie, effective diuretic regimen, patiromer and sodium bicarbonate) will complement twice-weekly HD. The primary feasibility end points are recruitment rate, adherence to the assigned HD regimen, adherence to serial timed urine collections and treatment contamination. Incidence rate of clinically significant volume overload and metabolic imbalances in the first 3 months after randomisation will be used to assess intervention safety.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study has been reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board of Wake Forest School of Medicine in North Carolina, USA. Patient recruitment began on 14 June 2019, was paused between 13 March 2020 and 31 May 2020 due to COVID-19 pandemic, resumed on 01 June 2020 and will last until the required sample size has been attained. Participants will be followed in usual care fashion for a minimum of 6 months from last individual enrolled. All regulations and measures of ethics and confidentiality are handled in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03740048; Pre-results.

Intradialytic Nutrition and Hemodialysis Prescriptions: A Personalized Stepwise Approach

Dialysis and nutrition are two sides of the same coin—dialysis depurates metabolic waste that is typically produced by food intake. Hence, dietetic restrictions are commonly imposed in order to limit potassium and phosphate and avoid fluid overload. Conversely, malnutrition is a major challenge and, albeit to differing degrees, all nutritional markers are associated with survival. Dialysis-related malnutrition has a multifactorial origin related to uremic syndrome and comorbidities but also to dialysis treatment. Both an insufficient dialysis dose and excessive removal are contributing factors. It is thus not surprising that dialysis alone, without proper nutritional management, often fails to be effective in combatting malnutrition. While composite indexes can be used to identify patients with poor prognosis, none is fully satisfactory, and the definitions of malnutrition and protein energy wasting are still controversial. Furthermore, most nutritional markers and interventions were assessed in hemodialysis patients, while hemodiafiltration and peritoneal dialysis have been less extensively studied. The significant loss of albumin in these two dialysis modalities makes it extremely difficult to interpret common markers and scores. Despite these problems, hemodialysis sessions represent a valuable opportunity to monitor nutritional status and prescribe nutritional interventions, and several approaches have been tried. In this concept paper, we review the current evidence on intradialytic nutrition and propose an algorithm for adapting nutritional interventions to individual patients.