Pay-for-Performance Incentives for Home Dialysis Use and Kidney Transplant

Importance

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services' mandatory End-Stage Renal Disease Treatment Choices (ETC) model, launched on January 1, 2021, randomly assigned approximately 30% of US dialysis facilities and managing clinicians to financial incentives to increase the use of home dialysis and kidney transplant.

Objective

To assess the ETC's association with use of home dialysis and kidney transplant during the model's first 2 years and examine changes in these outcomes by race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective cross-sectional study used claims and enrollment data for traditional Medicare beneficiaries with kidney failure from 2017 to 2022 linked to same-period transplant data from the United Network for Organ Sharing. The study data span 4 years (2017-2020) before the implementation of the ETC model on January 1, 2021, and 2 years (2021-2022) following the model's implementation.

Exposure

Receiving dialysis treatment in a region randomly assigned to the ETC model.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Primary outcomes were use of home dialysis and kidney transplant. A difference-in-differences (DiD) approach was used to estimate changes in outcomes among patients treated in regions randomly selected for ETC participation compared with concurrent changes among patients treated in control regions.

Results

The study population included 724 406 persons with kidney failure (mean [IQR] age, 62.2 [53-72] years; 42.5% female). The proportion of patients receiving home dialysis increased from 12.1% to 14.3% in ETC regions and from 12.9% to 15.1% in control regions, yielding an adjusted DiD estimate of -0.2 percentage points (pp; 95% CI, -0.7 to 0.3 pp). Similar analysis for transplant yielded an adjusted DiD estimate of 0.02 pp (95% CI, -0.01 to 0.04 pp). When further stratified by sociodemographic measures, including age, sex, race and ethnicity, dual Medicare and Medicaid enrollment, and poverty quartile, there was not a statistically significant difference in home dialysis use across joint strata of characteristics and ETC participation.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cross-sectional study, the first 2 years of the ETC model were not associated with increased use of home dialysis or kidney transplant, nor changes in racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic disparities in these outcomes.

The effect of dialysis modality on annual mortality: A prospective cohort study

Despite numerous studies on the effect of each dialysis modality on mortality, the issue remains controversial. We investigated the hazard rate of mortality in patients with incident end-stage renal disease (ESRD) concerning initial dialysis modality (hemodialysis vs. peritoneal dialysis). Using a nationwide, multicenter, prospective cohort in South Korea, we studied 2207 patients, of which 1647 (74.6%) underwent hemodialysis. We employed the weighted Fine and Gray model over the follow-up period using inverse probability of treatment and censoring weighting. Landmark analysis was used for identifying the changing effect of dialysis modality on individuals who remained event-free at each landmark point. No significant difference in hazard rate was observed overall. However, the peritoneal dialysis group had a significantly higher hazard rate than the hemodialysis group among patients under 65 years after 4- and 5- year follow-up. A similar pattern was observed among those with diabetes mellitus. Landmark analysis also showed the higher hazard rate for peritoneal dialysis at 2 years for the education-others group and at 3 years for the married group. These findings may inform dialysis modality decisions, suggesting a preference for hemodialysis in young patients with diabetes, especially for follow-ups longer than 3 years.

Assessment of frailty and quality of life and their correlation in the haemodialysis population at Palmerston North Hospital, New Zealand

AIM

End-stage kidney disease (ESKD) is increasingly becoming a healthcare concern in New Zealand and haemodialysis remains the most common modality of treatment. Frailty and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) are established predictors of prognosis and have already been shown to be poor in the dialyzing population. Existing data show correlation between these measures in the ESKD population, however there is little evidence for those on haemodialysis specifically. Our study aimed to assess for a correlation between frailty and HRQOL in the haemodialysis population at Palmerston North Hospital, and to assess for any differences in frailty and HRQOL scores between indigenous Māori and non-Māori subgroups.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted involving 93 in-centre haemodialysis patients from Palmerston North Hospital, New Zealand. Baseline demographic data was measured alongside frailty and HRQOL scores, which were measured using the Kidney Disease Quality of Life tool (KDQOL-36) and the Edmonton Frail Scale.

RESULTS

A statistically significant negative correlation was observed between frailty and all aspects of HRQOL (p < .05), with the strongest correlation observed between frailty and the physical component (r = -.64, p = <.001). Independent samples t-test showed no statistically significant difference between scores for Māori and non-Māori in frailty (M = 7.4, SD = 3.3 vs. M = 6.8, SD = 3.2; t (91) = -0.92, p = .80), or HRQOL (p values > .05 in all components).

CONCLUSION

A negative correlation was observed between frailty and HRQOL. This information can be beneficial in guiding discussions around treatment modality and for future patients and useful in enabling better predictions of prognosis. No statistically significant differences in frailty and HRQOL scores were observed between Māori and non-Māori groups, however the generalizability of this finding is limited due to the insufficient size of the study population.

A Service Reconfiguration Bundle for Expanding Access to Peritoneal Dialysis Including for Older Frailer Patients

INTRODUCTION

Rates of peritoneal dialysis (PD) have been traditionally low in Northern Ireland. With rising numbers of patients reaching end-stage kidney disease, PD is a more cost-effective treatment than haemodialysis and aligns with international goals to increase home-based dialysis options. The aim of our study was to highlight how a service reconfiguration bundle expanded access to PD in Northern Ireland.

METHODS

The service reconfiguration bundle consisted of the appointment of a surgical lead, a dedicated interventional radiologist for fluoroscopically guided PD catheter insertion, and a nephrology-led ultrasound-guided PD catheter insertion service in an area of particular need. All patients in Northern Ireland who had a PD catheter inserted in the year following service reconfigurations were included and prospectively followed up for one-year. Patient demographics, PD catheter insertion technique, setting of procedure, and outcome data were summarised.

RESULTS

The number of patients receiving PD catheter insertion doubled to 66 in the year following service reconfigurations. The range of approaches to PD catheter insertion (laparoscopic n = 41, percutaneous n = 24 and open n = 1) allowed a wide range of patients to benefit from PD. Six patients had emergency PD catheter insertion, with four receiving urgent or early start PD. Nearly half (48%, 29/60) of the PD catheters inserted electively were in smaller elective hubs rather than the regional unit. A total of 97% of patients successfully started PD. Patients who experienced percutaneous PD catheter insertion were older [median age 76 (range 37-88) vs. 56 (range 18-84), p < 0.0001] and had less previous abdominal surgery than patients who experienced laparoscopic PD catheter insertion (25%, 6/24 vs. 54%, 22/41, p = 0.05).

DISCUSSION

Through a service reconfiguration bundle, we were able to double our annual incident PD population. This study highlights how flexible models of service delivery introduced as a bundle can quickly deliver expanded access to PD and home therapy.

Patients and nursing-related factors associated with switching from peritoneal dialysis to hemodialysis: A cross-sectional survey

The study aimed at analyzing patients and nursing-related factors associated with switching from peritoneal dialysis to hemodialysis. A telephone survey with 574 patients receiving care at six peritoneal dialysis centers of the Mexican Institute of Social Security was conducted: 64.3% were on peritoneal dialysis, and 35.7% had transitioned from peritoneal dialysis to hemodialysis. Data were collected on participants' sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, peritoneal dialysis center size, and nursing workload. Descriptive, bivariate, and multiple Poisson regression analyses were performed. Factors associated with an increased probability of switching from peritoneal dialysis to hemodialysis were a history of catheter dysfunction, peritonitis, and being treated in a large peritoneal dialysis center with a low (<50 patients per nurse per month) or high nursing workload (>70 patients per nurse per month) located in the State of Mexico, compared to a medium-size peritoneal dialysis center with a moderate workload (50-70 patients per nurse per month). To decrease the odds of switching from peritoneal dialysis to hemodialysis, improvement programs should aim to limit nurses' workload to 50-70 patients per nurse per month and implement evidence-based nursing interventions to prevent, detect, and manage peritonitis and peritoneal catheter dysfunction.

Managing Transition between dialysis modalities: a call for Integrated care In Dialysis Units

Summary Patients with chronic kidney disease have three main possible groups of dialysis techniques: in-center hemodialysis, peritoneal dialysis, and home hemodialysis. Home dialysis techniques have been associated with clinical outcomes that are equivalent and sometimes superior to those of in-center hemodialysisTransitions between treatment modalities are crucial moments. Transition periods are known as periods of disruption in the patient’s life associated with major complications, greater vulnerability, greater mortality, and direct implications for quality of life. Currently, it is imperative to offer a personalized treatment adapted to the patient and adjusted over time.An integrated treatment unit with all dialysis treatments and a multidisciplinary team can improve results by establishing a life plan, promoting health education, medical and psychosocial stabilization, and the reinforcement of health self-care. These units will result in gains for the patient’s journey and will encourage home treatments and better transitions.Peritoneal dialysis as the initial treatment modality seems appropriate for many reasons and the limitations of the technique are largely overcome by the advantages (namely autonomy, preservation of veins, and preservation of residual renal function).The transition after peritoneal dialysis can (and should) be carried out with the primacy of home treatments. Assisted dialysis must be considered and countries must organize themselves to provide an assisted dialysis program with paid caregivers.The anticipation of the transition is essential to improve outcomes, although there are no predictive models that have high accuracy; this is particularly important in the transition to hemodialysis (at home or in-center) in order to plan autologous access that allows a smooth transition.

Effect of Dialysis Modalities on All-Cause Mortality and Cardiovascular Mortality in End-Stage Kidney Disease: A Taiwan Renal Registry Data System (TWRDS) 2005-2012 Study

Introduction: End-stage kidney disease (ESKD) patients who need renal replacement therapy need to face a dialysis modality decision: the choice between hemodialysis (HD) and peritoneal dialysis (PD). Although the global differences in HD/PD penetration are affected by health-care policies, these two modalities may exert different effects on survival in patients with ESKD. Although Taiwan did not implicate PD as first policy, we still need to compare patients’ outcomes using two modalities in a nation-wise database to determine future patients’ care and health policies. Methods: We used the nationwide Taiwan Renal Registry Data System (TWRDS) database from 2005 to 2012 and included 52,900 patients (48,371 on HD and 4529 on PD) to determine all-cause and cardiovascular mortality among ESKD patients. Results: Age-matched survival probability from all-cause mortality was significantly lower in patients on PD than in those on HD (p < 0.05). The adjusted hazard ratios of 3-year and 5-year all-cause and cardiovascular mortality were significantly higher in PD compared with HD. The presence of comorbid conditions including myocardial infarction, coronary artery disease (CAD), diabetes mellitus (DM), hypoalbuminemia, hyperferritinemia and hypophosphatemia was related with significantly higher all-cause and CV mortality in PD patients. No significant difference was noted among younger patients <45 years of age regardless of DM and/or comorbid conditions. Conclusion: Although PD did not have the survival advantage compared to HD in all dialysis populations, PD was related with superior survival in younger non-DM patients, regardless of the presence of comorbidities. Similarly, for younger ESKD patients without the risk of CV disease, both PD and HD would be suitable dialysis modalities.

Time on Therapy of Automated Peritoneal Dialysis with and without Remote Patient Monitoring: A Cohort Study

Background. Remote patient monitoring (RPM) of patients undergoing automated peritoneal dialysis (APD-RPM) may potentially enhance time on therapy due to possible improvements in technique and patient survival. Objective. To evaluate the effect of APD-RPM as compared to APD without RPM on time on therapy. Methods. Adult incident APD patients undergo APD for 90 days or more in the Baxter Renal Care Services (BRCS) Colombia network between January 1, 2017, and June 30, 2019, with the study follow-up ending June 30, 2021. The exposure variable was APD-RPM vs. APD-without RPM. The outcomes of time on therapy and mortality rate over two years of follow-up were estimated in the full sample and in a matched population according to the exposure variable. A propensity score matching (PSM) 1:1 without replacement utilizing the nearest neighbor within caliper (0.035) was used and created a pseudopopulation in which the baseline covariates were well balanced. Fine & Gray multivariate analysis was performed to assess the effect of demographic, clinical, and laboratory variables on the risk of death, adjusting for the competing risks of technique failure and kidney transplantation. Results. In the matched sample, the time on APD therapy was significantly longer in the RPM group than in the non-RPM group, 18.95 vs. 15.75 months, $p<0.001$ . The mortality rate did not differ between the two groups: 0.10 events per patient-year in the RPM group and 0.12 in the non-RPM group, $p=0.325$ . Conclusion. Over two years of follow-up, the use of RPM vs. no RPM in APD patients was associated with a significant increase in time on therapy, by 3.2 months. This result indicates that RPM-supported APD therapy may improve the clinical effectiveness and the overall quality of APD.

First-year mortality in incident dialysis patients: results of the Peridialysis study

Background

Controversy surrounds which factors are important for predicting early mortality after dialysis initiation (DI). We investigated associations of predialysis course and circumstances affecting planning and execution of DI with mortality following DI.

Methods

Among 1580 patients participating in the Peridialysis study, a study of causes and timing of DI, we registered features of predialysis course, clinical and biochemical data at DI, incidence of unplanned suboptimal DI, contraindications to peritoneal dialysis (PD) or hemodialysis (HD), and modality preference, actual choice, and cause of modality choice. Patients were followed for 12 months or until transplantation. A flexible parametric model was used to identify independent factors associated with all-cause mortality.

Results

First-year mortality was 19.33%. Independent factors predicting death were high age, comorbidity, clinical contraindications to PD or HD, suboptimal DI, high eGFR, low serum albumin, hyperphosphatemia, high C-reactive protein, signs of overhydration and cerebral symptoms at DI. Among 1061 (67.2%) patients who could select dialysis modality based on personal choice, 654 (61.6%) chose PD, 368 (34.7%) center HD and 39 (3.7%) home HD. The 12-months survival did not differ significantly between patients receiving PD and in-center HD.

Conclusions

First-year mortality in incident dialysis patients was in addition to high age and comorbidity, associated with clinical contraindications to PD or HD, clinical symptoms, hyperphosphatemia, inflammation, and suboptimal DI. In patients with a “free” choice of dialysis modality based on their personal preferences, PD and in-center HD led to broadly similar short-term outcomes.

Outcomes of incident patients treated with incremental haemodialysis as compared with standard haemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis

BACKGROUND

Residual kidney function is considered better preserved with incremental haemodialysis (I-HD) or peritoneal dialysis (PD) as compared with conventional thrice-weekly HD (TW-HD) and is associated with improved survival. We aimed to describe outcomes of patients initiating dialysis with I-HD, TW-HD or PD.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of a prospectively assembled cohort in a single university centre including all adults initiating dialysis from January 2013 to December 2020. Primary and secondary endpoints were overall survival and hospitalization days at 1 year, respectively.

RESULTS

We included 313 patients with 234 starting on HD (166 TW-HD and 68 I-HD) and 79 on PD. At the end of the study, 10 were still on I-HD while 45 transitioned to TW-HD after a mean duration of 9.8 ± 9.1 months. Patients who stayed on I-HD were less frequently diabetics (P = .007). Mean follow-up was 33.1 ± 30.8 months during which 124 (39.6%) patients died. Compared with patients on TW-HD, those on I-HD had improved survival (hazard ratio 0.49, 95% confidence interval 0.26-0.93, P = .029), while those on PD had similar survival. Initial kidney replacement therapy modality was not significantly associated with hospitalization days at 1 year.

CONCLUSIONS

I-HD is suitable for selected patients starting dialysis and can be maintained for a significant amount of time before transition to TW-HD, with diabetes being a risk factor. Although hospitalization days at 1 year are similar, initiation with I-HD is associated with improved survival as compared with TW-HD or PD. Results of randomized controlled trials are awaited prior to large-scale implementation of I-HD programmes.

Peritoneal catheter insertion: combating barriers through policy change

Barriers to accessing home dialysis became a matter of life and death for many patients with kidney failure during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Peritoneal dialysis (PD) is the more commonly used home therapy option. This article provides a comprehensive analysis of PD catheter insertion procedures as performed around the world today, barriers impacting timely access to the procedure, the impact of COVID-19 and a roadmap of potential policy solutions. To substantiate the analysis, the article includes a survey of institutions across the world, with questions designed to get a sense of the regulatory frameworks, barriers to conducting the procedure and impacts of the pandemic on capability and outcomes. Based on our research, we found that improving patient selection processes, determining and implementing correct insertion techniques, creating multidisciplinary teams, providing appropriate training and sharing decision making among stakeholders will improve access to PD catheter insertion and facilitate greater uptake of home dialysis. Additionally, on a policy level, we recommend efforts to improve the awareness and feasibility of PD among patients and the healthcare workforce, enhance and promulgate training for clinicians—both surgical and medical—to insert PD catheters and fund personnel, pathways and physical facilities for PD catheter insertion.

Epidemiology of haemodialysis outcomes

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The case for Increased Peritoneal Dialysis Utilization in Low- and Lower-Middle-Income Countries

Peritoneal dialysis (PD) has several advantages compared to hemodialysis (HD), but there is evidence showing underutilization globally, especially in low-income and lower-middle-income countries (LLMICs) where kidney replacement therapies (KRT) are often unavailable, inaccessible, and unaffordable. Only 11% of all dialysis patients worldwide use PD, more than 50% of whom live in China, the United States of America, Mexico, or Thailand. Various barriers to increased PD utilization have been reported worldwide including patient preference, low levels of education, and lower provider reimbursement. However, unique but surmountable barriers are applicable to LLMICs including the excessively high cost of providing PD (related to PD fluids in particular), excessive cost of treatment borne by patients (relative to HD), lack of adequate PD training opportunities for doctors and nurses, low workforce availability for kidney care, and challenges related to some PD outcomes (catheter-related infections, hospitalizations, mortality, etc.). This review discusses some known barriers to PD use in LLMICs and leverages data that show a global trend in reducing rates of PD-related infections, reducing rates of modality switches from HD, and improving patient survival in PD to discuss how PD use can be increased in LLMICs. We therefore, challenge the idea that low PD use in LLMICs is unavoidable due to these barriers and instead present opportunities to improve PD utilization in LLMICs.

Dialysis Outcomes in a Middle-Income Country: An Updated Comparison of Patient Mortality between Hemodialysis and Peritoneal Dialysis

INTRODUCTION

Comparisons of survival between dialysis modalities is of great importance to patients with kidney failure, their families, and healthcare systems.

OBJECTIVE

This study's objective was to compare mortality of patients on chronic hemodialysis (HD) or peritoneal dialysis (PD) and identify variables associated with mortality.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included adult incident patients with kidney failure treated with HD or PD by the Baxter Renal Care Services network in Colombia. The study was conducted between January 1, 2008, and December 31, 2013 (recruitment period), with follow-up until December 31, 2018. The outcome was the cumulative mortality rate at 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 years. Propensity score matching (PSM) and the Gompertz parametric survival model were used to compare mortality in HD versus PD.

RESULTS

The analysis included 12,499 patients, of whom 57.4% were on PD at inception. The overall mortality rate was 14.0 events per 100 patient-years (95% confidence interval [CI], 13.61-14.42). Using an intention-to-treat approach, crude mortality rates were significantly lower in patients receiving HD (HD: 12.3 deaths per 100 patient-years [95% CI, 11.7-12.8] vs. PD: 15.5 [14.9-16.1], p < 0.01). Using a Gompertz parametric survival model, dialysis modality was not significantly associated with mortality (hazard ratio HD vs. PD 1.0, 95% CI, 0.9-1.1). After PSM, the mortality cumulative incidence functions between HD and PD were not statistically significantly different (p = 0.88).

CONCLUSIONS

The present study in a large cohort of incident dialysis patients with at least 5 years follow-up and using PSM methods showed no differences in cumulative mortality between HD and PD patients. This evidence from a middle-income country may facilitate the process of dialysis modality selection globally.

Survival analysis in the incident dialysis patients by different modalities

BACKGROUND

To analysis survival in onset uremic patients who initiating HD or PD dialysis in our dialysis center.

METHODS

Between Jan. 2015 and June. 2018, patients with onset uremia and initiating planned-start dialysis were retrospectively enrolled in this study and followed up to January, 2019. The relationships between the types of dialysis modality and patient prognosis were assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 460 patients were included in the final analysis. Of which, 213 patient (46.30%) undergoing PD and 247 patients (53.70%) undergoing HD with arteriovenous fistula. The average follow-up time was 27.9 months. Eighty-seven (18.91%) patients died during the study period. The all-cause mortality was 127 per 1000 person-year. It was 102 per 1000 person-year in the HD group and 171 per 1000 person-year in the PD group (p < 0.01). However, dialysis modality was not an independent predictor for survival. During the first year after dialysis initiation, patient survival was comparable between the PD and HD groups (log-rank p = 0.14). As the dialysis age increased over 1 year, HD patients seemed to have a better survival as compared to that of PD patient (log-rank p < 0.05), especially those older than 65 years and without DN.

CONCLUSIONS

Though dialysis modality was not an independent factor for overall survival, HD therapy seemed to be more suitable for patients without DN.

Choice of dialysis modality among patients initiating dialysis: results of the Peridialysis study

Background

In patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD), home dialysis offers socio-economic and health benefits compared with in-centre dialysis but is generally underutilized. We hypothesized that the pre-dialysis course and institutional factors affect the choice of dialysis modality after dialysis initiation (DI).

Methods

The Peridialysis study is a multinational, multicentre prospective observational study assessing the causes and timing of DI and consequences of suboptimal DI. Clinical and biochemical data, details of the pre-dialytic course, reasons for DI and causes of the choice of dialysis modality were registered.

Results

Among 1587 included patients, 516 (32.5%) were judged unsuitable for home dialysis due to contraindications [384 ( 24.2%)] or no assessment [106 (6.7%); mainly due to late referral and/or suboptimal DI] or death [26 (1.6%)]. Older age, comorbidity, late referral, suboptimal DI, acute illness and rapid loss of renal function associated with unsuitability. Of the remaining 1071 patients, 700 (65.4%) chose peritoneal dialysis (61.7%) or home haemodialysis (HD; 3.6%), while 371 (34.6%) chose in-centre HD. Somatic differences between patients choosing home dialysis and in-centre dialysis were minor; factors linked to the choice of in-centre dialysis were late referral, suboptimal DI, acute illness and absence of a ‘home dialysis first’ institutional policy.

Conclusions

Given a personal choice with shared decision making, 65.4% of ESKD patients choose home dialysis. Our data indicate that the incidence of home dialysis potentially could be further increased to reduce the incidence of late referral and unplanned DI and, in acutely ill patients, by implementing an educational programme after improvement of their clinical condition.

Home Versus Facility Dialysis and Mortality in Australia and New Zealand

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE

Mortality is an important outcome for all dialysis stakeholders. We examined associations between dialysis modality and mortality in the modern era.

STUDY DESIGN

Observational study comparing dialysis inception cohorts 1998-2002, 2003-2007, 2008-2012, and 2013-2017.

SETTING & PARTICIPANTS

Australia and New Zealand (ANZ) dialysis population.

EXPOSURE

The primary exposure was dialysis modality: facility hemodialysis (HD), continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD), automated PD (APD), or home HD.

OUTCOME

The main outcome was death.

ANALYTICAL METHODS

Cause-specific proportional hazards models with shared frailty and subdistribution proportional hazards (Fine and Gray) models, adjusting for available confounding covariates.

RESULTS

In 52,097 patients, the overall death rate improved from ~15 deaths per 100 patient-years in 1998-2002 to ~11 in 2013-2017, with the largest cause-specific contribution from decreased infectious death. Relative to facility HD, mortality with CAPD and APD has improved over the years, with adjusted hazard ratios in 2013-2017 of 0.88 (95% CI, 0.78-0.99) and 0.91 (95% CI, 0.82-1.00), respectively. Increasingly, patients with lower clinical risk have been adopting APD, and to a lesser extent CAPD. Relative to facility HD, mortality with home HD was lower throughout the entire period of observation, despite increasing adoption by older patients and those with more comorbidities. All effects were generally insensitive to the modeling approach (initial vs time-varying modality, cause-specific versus subdistribution regression), different follow-up time intervals (5 year vs 7 year vs 10 year). There was no effect modification by diabetes, comorbidity, or sex.

LIMITATIONS

Potential for residual confounding, limited generalizability.

CONCLUSIONS

The survival of patients on PD in 2013-2017 appears greater than the survival for patients on facility HD in ANZ. Additional research is needed to assess whether changing clinical risk profiles over time, varied dialysis prescription, and morbidity from dialysis access contribute to these findings.

Soluble CD59 in peritoneal dialysis: a potential biomarker for peritoneal membrane function

INTRODUCTION

Various studies have reported the importance of complement regulators in preventing mesothelial damage during peritoneal dialysis (PD). Its assessment, however, is limited in clinical practice due to the lack of easy access to the peritoneal membrane. Recently, a soluble form of the complement regulatory protein CD59 (sCD59) has been described. We therefore aimed to investigate the role of sCD59 in PD.

METHODS

Plasma sCD59 was measured in 48 PD patients, 41 hemodialysis patients, 15 non-dialysis patients with chronic kidney disease and 14 healthy controls by ELISA (Hycult; HK374-02). Additionally, sCD59 and sC5b-9 were assessed in the peritoneal dialysate.

RESULTS

sCD59 and sC5b-9 were detectable in the peritoneal dialysate of all patients, and marginally correlated (r = 0.27, P = 0.06). Plasma sCD59 levels were significantly higher in PD patients than in patients with chronic kidney disease and healthy controls, but did not differ from hemodialysis patients. During follow-up, 19% of PD patients developed peritoneal membrane failure and 27% of PD patients developed loss of residual renal function. In adjusted models, increased sCD59 levels in the dialysate (HR 3.44, 95% CI 1.04-11.40, P = 0.04) and in plasma (HR 1.08, 95% CI 1.01-1.17, P = 0.04) were independently associated with the occurrence of peritoneal membrane failure. Higher plasma levels of sCD59 were also associated with loss of residual renal function (HR 1.10, 95% CI 1.04-1.17, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests that sCD59 has potential as a biomarker to predict peritoneal membrane function and loss of residual renal function in PD, thereby offering a tool to improve patient management.

Peritoneal dialysis patient selection from a comorbidity perspective

Despite many medical and socioeconomic advantages, peritoneal dialysis (PD) is an underutilized dialysis modality that in most countries is used by only 5%-20% of dialysis patients, while the vast majority are treated with in-center hemodialysis. Several factors may explain this paradox, such as lack of experience and infrastructure for training and monitoring of PD patients, organizational issues, overcapacity of hemodialysis facilities, and lack of economic incentives for dialysis centers to use PD instead of HD. In addition, medical conditions that are perceived (rightly or wrongly) as contraindications to PD represent barriers for the use of PD because of their purported potential negative impact on clinical outcomes in patients starting PD. While there are few absolute contraindications to PD, high age, comorbidities such as diabetes mellitus, obesity, polycystic kidney disease, heart failure, and previous history of abdominal surgery and renal allograft failure, may be seen (rightly or wrongly) as relative contraindications and thus barriers to initiation of PD. In this brief review, we discuss how the presence of these conditions may influence the strategy of selecting patients for PD, focusing on measures that can be taken to overcome potential problems.