Incremental dialysis for preserving residual kidney function-Does one size fit all when initiating dialysis?

Twice Weekly versus Thrice Weekly Hemodialysis-A Pilot Cross-Over Equivalence Trial

Key Points

Background

The 2015 Update of the Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (KDOQI) Guideline for Hemodialysis Adequacy increased the contribution of residual kidney function in calculating standard Kt/Vurea (stdKt/Vurea). However, no study has assessed the effect of prescribing twice weekly hemodialysis according to this guideline on patients' quality of life or uremic solute levels.

Methods

Twenty six hemodialysis patients with average residual urea clearance (Kru) 4.7±1.8 ml/min and hemodialysis vintage of 12±15 months (range 2 months to 4.9 years) underwent a cross-over trial comparing four weeks of twice weekly hemodialysis and four weeks of thrice weekly hemodialysis. Twice weekly hemodialysis was prescribed to achieve stdKt/Vurea 2.2 incorporating Kru using the 2015 KDOQI Guideline. Thrice weekly hemodialysis was prescribed to achieve spKt/Vurea 1.3 regardless of Kru. Quality of life and plasma levels of secreted uremic solutes and β 2 microglobulin were assessed at the end of each period.

Results

Equivalence testing between twice and thrice weekly hemodialysis based on the Kidney Disease Quality of Life instrument (primary analysis) was inconclusive. Symptoms as assessed by the secondary outcomes Dialysis Symptom Index and Post-Dialysis Recovery Time were not worse with twice weekly hemodialysis. StdKt/Vurea was adequate during twice weekly hemodialysis (2.7±0.5), and ultrafiltration rate and plasma potassium were controlled with minimally longer treatment times (twice weekly: 195±20 versus thrice weekly: 191±17 minutes). Plasma levels of the secreted solutes and β 2 microglobulin were not higher with twice weekly than thrice weekly hemodialysis.

Conclusions

Twice weekly hemodialysis can be prescribed using the higher contribution assigned to Kru by the 2015 KDOQI Guideline. With twice weekly hemodialysis, quality of life was unchanged, and the continuous function of the residual kidneys controlled fluid gain and plasma levels of potassium and uremic solutes without substantially longer treatment times.

Clinical Trial registration number:

NCT03874117.

Personalising haemodialysis treatment with incremental dialysis for incident patients with end-stage kidney disease: an implementation study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Incremental dialysis is a personalised dialysis prescription based on residual kidney function that allows for the initial use of shorter duration, less frequent and less intense dialysis. It has been associated with enhanced quality of life and decreased healthcare costs when compared with conventional dialysis. While nephrologists report prescribing incremental dialysis, few dialysis programmes offer a systematic approach in offering and evaluating its use. To move evidence into practice, and in order to improve the safety and quality of providing incremental dialysis care, we have designed an implementation study. This study aims to evaluate the systematic assessment of patients starting facility-based haemodialysis for eligibility for incremental dialysis, and the prescription and monitoring of incremental dialysis treatment.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A hybrid effectiveness and implementation study design is being used to evaluate the implementation of the programme at dialysis sites in Alberta, Canada. The Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance framework will be used to capture individual-level and organisational-level impact of the project. Clinical outcomes related to kidney function will be monitored on an ongoing basis, and patient-reported outcomes and experience measures will be collected at baseline and then quarterly throughout the first year of dialysis.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study was approved by the Health Research Ethics Board of the University of Alberta. The study is funded by the Strategic Clinical Networks of Alberta Health Services. The study will help answer important questions on the effectiveness of incremental dialysis, and inform the acceptability, adoption, feasibility, reach and sustainability of incremental dialysis within provision of haemodialysis care.

Incremental hemodialysis in pediatric patients

BACKGROUND

Incremental hemodialysis follows the concept of adjusting dialysis dose according to residual kidney function. Data on incremental hemodialysis in pediatric patients is lacking.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of children initiating hemodialysis between January 2015 and July 2020 in a single tertiary center, comparing the characteristics and outcomes of those who commenced with incremental hemodialysis vs with conventional thrice-weekly regimen.

RESULTS

Data on forty patients, 15 (37.5%) on incremental hemodialysis and 25 (63%) on thrice-weekly hemodialysis were analyzed. No differences in age, estimated glomerular filtration rate and metabolic parameters were noted between groups at baseline, but there were more males (73 vs 40%, p = 0.04), more patients with congenital anomalies of kidney and urinary tract (60 vs 20%, p = 0.01), higher urine output (2.5 ± 1 vs 1 ± 0.8 ml/kg/h, p < 0.001), lower use of antihypertensive medications (20 vs 72%, p = 0.002) and lower prevalence of left ventricular hypertrophy (6.7 vs 32%, p = 0.003) in the incremental hemodialysis group vs thrice-weekly hemodialysis. During follow up, 5 (33%) incremental hemodialysis patients were transplanted, 1 (7%) remained on incremental hemodialysis at 24 months, and 9 (60%) transitioned to thrice-weekly hemodialysis at a median (IQR) time of 8.7 (4.2, 11.8) months. At last follow up, fewer patients who initiated incremental hemodialysis had left ventricular hypertrophy (0 vs 32%, p = 0.016) and urine output < 100 ml/24 h (20 vs 60%, p = 0.02) compared to thrice-weekly hemodialysis, with no significant differences in metabolic or growth parameters.

CONCLUSION

Incremental hemodialysis is a viable option for initiating dialysis in selected pediatric patients, that may help improve patients' quality of life and reduce dialysis burden without compromising clinical outcome.

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.

Nutritional status and the risk of malnutrition in older adults with chronic kidney disease - implications for low protein intake and nutritional care: A critical review endorsed by ERN-ERA and ESPEN

Increased life expectancy is posing unprecedented challenges to healthcare systems worldwide. These include a sharp increase in the prevalence of chronic kidney disease (CKD) and of impaired nutritional status with malnutrition-protein-energy wasting (PEW) that portends worse clinical outcomes, including reduced survival. In older adults with CKD, a nutritional dilemma occurs when indications from geriatric nutritional guidelines to maintain the protein intake above 1.0 g/kg/day to prevent malnutrition need to be adapted to the indications from nephrology guidelines, to reduce protein intake in order to prevent or slow CKD progression and improve metabolic abnormalities. To address these issues, the European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN) and the European Renal Nutrition group of the European Renal Association (ERN-ERA) have prepared this conjoint critical review paper, whose objective is to summarize key concepts related to prevention and treatment of both CKD progression and impaired nutritional status using dietary approaches, and to provide guidance on how to define optimal protein and energy intake in older adults with differing severity of CKD. Overall, the authors support careful assessment to identify the most urgent clinical challenge and the consequent treatment priority. The presence of malnutrition-protein-energy wasting (PEW) suggests the need to avoid or postpone protein restriction, particularly in the presence of stable kidney function and considering the patient's preferences and quality of life. CKD progression and advanced CKD stage support prioritization of protein restriction in the presence of a good nutritional status. Individual risk-benefit assessment and appropriate nutritional monitoring should guide the decision-making process. Higher awareness of the challenges of nutritional care in older adult patients with CKD is needed to improve care and outcomes. Research is advocated to support evidence-based recommendations, which we still lack for this increasingly large patient subgroup.

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.

Out-of-pocket expenditures, catastrophic household finances, and quality of life among hemodialysis patients in Kerala, India

INTRODUCTION

Kidney replacement therapy in chronic kidney disease patients can result in catastrophic health costs, pushing them into poverty in lower middle-income countries. There are only limited studies from India focusing on the financial hardship of these patients. Data on direct nonmedical and indirect cost of hemodialysis (HD) are also limited. This study aims to find the different components of cost for HD and its association with quality of life (QOL) among HD patients.

METHODS

Primary objective was to find the cost of HD, which include direct medical, direct nonmedical and indirect cost. Secondary objective was to study whether the ratio of out-of-pocket (OOP) payments for HD to household income can affect the QOL. The QOL was assessed using EQ-5D-5L instrument. Catastrophic health care expenditure was defined as OOP health care expenditure exceeding 40% of the household income and distress financing as borrowing money or selling assets to meet the OOP expenditure for treatment.

FINDINGS

Of the 152 patients enrolled for the study, 103 (67.8%) were males. Mean age was 60.9 ± 12.5 years. Monthly OOP expenditure for dialysis was USD 478.4 (362.6-663.6) of which direct nonmedical and indirect expenses constitute USD 115.6 (88.4-292.4). Median percentage of household income spent for dialysis was 194.5 (IQR 128-297). One hundred and forty-two (93.4%) had catastrophic healthcare expenditure and 76 (50%) had distressing health care expenditure. On multivariable linear regression, proportion of total household income spend for dialysis was associated with poor QOL in patients undergoing HD; coefficient = -0.04 (95% CI -0.008 - 0.092), p = 0.039.

DISCUSSION

Nonmedical direct and indirect cost is substantial among patients undergoing HD. Nine of 10 patients had catastrophic health care expenditure, which pushed 50% of the patients to distress financing.

Incremental and Personalized Hemodialysis Start: A New Standard of Care

Introduction

Incremental hemodialysis (iHD) may attenuate “dialysis shock” and reduce costs, preserving quality of life. It is considered difficult to reconcile with HD wards’ routine; fear of underdialysis and increasing mortality are additional concerns. The aim of this study was to evaluate mortality, morbidity, and costs in a large HD ward where iHD is the standard of HD start.

Methods

This observational study included all incident HD patients in 2017 to 2021, stratified according to HD start: iHD (1–2 sessions/wk), decremental HD (dHD, 3 sessions/wk at start, later reduced), or standard (3 sessions/wk). Results were compared with data recorded in the same unit before the incremental program (2015–2017) and with a propensity score-matched cohort from the French Renal Epidemiology and Information Network (REIN) registry.

Results

A total of 158 patients started HD in 2017 to 2021, 57.6% on iHD, 8.9% dHD, and 33.5% standard HD schedule. Patients on the standard schedule had lower initial estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) (5 vs. 7 ml/min per 1.72 m², P = 0.003). We found no survival differences according to period of start (same center) and propensity score matching (REIN). Patients intensively followed in the pre-HD period were more likely to start on iHD-dHD. Persistence on iHD-dHD was about 50% at 1 year and 35% at 2 years. Hospitalization rates and time to first hospitalization or death did not differ between the schedules. The iHD-dHD policy allowed a 16% cost saving, even accounting for supplemental biochemical tests.

Conclusion

Our study reveals that iHD can be a new standard of care, as it is safe and feasible in up to two-thirds of patients on incident HD.

Residual Renal Function - How Fast Does the Residual Urine Output Function Decline in the First Year of Haemodialysis? - A Scoping Review

Background

Haemodialysis is the most common treatment method in Australia for individuals requiring renal replacement therapy. Although it is known that the residual renal function in these patients has many advantages for their overall health outcomes and that the residual urine volume production is also declining over time, it is unknown how fast this functional decline occurs when patients are embarking on their first year on haemodialysis.

Aim

This scoping review sought to determine if the functional decline in renal residual function in the first year of haemodialysis has been previously investigated, documented or quantified.

Method

The scoping review was performed using variety of nursing and medical databases comprising MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science and CINAHL Plus with Full Text.

Results

The decline of renal residual function in patients on Peritoneal dialysis over the first year of treatment has previously been described, but not in detail for patients receiving haemodialysis. There is a paucity of knowledge how fast residual urine production can decline in patients receiving haemodialysis during their first year of treatment. A PRISMA checklist has been used to validate the results of this scoping review.

Conclusions

The extended preservation of renal residual function in patients on haemodialysis is crucial for their survival and may have a positive impact on their quality of life. An observational study is needed to examine how fast the functional decrease of the residual urine production function within patients receiving haemodialysis generally occurs. This information could prove to be useful in the context of treatment goals and could inform clinical practice.

Patient-centred approaches for the management of unpleasant symptoms in kidney disease

Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) frequently experience unpleasant symptoms. These can be gastrointestinal (constipation, nausea, vomiting and diarrhoea), psychological (anxiety and sadness), neurological (lightheadedness, headache and numbness), cardiopulmonary (shortness of breath and oedema), dermatological (pruritus and dry skin), painful (muscle cramps, chest pain and abdominal pain) or involve sexual dysfunction, sleep disorders and fatigue. These symptoms often occur in clusters, with one of them as the lead symptom and others as secondary symptoms. Uraemic toxins (also called uremic toxins) are often considered to be the main cause of CKD-associated symptom burden, but treatment of uraemia by dialysis often fails to resolve them and can engender additional symptoms. Indeed, symptoms can be exacerbated by comorbid conditions, pharmacotherapies, lifestyle and dietary regimens, kidney replacement therapy and ageing. Patients with kidney disease, including those who depend on dialysis or transplantation, should feel actively supported in their symptom management through the identification and targeting of unpleasant symptoms via a tailored palliative care approach. Such an approach may help minimize the burden and consequences of kidney disease, and lead to improved patient outcomes including health-related quality of life and better life participation.

Benefits of Incremental Hemodialysis Seen in a Historical Cohort Study

Purpose

Previous research on incremental hemodialysis transition has mainly focused on one or two benefits or prognoses. We aimed to conduct a comprehensive analysis by investigating whether incremental hemodialysis was simultaneously associated with adequate dialysis therapy, stable complication indicators, long-lasting arteriovenous vascular access, and long-lasting preservation of residual kidney function (RKF) without increasing mortality or hospitalization.

Patients and Methods

Incident hemodialysis patients from Huashan Hospital in Shanghai, China, over the period of 2012 to 2019, were enrolled and followed every three months until death or the time of censoring. Changes in complication indicators from baseline to all post-baseline visits were analyzed by mixed-effects models. The outcomes of RKF loss, arteriovenous vascular access complications, and the composite of all-cause mortality and cardiovascular events were compared between incremental and conventional hemodialysis by Cox proportional hazards model.

Results

Of the 113 patients enrolled in the study, 45 underwent incremental and 68 conventional hemodialysis. There were no significant differences in the changes from baseline to post-baseline visits in complication indicators between the two groups. Incremental hemodialysis reduced the risks of RKF loss (HR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.14–0.82), de novo arteriovenous access complication (HR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.08–0.82), and recurrent arteriovenous access complications under the Andersen–Gill (AG) model (HR, 0.27; 95% CI, 0.10–0.74) and the Prentice, Williams and Peterson Total Time (PWP-TT) model (HR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.12–0.80). There were no significant differences in all-cause hospitalization or the composite outcome between groups.

Conclusion

Incremental hemodialysis is an effective dialysis transition strategy that preserves RKF and arteriovenous access without affecting dialysis adequacy, patient stability, hospitalization risk and mortality risk. Randomized controlled trials are warranted.

The role of once-weekly online hemodiafiltration with low protein diet for initiation of renal replacement therapy: A case series

Incremental hemodialysis (HD) has become an exciting approach according to the recognition of the importance of preserving residual kidney function (RKF). However, not all incident HD patients are suitable for this approach, particularly once-weekly HD. This is the first study which reported the effectiveness of once-weekly online-hemodiafiltration (OL-HDF) plus low protein diet (LPD) in incident HD patients. All stage 5 CKD patients who had chosen HD as their treatment modality at the HD center of King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand, with RKF ⩾ 3 mL/min calculated by renal clearance of urea and urine output ⩾ 800 mL/day, started the treatment with once-weekly OL-HDF. Dietitians advised patients to consume LPD (0.6-0.8 g/kg/day) on non-dialysis days and a regular protein diet on the dialysis day (1.2 g/kg/day). Eleven incident HD patients were enrolled in the study. The mean RKF and urine volume at baseline were 4.56 ± 2.21 mL/min and 2,019.54 ± 743.73 mL/day, respectively. After 6 and 12 months of follow-up, the mean RKF of the patients who remained in the once-weekly OL-HDF protocol were 3.82 ± 1.68 mL/min and 3.28 ± 0.95 mL/min, respectively. The median duration of once-weekly OL-HDF before transitioning to twice- or thrice-weekly OL-HDF was 7 months (3-24 months). The most common indication for stepping prescription was too low RKF. We reported that dialysis initiation in the university-based center with once-weekly OL-HDF in carefully selected incident HD patients combined with LPD under serial monitoring is practical. Further studies on the clinical benefits of once-weekly OL-HDF are still required.

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.

Lowering dialysis sessions duration may be dangerous

Dialysis session in less duration - either to give a better quality of life for the patient or to optimize the organization the dialysis institution - may have bad repercussions on the quality of the treatment and therefore the quality of life of the patient. According to the result of the publications listed in this work, we conclude that it is necessary to perform either longer sessions or more frequent treatments to limit the interval time between two sessions. As this is difficult to perform by the providers, we recommend to develop home dialysis to obtain the best result.

Novel options for failing allograft in kidney transplanted patients to avoid or defer dialysis therapy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Despite improvement in short-term renal allograft survival in recent years, renal transplant recipients (RTR) have poorer long-term allograft outcomes. Allograft function slowly declines with periods of stable function similar to natural progression of chronic kidney disease in nontransplant population. Nearly all RTR transitions to failing renal allograft (FRG) period and require transition to dialysis. Conservative chronic kidney disease management before transition to end-stage renal disease is an increasingly important topic; however, there is limited data in RTR regarding how to delay dialysis initiation with conservative management.

RECENT FINDINGS

Since immunological and nonimmunological factors unique to RTR contribute to decline in allograft function, therapies to slow progression of FRG should take both sets of factors into account. Renal replacement therapy either incremental dialysis or rekidney transplantation should be explored. This required taking benefits and risks of continuing immunosuppressive medications into account when allograft nephrectomy may be necessary.

SUMMARY

FRG may benefit from various interventions to slow progression of worsening allograft function. Until there are stronger evidence to guide interventions to preserve renal function, extrapolating evidence from nontransplant patients and clinical judgment are necessary. The goal is to provide individualized care for conservative management of RTR with FRG.

Precision medicine approach to dialysis including incremental and decremental dialysis regimens

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Conventional standardization of haemodialysis for treatment of end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) is predicated upon the fixed construct of one disease stage and one patient category. Increasingly recognized are subgroups of patients for whom less-intensive haemodialysis, such as incremental or decremental haemodialysis, could be employed.

RECENT FINDINGS

Almost 30% of patients with incident ESKD have clinical and residual kidney function (RFK) parameters that could accommodate less-intensive haemodialysis. In one study, patients with incident ESKD and substantial RKF treated with low-dose haemodialysis had similar mortality rate as those treated with standard-dose haemodialysis, adding to the evidence that endogenous kidney function -- when present -- can complement less-intensive haemodialysis schedules. Hazards related to incremental haemodialysis include insidious development of fluid overload and higher rates of fluid removal. Finally, deintensification of haemodialysis treatment could be employed in patients with ESKD who seek conservative care.

SUMMARY

A shift in approach to ESKD from a dichotomous frame -- disease presence versus absence -- to stages of dialysis-dependent kidney disease, each stage associated with attuned haemodialysis intensity, has been proposed. Haemodialysis standardization and personalization -- often considered mutually exclusive -- can be combined in incremental haemodialysis. Data from ongoing and future randomized clinical trials, comparing less-intensive with standard haemodialysis schedules, are required to change practice.

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

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Early mortality rates after the start of maintenance haemodialysis therapy are high. Compared with three-times weekly haemodialysis, incremental haemodialysis is associated with better preservation of residual renal function (RRF) and at least equivalent mid-term to long-term survival. However, there is paucity of data in relation to its use as a means of helping patients through the transitional period, when they first become dialysis dependent.

RECENT FINDINGS

Studies of incremental haemodialysis have overlooked early mortality as an outcome measure. This is primarily due to their retrospective design which makes it difficult to link early deaths to the frequency of haemodialysis. New data confirm previous observations associating incremental haemodialysis with favourable outcomes. They also raise the possibility that in selected groups and for short periods, the pursuit of set clearance targets during the early days of dialysis may not necessarily bring additional short-term gains.

SUMMARY

We argue that, while simpler ways of estimating RRF are being explored, future trials must consider implementing incremental haemodialysis focusing on practical aspects of care in the transitional period; safety monitoring in such regimes should be undertaken using conventional methods. Such an approach is likely to benefit a larger subset of haemodialysis population.

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.

Dialysis initiation, modality choice, access, and prescription: conclusions from a Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Controversies Conference

Globally, the number of patients undergoing maintenance dialysis is increasing, yet throughout the world there is significant variability in the practice of initiating dialysis. Factors such as availability of resources, reasons for starting dialysis, timing of dialysis initiation, patient education and preparedness, dialysis modality and access, as well as varied "country-specific" factors significantly affect patient experiences and outcomes. As the burden of end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) has increased globally, there has also been a growing recognition of the importance of patient involvement in determining the goals of care and decisions regarding treatment. In January 2018, KDIGO (Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes) convened a Controversies Conference focused on dialysis initiation, including modality choice, access, and prescription. Here we present a summary of the conference discussions, including identified knowledge gaps, areas of controversy, and priorities for research. A major novel theme represented during the conference was the need to move away from a "one-size-fits-all" approach to dialysis and provide more individualized care that incorporates patient goals and preferences while still maintaining best practices for quality and safety. Identifying and including patient-centered goals that can be validated as quality indicators in the context of diverse health care systems to achieve equity of outcomes will require alignment of goals and incentives between patients, providers, regulators, and payers that will vary across health care jurisdictions.

Residual renal function in incremental dialysis

Incremental haemodialysis has the potential to allow better preservation of renal function, is less invasive to the patient and has lower cost. Despite these advantages, it is not commonly applied. This may be due to uncertainty about how to account for renal function in the prescription of dialysis and measurement of dose. In this issue, Vartia describes the practical basis for including the effect of renal function in the prescription and quantification of dialysis. He uses a well-known and validated urea kinetic model to calculate time average urea concentrations and the equivalent renal clearance (EKR) from dialysis. The effect of renal function is amplified by a weighting factor to account for the relatively greater effect of renal function compared with dialysis with the same urea clearance. In that way, patients on differing dialysis regimens can be dialysed with the same target dose. A further step would be to use a downward adjusting factor for dialysis to convert the urea clearance by dialysis (as EKR) to a glomerular filtration rate (GFR) equivalent. A factor of 0.75 is suggested. In that way, dialysis dose can be reported as GFR equivalent in mL/min/1.73 m2, comparable between different types of dialysis and also to renal function without dialysis.